National Assembly for Wales

I call the National Assembly to order.

It gives me great pleasure to announce, in accordance with Standing Order 26.75, that the Land Transaction Tax and Anti-avoidance of Devolved Taxes (Wales) Bill was given Royal Assent today.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs. The first question is from Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you. We are committed to maintaining and improving our environmental standards and recognise that our natural resources are fundamental to Wales’s future post EU exit. The environment and well-being of future generations Acts have already put in place a strong foundation based on international obligations that will remain unaffected by Brexit.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that answer. But, speaking as the lapwing champion of the Assembly, I would point out that the birds and habitats directives enable the protection and enhancement of a myriad of important species and habitats across Wales. Our special sites include coastal dunes, blanket bogs, wetlands, marine sites, all under this legislation, and iconic species like the bottlenose dolphins, the otters, the hen harriers, the Greenland white-fronted geese and the chough are protected. So, it’s vitally important that we retain these protections going forward. Only a few months back, the European Commission reported, from their assessment of directives, that they had found them fit for purpose, but required better implementation by member states in order to meet our international obligations. And, in a study last year, the nature directives were found to be essential regulatory framework, that, with fuller implementation, can help us to achieve, including Wales to achieve, our obligations under the Aichi targets and other multilateral environmental agreements. So, Cabinet Secretary, could I ask whether you’ve been able to have discussions with ministerial counterparts, particularly Andrea Leadsom, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, regarding the importance of retaining these important protections in a post-Brexit scenario?

Yes, absolutely, I have been having those discussions, and I certainly meet very regularly with UK Ministers on EU transition issues, and Ministers from the other devolved administrations. The last meeting was 20 April. We haven’t got one this month, obviously, because of the election, and we’re due to meet on 21 June next. We support the European Commission’s action plan, which aims to enhance the efficiency of the implementation of the nature directives and secure greater flexibility in how the directives are implemented to meet environmental outcomes. My officials are also working very closely with their counterparts in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and also with Scotland and Northern Ireland, to ensure that the UK response to the action plan fully reflects our approach to the sustainable management of natural resources, as set out in our environment Act.

I think that really puts us on a strong footing to continue to deliver our international obligations.

It’s a pleasure to see you back.

Thank you.

You’ll be aware, of course, that the EU directive regarding the protection of harbour porpoise breeding sites has not been transposed into UK law, and I’m hoping that Welsh Government, post Brexit, will either be able to choose to introduce some protections itself, or to work with the UK Government to do that. I’m looking to Welsh Government actually to take a lead on this on behalf of constituents in Porthcawl and other constituents in the Swansea bay area. If you are prepared to take something along these lines forwards, would that protection be sufficiently explicit to protect grounds from the relevant impact of offshore wind development?

It’s something that we can take a look at. There’s actually something on my desk upstairs around harbour porpoises. So, we’ll certainly have a look at it and, obviously, I’d be happy to update Members.

Thank you. The Welsh Government supports the agriculture and food industries in partnership with Amaeth Cymru and the Food and Drink Wales Industry Board. There is potential to develop horticulture and opportunity as Wales adapts to Brexit. We recognise the health benefits of fruit and vegetable consumption and have taken action to promote them.

Thank you for that, Cabinet Secretary, and welcome back, incidentally. This is my first opportunity to say that to you.

We only produce about 10 per cent of what we consume, so the deficit is up to 90 per cent, certainly of fruit and veg that can be grown in our climate. With 2 per cent of Welsh agricultural land given over to fruit and veg, albeit 10.5 per cent of grade 1 to 3 land, we would actually produce all that we need. So, I do hope that, in any shaping of future policy post Brexit, that we see the importance of this area. We did use to produce more; we should produce more again.

Yes, I think you raise a very important point and, when we look at Brexit, it’s not all doom and gloom—there are opportunities. I think one of the opportunities is that we could perhaps look at the potential different uses of land, if you like, and we’ve started scoping that work. Obviously, it’s up to a landowner what they want to do with their land, but I think there is the opportunity to do that. As I say, we’re scoping it now because we’ll need that information to see what we can do.

Obviously, the climate does have an impact and also consumers’ choice and consumers demand vegetables out of season, if you like. So, I think all these decisions and information have to be looked at, but I think certainly, post Brexit, there is that opportunity to do that.

I hope we’re not going to wait until Brexit before doing something about this because there are lots of things that the Government could be doing now. One is that we could be planting more fruit trees because we need to plant more trees generally and, if we have fruit trees, then their produce is available. But, more strategically, I wondered if we could have a much more urgent approach to our public procurement policy around food, in particular to enable us to follow the lead of Flintshire, which is adopting the ‘Food for Life’ certification, which requires schools to produce 75 per cent of their dishes freshly produced. That would obviously stimulate the horticulture industry to provide the vegetables and fruit that schools would need. The same would apply to hospitals and other public buildings. We have this approach here in our canteen in the Senedd. Surely, we can extend it to all our children.

Yes, we certainly don’t have to wait until post Brexit—that was where I was specifically talking about the work that we were doing in looking at the use of land in a different way. Certainly, we have been looking at the current procurement regime to make sure that we do that.

I have the Food and Drink Wales Industry Board and, obviously the food and drink industry action plan, and I think that absolutely recognises the importance of healthy eating, particularly in our schools and in other parts of our public sector. We’ve also got the Peas Please initiative, which was started by the Food Foundation, and that’s bringing together farmers and retailers and fast-food outlets, and caterers and processors and Governments, and that really is looking at the supply chain and how we can raise fruit and vegetable production.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Simon Thomas.

Diolch, Llywydd. I also welcome the Cabinet Secretary back to this place. I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary, like me, welcomes the report from the National Farmers Union Cymru, published yesterday, ‘Farming—Bringing Wales Together’. I know that she was present at the report’s launch. It sets out how farming contributes to the seven well-being goals that the Government has in its own legislation—the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015—and it’s part of the work that we all have to do, I think, in setting out the ongoing argument for support payments and continuing support for farming and the wider rural community as we leave the European Union. In that context, I was struck by the publication of the Welsh Labour Party manifesto, which doesn’t seem to make any commitment to maintain those payments in the whole of the next Parliament, and I wondered if the Cabinet Secretary could explain why.

You will have heard me say many times that I cannot imagine a time when we do not have to support our agricultural sector. Obviously, the manifesto was launched, there was a significant chapter in the manifesto regarding agriculture and environment, right across my portfolio. We have said all along we don’t know what funding we’re going to have post Brexit, but, if you remember, during the campaign for the EU referendum, we were told we would not lose a penny, and that’s what I’ll be holding the UK Government to.

And so will I, but I thought you wanted to become the UK Government and therefore were seeking to make financial commitments for the next Westminster Government, because it’s there that the 8 June is being fought upon. The one thing that you do state in your manifesto, however, is this:

The Conservatives were dragged to court and forced to publish their draft nitrogen dioxide plan. But their commitments are disappointing and lack information about the action needed to address emissions on a UK basis, providing no detail about a diesel scrappage scheme.’

I think that’s quite factually correct, but does this mean that Welsh Labour is going to introduce a scrappage scheme to Wales?

That’s something that will have to be looked at. You are quite right about the UK Government, and I’ve been working very closely with colleagues to make sure that we are in a position to take air quality forward. You know that I’ve made it a personal priority. I think it’s really important, and I’ve written to DEFRA recently on it. You’ll be aware DEFRA have recently published a joint consultation. One of the things we have committed to is to consult, within the next 12 months, on a clean air zone framework for Wales.

This is indeed true of what you’re doing as a Cabinet Secretary, and I welcome it insofar as it goes, but it does underline the fact that, as a party, you don’t seem to be serious about taking control at Westminster at all. I don’t really have firm proposals or financial securities and commitments for how you’re going to support these actions going forward.

However, let’s look at something that happens here in Wales, because I think we can agree, or potentially agree at least, that if we are to have diesel scrappage or some kind of approach like that, we will move away from diesel into, yes, more petrol, but also into electric vehicles, which are predicted now by the ‘Financial Times’ to be at the same price by 2018 as petrol vehicles. At the moment, there are about 100,000 electric vehicles registered in the UK. There are 1,500 electric vehicle rapid charging points in England and Scotland. It’s possible to drive from north Wales to Orkney in an electric car using rapid charging points, but you can’t drive from north Wales to Cardiff. There are just 13 rapid charging points in the whole of Wales and not a single one in mid Wales. What is Cabinet Secretary doing with her colleagues, because we have a 2015 report that hasn’t been acted on yet, to develop a network of electric vehicle charging points throughout Wales and particularly in mid and west Wales?

I actually had a discussion about this this morning because this is something that we need to look at. On a personal level, I’m making sure that Welsh Government puts some charging points in as soon as possible. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, which I won’t bore you with, they can only be used by staff in the beginning, but I think it’s really important. You’ll be aware of an app that we have to make sure that we know where the electric points are. One of the suggestions we’ve had is that perhaps we put charging points where there are public toilets.

So, there needs to be significant investment in charging points because, as you say, we haven’t got enough in Wales yet. I don’t want it to affect our tourism offer, and I know my colleague, Ken Skates, doesn’t want that also. So, we need to think about that too, because, as you say, you need to be able to move freely around Wales and know that you’ve got those charging points available.

The Conservative spokesperson, Paul Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Like others, I’m delighted to see your return to this Chamber and I hope you will be fully recovered in the very near future.

Now, Cabinet Secretary, at the Royal Welsh Spring Festival recently, you said that young farmers are the future of the industry and we must invest in them to ensure both they and this industry have a bright future. Of course, I completely agree with you on that, Cabinet Secretary. Therefore, could you tell us what specific policies you’ve introduced during your time as Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs for young farmers to ensure that they have a bright future?

I’m not sure about specific policies, but I’ve certainly supported them financially. You’ll be aware of the significant investment we’ve put to young farmers. For instance, we’ve got the Agri Academy, which is full of young, dynamic farmers who are very willing to help me formulate policies going forward, and I’ve met them regularly. I’ve also made it a personal choice to go out to visit as many young farmers on their farms as I can. Certainly, I can think of a couple in north Wales that I’ve visited—one of them leased the farm and wanted to talk to me specifically about what we could do in our policies to encourage young people to be able to lease their farms. I then wrote to all local authorities to try to encourage them not to sell their farms, which, unfortunately, some local authorities seem to be doing at quite an alarming rate.

A recent NatWest report concluded that,

young farmers need more support to diversify and while the entrepreneurial ideas may be there the support networks could be improved.’

Therefore, it’s crucial that more support is offered to young farmers, both in terms of advice and support, and in terms of finance as well. So, in light of this report, will you confirm what funding you will now bring forward to better support young farmers who are looking to diversify?

That can be part of our programmes. You will be aware of the farming business grants that we’ve just brought forward. That’s not just available to young farmers, it’s available to all farmers, and I know that when it was launched recently young farmers were telling me that that was really helpful for them, because if they wanted a piece of equipment that they couldn’t afford, they didn’t have to go through that long business plan and getting several quotes—we’ve taken all of that hard work away. Going forward, we can be looking at what specific support we can give them as we formulate a Welsh agricultural policy.

Cabinet Secretary, the same report concluded that

There is a generational crisis in farming’,

which has long been a concern of many in the agricultural world. Indeed, according to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the percentage of farmers under the age of 45 had fallen to just 13 per cent in 2015, down from 18 per cent in 2003. Therefore, in light of the pressing need to attract young people into the farming profession, and the need to keep young people in the farming profession, what immediate steps will the Welsh Government now be taking to ensure that the percentage of farmers under the age of 45 doesn’t continue to fall in the future?

I don’t recognise those figures. I’m not sure if you said that they were DEFRA’s figures, because I don’t think that is the case in Wales—that significant drop. I don’t like the word ‘crisis’. I do understand that it’s very difficult for young farmers if they’re not part of a farming family—if they want to come into farming cold, if you like, it’s very difficult for them to be able to do that. One of the things we have been working with young farmers on is around ensuring that we help them to break into the agricultural world. I go back to what I was saying about working with local authorities to try to get them not to sell off the farms that they have in their portfolios, because, certainly, speaking to young farmers, that is one of the ways that they can get into farming. I spoke about somebody in north Wales; he actually is from a farming background, but he wanted to go out and get his own farm. At the age of 21, he’s gone out and leased a farm, which is incredibly impressive.

UKIP spokesperson, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch, Llywydd. I don’t want to be left out of the crowd of the Cabinet Secretary’s fans, welcoming her back to the Chamber, and I’d like to say how glad I am to see her looking so hale and hearty.

I’d like to return to the question of the Labour Party manifesto, to follow up on the point that Simon Thomas made right at the start of proceedings today. As far as I can see in this manifesto, there are two paragraphs about farming under the chapter on negotiating Brexit, and then there’s, broadly speaking, one small paragraph under environmental and rural affairs. Given that agriculture is entirely a devolved matter, and we are in the middle of a general election campaign, I think the farming community will be pretty surprised that farming features so negligibly in this rather thick document.

Given that the First Minister has criticised my party and others for lack of clarity about our post-Brexit vision—I’m coming to this in a second—in fact our vision for agriculture was rolled out last year in the Assembly elections, in our manifesto there, where we were quite clear that we would maintain the basic payments scheme, then on the basis of £80 per acre. We’d have to revisit that figure—it may be possible to increase it, with extra payments for hill farmers based on headage within World Trade Organization rules, et cetera. This is the fundamental point that everybody wants to get some assurance on: if a basic payment scheme is going to be maintained in Wales post Brexit, and whether the existing payment regime will be replicated. I appreciate, as the Cabinet Secretary said, that we don’t know yet what the Westminster Government is going to give us by way of a financial settlement, and like her and her party, UKIP thinks that we should have every single penny of British taxpayers’ money that is currently spent by Brussels in Wales, but on that basis, it should be possible for her as the Cabinet Secretary for agriculture to give the kind of concrete assurances that farmers need.

Well, I have given that assurance to farmers. I’ve been in post for just a year now, and certainly I’ve made it very clear that we cannot envisage a time when our agricultural sector would not need that support. As to how the basic payment scheme will look post Brexit, as I say, it depends on the funding that we get, but, like you, I think we should get every penny that we were promised. We were told Wales would not lose one penny, and that is what I will be holding the UK Government to.

And the other question that arises is the freedom that we will have to consider the regulatory regime applying to rural industries in general. Whilst I accept the points that were made by Huw Irranca-Davies in his question earlier on about maintaining essential regulations, it can’t be said that the existing corpus of regulation imposed upon us by the EU is perfect in every particular, and there may be ways in which we can very significantly reduce costs without endangering the public benefits that we all want in terms of environmental protection, and so on. Farmers’ incomes are negligible, and the administrative burden of the EU regulatory regime is often very considerable upon them. They don’t have the income levels that would make life easier for them to employ staff to do all the form-filling, box-ticking and all the other complications of life in the farming industry. So, I hope that, as the Cabinet Secretary said in answer to David Melding earlier on, it’s not all doom and gloom post Brexit—I was very pleased to hear her say that and that she is taking a positive approach to these opportunities—and that we will take an open-minded science-based approach to regulation, and over time, no doubt quite a long time, we will go through the whole corpus of regulation and see how we can lift administrative burdens on farmers without losing any great public benefits that the non-farming community values.

Well, I do try to be a glass half full, rather than a glass half empty, so I am really trying to embrace the opportunities that I do think are there when you look. I was a passionate remainer and nothing will make me believe that leaving, that Brexit is good for us, but we do have to look for those opportunities. Regulations were one of the reasons cited to me by farmers as to why—I won’t say a majority, but certainly of the people I spoke to, the majority of them had voted leave. However, environmental standards and regulations, as a minimum, are going to be maintained. I keep saying this to them: we could strengthen them where there’s need to, and when we look at them all individually, there are literally thousands of regulations in my portfolio, and it could be that we’ll be strengthening some of them. So, perhaps some of them should have been careful what they wished for.

So, I would say that that regulation regime is essential. However, we will need to look at it on a case-by-case basis.

I know from having spoken to many farming organisations and individual farmers that they do appreciate the Cabinet Secretary’s open-minded approach and, indeed, her general approachability and willingness to discuss these issues in the round. There’s one particular case that I would like to raise with her now where she would be able to do something.

She will be aware that the regime surrounding livestock movements on farms, coming up into the county show period, is now a matter of controversy, with the introduction of new quarantine units from 10 June replacing the old regime of approved isolation units on farms. There have been significant complaints that this is unacceptably bureaucratic. There are 61 rules as part of the new system, which include installing double gates and double fences, as well as wearing specialised clothing. There’s also, of course, a fee payment regime of £172.80 for one quarantine unit and £244.80 for two, and many farmers are struggling to understand why this should be as bureaucratic a scheme as it is. For many of them, they’re saying that it’s just not worth the effort now to go to county shows with livestock and to show animals. So, I wonder whether we might be able to revisit this scheme and introduce a bit more flexibility than appears to be there at the minute, given that we already have an effective regime with approved isolation use and there isn’t really any evidence to show that there is a risk to animal welfare or health from the limited circumstances of moving animals to and from county shows.

Before I come onto quarantine units, just picking up your first point about approachability, certainly, I want to have those discussions with the sector and one of the reasons I set up the stakeholder group straight after the referendum last June—I think we met on 4 July for the first time—was to make sure that we brought the agriculture and environment sectors together. I thought it was really important that we didn’t have those silos. I have to say, we’ve had probably up to about 10 meetings now, and it’s been really good to see those two sectors working so positively together.

On the issue of quarantine units, when I came into post a year ago, I was told we needed to get moving really quickly on these new arrangements and I was criticised last summer for not bringing it forward quickly. We have worked on this policy, with the sector, really closely. My officials have worked with the livestock identification advisory group on those proposals and we continue to work with stakeholders on the delivery of the project. It’s not a mandatory scheme, so, they can choose: if they prefer the six-day standstill to the quarantine unit, they can choose to do that. I know there’s a financial cost and, again, if they choose not to have a QU, then any movements onto their farm will trigger the six-day standstill. They need to weigh up which is the best scheme for them personally.

Thank you. Whilst air quality in Wales is improving, hotspots remain. As we work to finalise a new clean air zone framework for Wales, all sectors and representative bodies—in particular in the private sector—are viewed as active stakeholders. Their involvement in this work will be essential.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. I’m sure that you’ll agree with me that air pollution impacts both on our environment and on our health. On the environment issues, we actually have the visible impacts upon our species, our plants and in our towns. Just come to Taibach in my constituency to see some of the visual impacts yourself. But also, there are many organisations in the health area that indicate that air pollution contributes to over 2,000 deaths annually here in Wales because of things like asthma attacks, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and perhaps flare-ups and heart attacks as a consequence of the air pollution.

I appreciate that the health agenda is with another Minister, but the air quality agenda is with you. What are you doing to actually have discussions across the Cabinet to ensure that we tackle the air pollution aspects across Wales? And, will you also perhaps look at strengthening the EU regulations, pre and post Brexit, to look at how we can address fewer breaches being allowed to ensure air quality is tighter, and perhaps the role of NRW in policing that?

The health of people and the environment of Wales go absolutely hand in hand and I am committed to protecting the people and the environment of Wales. My officials and certainly health officials, and particularly the Minister for social services’ officials, work very closely together and we revised the new guidance that you’re probably aware of on the local air quality management. We’re taking a joint approach with public health in the development of a clear air zone framework for Wales and that will be reflected in the work of a working group from within the Brexit stakeholder group on air and climate. You’ll be aware of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee report and I’ve already said to them that there’s a scope to better align both the national and the local air quality regimes following the exit from the EU.

Cabinet Secretary, welcome back to the Chamber. The point about 2,000 people dying prematurely in Wales through poor air quality—that’s five people a day—surely is one of the biggest public health challenges, dilemmas that we do face. I’ve listened to several of the answers that you’ve given and I welcome the action the Government is taking across portfolios. But, what confidence can we have that, by the time this Assembly goes before the electorate in 2021, we will see a reduction in those numbers of premature deaths here in Wales? As I said, and it is worth repeating, 2,000 people are dying prematurely because of poor air quality. That’s five people a day. Where can we mark you, as a Government, in 2021 as to those premature deaths here in Wales?

As you say, we need to do some significant work around this and you will have heard me say it’s absolutely a priority for me. You know we’ve recently had a consultation and I have to say the consultation was, in general, supportive of the action that we’re taking. We reaffirm the importance of reducing public exposure to air pollution by making the average concentration of nitrogen dioxide at dwellings one of Wales’s national well-being and public health outcomes framework indicators, so that’s an area where you can hold us to account. I’ve committed to issue a new air quality policy guidance to local authorities next month, and that will recognise schools and active travel routes, amongst others, as sensitive receptor locations. And local authorities have to take a risk-based approach to where they site their monitors, but I think it’s really important that they take that into consideration also. We’re also going to be issuing some guidance to support health and public health professionals in NHS Wales, because I think we need to work very closely with the staff of NHS Wales regarding that and I think they need to communicate the public health risks of poor air quality to the public and other agencies. I’m also looking to have an awareness-raising campaign on air quality, going forward.

Thank you. The Welsh Government’s aim is to prevent littering from occurring in the first place. We support and fund a range of programmes focusing on education, improving enforcement action, and community engagement and involvement. By encouraging people to take pride in their environment we will achieve longer lasting improvements.

It is good to see you back and I know that, like me, you and most of the other Assembly Members here will have received many constituent representations over concerns with littering, dog mess and fly-tipping, and of course it’s vital for public health, and particularly in areas that rely on tourism, that we have clean, safe and pleasant streets to walk in. Pembrokeshire has recently been recognised, through the ‘how clean are my streets?’ campaign, as having the cleanest streets in Wales, and I’m unabashed in saying this is a shout-out for Pembrokeshire. So, Cabinet Secretary, I wondered if you would join me, first of all, in praising the work of the street-cleaning teams in Pembrokeshire who are out all the time maintaining these streets, particularly in Pembrokeshire’s weather, which is either wonderful or totally inclement. But, above all, could you tell us how you intend to use that example of best practice to be percolated throughout Wales to improve our general streets, litter, dog messing, which does upset so many of our constituents, and so often.

I’m sure most Members in the Chamber will recognise what you’re saying. Our postbags are often full of such complaints and I certainly congratulate Pembrokeshire on having the cleanest streets, and it’s really important that that best practice is shared out. You’ll be aware of many schemes we have. We support Keep Wales Tidy, for instance, and I know they recently undertook a survey of street cleanliness and it found 95.5 per cent of the streets surveyed were graded B and above. So, that’s sort of acceptable to members of the public, but I think it’s really important that every area aims higher.

May I add my welcome to the other welcomes back that you’ve had, Minister? We’ve had some interesting ideas lately that may help to reduce littering. I’m thinking in terms of ideas about tackling the issue of excess packaging on food. It may be premature to ask you this, but what are your initial thoughts about whether that may be a good thing?

I certainly think we need to reduce packaging and I was horrified to see—my daughter bought something from a very well-known company that I won’t mention, and I think that the article was this size and the packaging was absolutely enormous and it made me get onto officials straight away to remind them that this is something that I think we really need to look at. And what we’re going to do is commission a feasibility study, and that needs to look at the costs and the benefits and all the options available to reduce food and drink packaging, in one area. We need to have a look at increasing recycling and reducing litter under an extended producer responsibility scheme. I met with a very well-known drinks organisation about what they can do in relation to disposable cups. I think there are huge opportunities here for us to be able to reduce packaging.

Cwestiwn 5 [OAQ(5)0149(ERA)] is withdrawn. Question 6, David Melding.

Thank you. The better management and use of our wealth of natural resources, together with the more efficient use of those resources in circulation, is a key component of our circular economy approach and commitment to green growth and reducing Wales’s ecological footprint.

First—First Minister? Cabinet Secretary—[Interruption.] Yes, that was a quick promotion.

If everyone in the world consumed as much as we do in Wales, we’d need 2.5 planets. I was looking at the ‘Ecological and Carbon Footprints of Wales’ 2015 report by the Stockholm Environment Institute, which I’m glad to say the Welsh Government did commission, and about 11 per cent of our footprint relates to transport—promoting cycling is one of the best things we could do. Actually, Welsh cities are quite good environments for promoting cycling; they’re relatively flat. But what we need to do is re-designate—[Interruption.] Well, Swansea in parts, I suppose. What we need to do is re-designate some of our roads as exclusively for pedestrians and cyclists. Until we do that, we won’t get the sort of modal shift we require.

Yes, I would agree with that statement. Certainly, I was looking at a cycling path in my own constituency of Wrexham and it just ended; it didn’t carry on. So, I did wonder what somebody would do when they were cycling along—you know, where would they go? So, I think all local authorities need to look very carefully at the provision that they have for cyclists and do all they can to improve it.

Thank you. Natural Resources Wales are responsible for assessing risk of flooding from rivers and the sea. The local flood risk management plan further sets out how risk will be managed. A £7 million flood-risk management scheme was completed in 2015, significantly reducing risk to the lower Swansea vale.

Can I highlight the huge success of the floodplain at Ynys Forgan, which is probably about a quarter of a mile from where I live? I quite often drive past it and sometimes you’ve got a lake, other times you’ve got a few little lakes, and other times it’s dry, but it does stop flooding in that area, which used to be a huge problem.

Can I also welcome the proposal to not charge landfill tax on dredged materials from rivers in the current Land Disposals Tax (Wales) Bill, which is making its way through? Having seen the great success of the floodplain on the River Tawe—we’re always willing, in Swansea, to export successes—are there any plans to create floodplains like that on other rivers to stop houses and businesses getting flooded?

Yes, I’m very pleased that my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government was able to bring forward a Government amendment at Stage 2 of the Landfill Disposals Tax (Wales) Bill to ensure a relief from the tax is available to material removed from the water in the interests of flood prevention. I think that was a very important amendment.

Certainly, you’ll be aware of the significant funding we are putting into flood prevention, so, again, it’s always very good to share best practice. I think what our national strategy for flood and coastal erosion risk management in Wales does is promote natural flood-risk management, and that work is eligible for grant funding. I think it’s really important that we strengthen that message to risk-management authorities in the refresh of the national strategy.

I acknowledge the work that was done in Ynys Forgan, really. That’s about 300 homes that were protected there. Yet, in recent years, we’ve also seen new building on sites on seemingly low-level ground close to the river. Conversely, in my previous work, I recall having to repeatedly explain to lenders that, while their environmental searches revealed that properties were being built in floodplain areas, it wasn’t the case—they were usually several metres higher than the environmental floodplain risk maps revealed, and it would’ve taken a tsunami, actually, to have taken most of them out. How often are these floodplain plans reassessed? I ask not just because desktop studies can often miss local geography, if you like, but also because overdevelopment in a particular area can affect the water table and water run-off, and that’s particularly important in places like Swansea, where we’re looking at 20,000 new homes, as well as the associated infrastructure.

I think Suzy Davies raises a very important point. I will have to write to you as to the frequency as to how often flood plans are reassessed.

Clearly, flood alerts are active in the lower Swansea valley, but there’s also a lot of new building, as has been alluded to. So, can I ask what action are you taking in conjunction with Natural Resources Wales and the local authority in terms of raising flood awareness and associated actions for residents during flood incidents, particularly to those new homeowners who move into this particular area?

I know that’s something that planning officials are working on with the local authorities, and obviously NRW are part of that campaign. It’s very important that all these issues are taken into account, and I’m constantly looking at the planning policies to make sure local authorities have the correct guidance at hand.

Thank you. We have a large number of policies and programmes delivering green growth, such as Green Growth Wales. We’ve been working to decarbonise the public sector, and we provide flexible support to businesses, domestic energy efficiency programmes, and support for low-carbon developments, from community scale to centralised generation.

Thank you for that response, Cabinet Secretary. Some environmental businesses are based around the timber industry, and there have been concerns that I have raised about the sustainability of that industry in terms of its supply of timber for the future. Now, there have been many references this afternoon to the role of Natural Resources Wales and the functions that it undertakes, and I have to say they do an excellent job, for example, in terms of flood prevention and protection. But I am concerned about the way that they are managing our forestry resource here in Wales, and that they’re not doing a particularly good job. I was very concerned also about the timber sales contract that has been featuring in the media and is now a subject of inquiry by the Public Accounts Committee. That suggests to me that they need to pull their socks up when it comes to managing our timber resources. And I wonder, Cabinet Secretary, what assurances you can give us that this is going to be a matter of priority in the future for Natural Resources Wales, and that we will have a sustainable supply of timber for the Welsh timber industry in the future.

Commercial timber operations are absolutely a high priority for Natural Resources Wales, and just last week I met with the Confederation of Forest Industries and ensured there was an NRW representative there to hear their concerns. This year, NRW are restocking more than 1,200 hectares on the Welsh Government’s woodland estate, and that compares very favourably, I think, with any of the previous five years. It is really important that the confederation and NRW work very closely together. I hear very conflicting reports around where trees are planted, are they planted in the right place, are there enough planted, so that is something that I’m working very closely with NRW and with Confor on. I meet NRW’s chair and chief executive every month, and I think it is absolutely a standing item now, because it is of such importance.

The ‘Wales Animal Health & Welfare Framework—Achieving High Standards Together’ explains the approach we are taking to achieve continued and lasting improvements in standards of animal health and welfare across Wales. The annual implementation plan sets out specific actions we are taking forward in any 12-month period.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that response. No doubt you’ll be aware that the Conservative election manifesto contains a commitment to hold another vote on the ban on hunting with dogs, or the fox hunting ban, as we probably best know it. Would you join me, Cabinet Secretary, in condemning any proposals that might open up the possibility of this barbaric and cruel practice returning to our shores, and assure me that the Welsh Government will speak out against any such proposals and look at every avenue available to prevent fox hunting with dogs ever taking place in Wales again?

Yes, absolutely. I would join you in that. And, although hunting with dogs is a non-devolved issue, my position is we would strongly oppose any moves to repeal the Hunting Act 2004 by any future UK Government. We do not wish to see the return of that barbaric, cruel and unpopular past time in Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, the Blue Cross ‘Unpicking the Knots’ report tells us that the last time Government brought in a specific law to regulate the sale of pets Winston Churchill was about to replace Clement Attlee for a second term as Prime Minister, Newcastle United won the FA cup, and ‘The Archers’ had just passed its pilot probation period. Now, I’m sure you’ll agree with me that times have certainly changed since then, and the rise of the internet has certainly had a significant effect on the pet trade. Therefore, can you tell us what specific discussions you’ve had regarding the need for an updated law regulating the sale of pets in Wales?

Certainly. I had a discussion with the animal health and welfare framework group. We look at their work programme. I can remember the last time—well, I thought I could—Newcastle United won the FA Cup, so I’m perhaps showing my age there. But you have reminded me that we need to make sure that all our legislation is up to date, and our policies, and it’s certainly something I’ll be happy to talk to my chief veterinary officer about.

Welcome back. When you were away, I asked for a debate on the register of animal abuse in Wales, because there have been a number of campaigns calling for this. The RSPCA has also called for a task and finish group from the Welsh Government looking at the options. For example, in Tennessee there is a list that is open to the public, and in New York there is a list for those who buy and sell pets and animals. Would you agree that some kind of task and finish group would help to bring that initial debate on this issue to the fore, so that the people of Wales who do think that this is a good idea—and a petition has received a great deal of support across the whole of the UK—can start this debate, and Wales can show the way ahead in that regard?

Yes, I absolutely agree with Bethan Jenkins. As you know, this is something I’m looking at very carefully and I hope to be writing to Assembly Members, if not before recess, certainly as soon as we come back.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children. The first question is from Dai Lloyd.

I thank the Member for his question. Our childcare offer will provide working parents of three and four-year-olds with 30 hours of Government-funded education and childcare for up to 48 weeks of the year. We will begin to test the offer in specific areas of seven local authorities in September.

Thank you for that response. As you know, a pilot scheme of the programme is being introduced in parts of Swansea, and local parents are obviously very pleased to see that happening. However, many of the pilot areas, including Pontarddulais and Gorseinon, are specific growth areas within the county. Can you ensure that you are taking the population increase into account as you introduce the programme, and how this impacts on the ability of the sector to deliver locally?

Of course, and we’re engaged with the sector. I am delighted that, in Swansea, there are many areas that are covered by this pilot and this will be a good spread of areas to test across schools sites and private day nursery settings. We will learn from this as we move forward, and I’m looking forward to the test areas starting in September in the new term.

Cabinet Secretary, one of the concerns that have been raised is around the capacity of the workforce to meet this challenge of providing the additional childcare. It’s an ambition that you and I both share in terms of increasing the availability of childcare, but particularly Welsh-medium childcare provision in traditionally non-Welsh speaking areas. What actions, specifically, are you taking to ensure that the childcare offer is available through both of our official languages in Wales?

There is a plethora of offers that we are currently considering. There is a test pilot—a joint scheme between Gwynedd and Anglesey—exploring opportunities both in English and Welsh-medium settings. There is an issue with the workforce and making sure we’ve got capacity as we move forward, and that’s the benefit of a roll-out, as we’re doing here in Wales. In England—we’ve learnt lessons from some of the issues that they’ve experienced there with the quick introduction of a system where there wasn’t capacity in the system to deliver. We’ve taken note of that, and that’s why we’re having a phased approach.

A good childcare offer is, of course, crucial to supporting women into work, and perhaps the Cabinet Secretary would join me in welcoming Neath Soroptimist International to the Senedd today, which does so much to support girls and women in my area and beyond. Childcare is only one part of the key offer that we need to make to young families. The other, as programmes like Flying Start acknowledge, is support with parenting. Countries such as Australia have pioneered evidence-based, broadly accessible parenting support programmes like Triple P, which can be delivered by care assistants, teachers or other disciplines. What steps is the Government taking to ensure that an evidence-based parenting support programme is widely available to young parents in Wales?

Of course, and I place on record my welcome to Neath Soroptimists, as well, in the Chamber today. I think the Member raises a really important point about the joined-up approach of delivery of services. The childcare pledge is not just about thinking of somewhere safe for a child to be for a certain amount of hours per day. This is about the ability to enhance their opportunities in life. Our Families First and Flying Start programmes, childcare pledges and our educational programmes such as the foundation phase all link in to a better opportunity for people as they move forward, and these are some of the conundrums that the pilot will start to tease out in terms of delivery mechanisms.

Thank you. Welsh Government is already taking action to help people to manage the effects of the UK Government’s welfare benefit changes. We have programmes to help people access sustainable work and affordable housing, we fund advice services and continue to maintain full entitlements for the council tax reduction scheme.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his answer. He’ll be aware of recent developments undermining benefit reforms at a UK level, such as the National Audit Office report in England demonstrating that benefit sanctions actually cost more than they save—another example of the ideologically driven and cruel cuts that have been meted out on people in this country. In other devolved administrations, such as in Northern Ireland, when they refused to implement welfare reform, they managed to secure £2 billion of additional spending from Westminster, and they’ve had concessions on future reforms. The Scottish Government has devolution of some social security powers and are changing things like the frequency of universal credit payments. The Cabinet Secretary knows my view: that we need a social safety net in this country too, like the other administrations. Could he, perhaps, consider launching a consultation sometime in the very near future on how we can use the limited powers we have already in this country to help people on social security, and perhaps to consult on what future powers we might like to draw down? Because I fear that we are going to be penalised even further in Wales, whilst other devolved administrations are taking proactive steps to protect those people that are under attack.

Well, I’m sympathetic to the Member’s approach on this. I say that with a word of caution, though, because I do understand that, while Scotland have taken a stance on this, there are significant issues around funding this long term. I think that is a matter for the relationship between the UK Government and Scotland, and I would like to learn from that whole proposal. Of course, I work with many of the third sector organisations and Government bodies and agencies that operate in Wales about how we can mitigate some of the effects of welfare reform. It is something that is on my agenda. I will give further updates to the Chamber in the near future.

In 2010-11, UK Government spent £177.3 billion on social security, including pensions. In 2016-17, that was £212.6 billion. What would the Welsh Government like to see spent?

We would not like to see any money spent. We want to see people back in work and supported in the appropriate areas. What the Member failed to mention with the statistics that he’s shared with me today is the fact that 1,000 young people will be displaced and possibly homeless in Wales because of the welfare benefit reforms that are happening in the UK Government under his new party.

I’ve referred, on a number of occasions, to the likely impact that you just alluded to now, Cabinet Secretary, of the Government’s cuts to local housing allowances for the under-35s, and the benefit cuts for those under 22 years old, which will have, obviously, exacerbating homelessness effects amongst young people. Merthyr Valleys Homes, Cabinet Secretary, are trying out an innovative approach to tackling homelessness at the moment by purchasing a couple of shipping containers for conversion to low-cost temporary accommodation for the homeless. Now, that isn’t about creating ghettos or these kinds of parks of people that are homeless and unemployed, but it is about providing accommodation that people can call their own while longer-term solutions are found, and I think that that would be better than the alternative, which is hostels and bed and breakfast. So, I’m just wondering, Cabinet Secretary, whether the Welsh Government would consider assisting more local authorities and housing associations in delivering similar initiatives across Wales.

Indeed, and I congratulate Merthyr Valleys Homes on their innovative solutions to this. I hear Members talking about the use of shipping containers. Actually, most of us live in a box of some form—some built by steel, some built by bricks and mortar, and some by sticks. It’s a little bit like the three pigs, I think, in terms of the construction. But what we do know is that having a roof over somebody’s head is absolutely important, and the affordability of that is critical too. That’s why we launched the £20 million innovation fund, and there are modular unit projects coming through. But I’m encouraged by Merthyr Valleys Homes already taking that initiative under their belt and helping young people in your constituency.

We now turn to party spokespeople to question the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children. The first today is Mark Isherwood.

Diolch. Of course, we must applaud the innovation coming from transfer housing associations.

Two weeks ago here you spoke in support of police devolution on a motion that also believed that specialist policing matters such as counter-terrorism are best co-ordinated at a UK level. If this were to happen, how would that work, given that the First Minister has called for powers equivalent to those devolved to Manchester, which are the powers of a police and crime commissioner, and therefore exclude operational matters? But even if it did include operational matters, the precedent in America, France and Italy, amongst many other nations, is that you end up with two separate police forces at different levels accountable to different people. So, how would that work?

Well, there is a model that’s already operating in Scotland, where there is a counter-terrorism operation between boundaries. That has no effect for individuals in terms of the UK administration. We can see that operating in the very same way on a Wales-England and UK basis as well. I think what we’ve been very clear about on the devolution of the police is that it fits in very nicely with the services that are provided already with the emergency services and the judicial system that we are also hoping will be transferred to Wales as well.

Well, again, I would be interested to know whether you’re envisaging, as the First Minister appears to, only police and crime commissioner powers, or something more.

But broadening the topic, we saw coverage last week from the anti-slavery co-ordinator for Wales, who had raised concerns about a number of entry points into Wales not having checks in terms of anti-slavery and people trafficking activities. He said that this week would be a week of action by Welsh forces aimed at tackling human trafficking and modern slavery, which he said had risen by 400 per cent in five years, including the children of victims. Are you able to tell us what involvement you and the Welsh Government have had in this operation and, either now or at a future date, brief the Assembly on what has occurred?

I would be very happy to update Members in the Chamber at a later date in terms of details from the successful programmes that we are operating. I would also offer the services of our anti-trafficking co-ordinator for any Members who wish to be briefed on this issue—for a personal briefing or a party briefing as well. I’d be happy for us to arrange that also. We are the only part of the UK that has invested, as Welsh Government, into an anti-human trafficking co-ordinator. I’ve raised this at very high levels in Westminster, because while I think it’s an excellent idea to have an anti-slavery co-ordinator, we are an island, and we are only a part of that island. I think it’s incumbent that Scotland and England also pursue this issue as well, and I would encourage the Member to raise that with his political leadership in terms of trying to resolve this issue in England and Wales.

[Inaudible.]—your predecessor worked with the UK Government on its UK anti-slavery legislation and the introduction of an officer there who does work with the anti-slavery co-ordinator in Wales.

But sticking with the theme of children for my final question, given the three inequalities in particular identified in the Children’s Commissioner for Wales’ ‘Hidden Ambitions’ report—. It said that young people leaving care

need the same sort of opportunities, assistance and support that all parents try to give their children as they start to make their way in the world’.

What steps are you taking to ensure that those in social care who reach the age of 18 are still entitled to obtain such care while studying A-levels? And what proposals do you have to ensure that young people who leave care continue to receive appropriate support until they reach 25—I think two of those three key calls in that report?

Indeed, and we’re working through that piece of work that the children’s commissioner did. Your colleague David Melding chairs a group on looked-after children for me. The advice coming from that team is invaluable in terms of shaping a different way that we are able to support children in the social care system. I am absolutely committed to making some changes in that space, and we’ve recently launched the St David’s award of £1 million, which will be on its way to local authorities to distribute between under 25-year olds, whom I believe should have access to some finances as they grow up. I didn’t badge this as—. We badged it as £1 million St David’s Day award, but I kind of like to think about it as ‘the bank of mum and dad’, like all of us have for our children, where they are able to go to a guardian or to kin to say, ‘Look, I want to go here tonight’—like my daughter did, or like your family did. These young people are so disadvantaged, we’ve got to support them in some way, and this is, hopefully, one step in the right direction to helping to support a normal type of life.

Thank you. We now move to the Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Bethan Jenkins.

Cabinet Secretary, in light of this week’s attack in Manchester, I thought it would be appropriate to ask what the Welsh Government is doing with regard to community cohesion. I ask in this context: a few years ago, I wrote to South Wales Police asking about some of the reasons why young men in Cardiff, for example, were moving to look to extremism as a way of life, or as something that they would find solace in, and they weren’t able to give me that information because it was protected. I don’t think some of those issues have gone away and I would like to understand from you what you are trying to do to work with communities to ensure that, if we are finding that there are instances where they may move to extremism, we understand why that is, and how you are working with communities to try and stop that, so that they have something to work with in their communities, as opposed to, potentially—potentially—feeling alienated.

I think the Member raises a very important and pertinent question, and our thoughts go out to the families and individuals affected by the Manchester bombing of two days ago. Community cohesion is one that we take very seriously, working with the local authorities, with the police, and with action groups on the ground. We have funded, since 2012, eight regional community co-ordinators in and across Wales. The grant is around £360,000 for posts awarded for 2017-18. We shouldn’t underestimate the important role that that plays in the community, but it’s about community ownership, and the engagement and trust is really important, so that we can get behind the scenes of where there are cases emerging of radicalisation. And I think what we’ve been able to do with the co-ordinators is to get into that space, and we will continue to fund that, particularly around this pressure point as well.

Thank you. It will be interesting to see an analysis of that, because I wanted to go on to ask particularly about at-risk groups, because we know that it may not be as simple as saying that it is because they may have a potential political grievance, or that they feel politically alienated that drives them to do this. It may be, as we’ve seen from other perpetrators of previous attacks in Europe, that they have lengthy criminal records already, often including domestic violence, and many have experienced deep poverty, which also, then, adds to their sense of feeling isolated. I’m not for one moment saying that what they do is acceptable, but I think we have to try and look at those at-risk groups, and try and stop them from getting to the stage where they feel that this is something that they need or want to do with their lives. So, are there communities in Cardiff, in those particular groups, that you’ve identified and that you are currently working with?

Yes, and alongside the police across the whole of Wales, and, indeed, the UK, there is an intelligence-led approach about how we look at particular groups, and we are able to support them in that sphere. I think the Member is right to raise—although the issues of historic actions may have had an impact on their adult lives, that’s not always the case either. And that’s why the identification of radicalisation or terrorism is really difficult, because we cannot describe what a terrorist looks like. The fact is, we’ve got to look back at some of their historic issues, and that’s why some of our other programmes, which will be interrelated around tackling issues around adverse childhood experiences, will sometimes give us an indicator of a pathway that an individual is taking. And this is why we’re learning alongside our other agencies, and there has been lots of work about why radicalisation takes place. I think there’s an awful lot of work still to be done, but our intelligence services are working very hard on this.

And my third question is something that has animated my mind since Manchester, and many of us here today as well, with regard to extremism, not only on the side of how we would see minority groups, but also far-right groups as well, who are attacking anybody at the moment who are Muslim in our society, even before they know what the religion of that potential perpetrator is. We had a debate last week on online abuse and we’ve seen a rise in that type of abuse by people who live amongst us. Quite frankly, I’m embarrassed by some of the things that I’ve been reading, attacking people in communities who don’t deserve to be attacked because they are no more guilty of this than any of us are.

So, I was wondering what you would be able to do in relation to talking to the education Secretary about having discussions with her about having more education, at an earlier age, about how we can be respectful of one another, how we can use online media, but also, in relation to terrorist activities, how we can understand what it is. For example, I studied at Aberystwyth university and there was no course on terrorism until 9/11 happened, and they put a course on especially for us to understand what that meant and how we could understand the world stage in relation to that. I don’t know if that’s happening for our young people and I think it’s turning communities against one another instead of uniting our communities. So, I know that it’s a complex issue, but how are you going about trying to unpick some of these very complex reasons for why people are taking to attacking others who have nothing to do with the awful acts that are taking place on the world stage?

Yes, there are two points to the Member’s question I feel: one is around the educational aspect of this. There is work going on in our schools to talk about and discuss with individuals tolerance and religion. I think that’s an important factor as we move forward, it’s about societies being tolerant with each other and our understanding of religious beliefs.

Let’s be very clear, and I’m with the Member on this—it’s abhorrent, the hatefulness that appears on social media from ill-informed individuals. Let me be very clear: Muslims aren’t terrorists. Terrorists are terrorists, and that’s the difference. I think we’ve got to be very clear about our ambition to make sure that Wales is a welcoming place. We want to help people and we want to support people. There’s certainly no place for misinformation, based on religion, on social media or, in fact, in any space where we are able to have conversations.

Thank you. And finally the UKIP spokesperson, Gareth Bennett.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I think there was welcome news recently from your colleague Lesley Griffiths about potentially including the ‘agent of change’ rule in planning regulations with regard to the protection of live music. I think that that’s a welcome development. It’s something that could help pubs that put on live music shows. There may be other ways in which the Welsh Government can help in this area. I know you had talks with CAMRA—the Campaign for Real Ale—earlier on in the Assembly term, so I wondered what the outcome of those talks was and if you were considering any other measures to protect pubs.

Yes, and this isn’t one Minister’s responsibility. Indeed, after Lesley Griffiths made the announcement around the issue of music venues, I spoke to Ken Skates only yesterday about the regeneration opportunities and perhaps areas of culture that could be designated for regeneration, which often may include arts and entertainment venues.

I did meet with CAMRA and we’ve had some discussions within our team about what the opportunities may be in terms of a Welsh-based solution for pubs and other publicly run buildings in Wales. I hope that I’ll be able to make an announcement shortly on that.

Okay, thanks for that. I’ll await the announcement obviously, but some ideas have been aired by CAMRA in the past. I don’t know if it’s perhaps premature to ask what your thoughts are on these. One of them pertains to—it’s slightly crossing over portfolios, I appreciate—planning and it’s the ease with which pubs in Wales can be changed by the owners, by pub chains, from pubs into shops or flats. This is because we don’t actually have a planning system like they have in Scotland, where they need express planning permission for change of use. So, I wondered if that was a change that you might be considering for Wales.

As I said, it’s a matter for cross-Cabinet discussion and planning will feature in the future of what we see for our public buildings. I think there are many factors that we have to have caution about, too. It’s not like one size fits all, and whatever happens in Scotland—if you want to pick the good bits in Scotland and the good bits in Wales, it’s always difficult to do that. The issues around community right to buy et cetera, or the right for a register, is something that I’m looking at, but I’m cautious about protecting a building with no intent of long-term purchase just to stem a planning application. We’ve just got to balance that issue out. I think further discussions with CAMRA may evolve following my discussions and announcements in the near future.

Okay, thanks for that. Now, I know you’re also responsible for the Post Office. At First Minister’s question’s last week, the First Minister was highlighting the need for co-location, which is something we’ve talked about in a lot of different policy areas. I wondered if there was any possibility of encouraging pubs perhaps to co-locate with post offices, if that might be a way forward to help the viability of pubs in future.

Well, I’m sure you should take a visit with Darren Millar to his local where you can get a pint a stamp and a curry, all in the same place. I did visit the pub, a long time ago, with the Member. I’m sure he’d like to take you perhaps at some stage to just show what can be done in our communities where there are opportunities.

Thank you very much. We return to the questions on the order paper now. Question 3, David Melding.

I thank the Member for his question. Our approach is to put children’s rights at the centre of our policy making. How we do this is set out in our children’s rights scheme and our compliance report provides us with an opportunity to reflect on the effectiveness of the arrangements to implement the UNCRC and amend where necessary.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that. The national participation standards set out what children are entitled to expect from the services they are involved in. These standards, as I understand, were reviewed last year and, as a consequence, updated guidance was necessary to local authorities to improve their self-assessment. I wonder if that guidance has been issued and whether we are likely to see more best practice along the lines developed by Torfaen council, where services that are for children or interact with children must clearly set out how they consult properly with children as service users.

I will write to the Member in terms of the detail of completion of that advice and whether that’s gone to local authorities; I don’t have that detail available for me today. But I do agree with the Member that there are some great value-added aspects of this. And where authorities are delivering very well, such as Torfaen council, we should replicate that across the 22 authorities, making sure that children really are the centre of our decision-making processes, rather than just an add-on and retrofitted into a policy. It is an important point the Member raises.

The Welsh Government recently approved Gypsy and Traveller accommodation assessments undertaken by all Welsh local authorities, which identified a need for 237 residential and 33 transit pitches. I have allocated £26.4 million between 2017 and 2021 to address this and I expect local authorities to make swift progress on this.

Diolch. In January 2011, obligations to meet the need for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation sites led to the granting of temporary planning permission for identified individuals for five years for a site in Flintshire, because of assurances made to the planning inspector by the council that, within such period, the need would be met by Flintshire. Because it wasn’t, Flintshire granted further temporary permission for five years in April, even though it’s widely recognised the site isn’t suitable as a permanent site. Then, subsequently, the granting of temporary planning permission was quashed in court because Flintshire had failed to fulfil its responsibility, and Flintshire had the costs of the hearing charged against it.

Given that the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 provisions in this respect, in terms of assessment of accommodation needs, came into effect in February 2015 and the duty to meet assessed needs, and the failure to comply with duties under section 103 came into effect in March 2016, what powers do you have to intervene in this instance, where something has clearly gone very wrong?

I’m not able to comment on legal cases that are being pursued. However, the housing Act of 2014 introduced new duties on local authorities to properly assess the mobile home pitch needs of Gypsies and Travellers and then ensure sufficient sites are created. We are the only part of the UK that’s placed a duty on local authorities to do this, and I think it’s very progressive, and, as I learned from the Gypsy, Traveller and Roma cross-party group the other week, the organisations were very positive about our interventions in this space.

Thank you very much. Question 5 [OAQ(5)0155(CC)] has been withdrawn. Therefore, question 6, Lynne Neagle.

I thank the Member for Torfaen for her question. We are working collaboratively across portfolios, including education, health and children and communities, to improve the well-being of children and young people. Preventing and mitigating the impact of ACEs can have a significant effect to benefit families and individuals, as well as the wider community.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The Children, Young People and Education Committee recently had a useful briefing on adverse childhood experiences, known as ACEs, from Public Health Wales. Clearly, recognition of particular ACEs has a role to play in ensuring the best possible outcomes for our children and young people, but there are many issues that can affect a child’s well-being, and it is a great concern to me that neglect is not recognised as an ACE. This is despite neglect being recognised as an ACE in North America and despite the fact that neglect continues to be the most common reason for child protection action in Wales. What assurances can you give, Cabinet Secretary, that the focus the Welsh Government is placing on ACEs will not lead to less focus on tackling neglect and other issues that will impact on a child’s well-being?

I thank the Member for a very important question in the supplementary that she raises with me. Can I give reassurance to the Member that this isn’t one or the other? This is about a holistic view and about engaging young people and their families? ACEs do provide one part of that. If we take the issue of ACEs, and the balance of two of the ACEs that are considered, which are any one of physical or mental abuse, both of those possibly relate to an outcome of neglect. Therefore, I wouldn’t say that we’re not on the same page here—I think it’s about definition. I would be very happy to meet with the Member and somebody from Public Health Wales to work through this issue to give the Member reassurance that, actually, this isn’t one area that we are neglecting—this is absolutely fundamental to making sure we can have the right benefits for young people as we move forward.

Cabinet Secretary, less than 1 per cent of Welsh NHS expenditure is targeted towards child and adolescent mental health services, yet 5,400 children and young people are referred to local primary mental health support services for assessment each year, with a further 2,355 waiting several months for their first out-patient appointment. Latest figures now show that 73 children and adolescents are waiting 26 weeks and beyond for treatment. At such an impressionable age, and when we talk about childhood experience, do you not agree with me that the earlier that we can get intervention and good treatment for our children, the greater outcomes are likely to be? Therefore, will you commit here today to working with the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport to bring down these unacceptable waiting times?

I’m grateful that the Member is now on board. I work with the health Cabinet Secretary already, as I do with all Cabinet colleagues, including the education Cabinet Secretary. We must get upstream of some of these issues. We’ve got to tackle the here and now, and the mental health cases that you talk about, particularly in young people, are ones that trouble me too, but, actually, what we’ve got to do is get to the prevention end of this and make sure that the experiences of young people don’t lead them into mental health trauma later on in life. So, I would encourage the Member, in her questions in the future also, to think about how we collectively have a non-political view on how we move resources from the critical end into the prevention end. It is an important process in where we’re going to be. There’s only one pot of money, and we’ve got to get in early on to make sure the young people she talks about aren’t duly affected in the long term in terms of adulthood.

I thank the Member for his question. We are committed to working across departments to ensure help to mitigate the effects of ACEs and provide support to vulnerable families in Wales. In addition, we are contributing £400,000 in 2017-18 to the establishment of Cymru Well Wales’s ACE support hub.

The Cabinet Secretary will be well aware that one of the most prevalent ACEs in Wales is that of parental separation, which can have a hugely damaging impact on children and young people. Given that, what action is the Welsh Government taking to support couples to stick together for the benefit of their children, and will you comment on what support is available, funded by the Welsh Government, in Wales at the moment?

There are many aspects of parental separation and drivers behind that, and they are often very complex. What we’ve got to do as a collective is understand what those impacts are. That’s why we’re investing in Families First, in Flying Start, in educational promotion programmes and in positive parenting programmes. And the ACE profiling of individuals is just one small part of the ability of complex families to move forward. Of course, I think that, where we can encourage parents to stay together, it’s the right thing to do, but, sometimes, in the best interests of the individuals and children, these things happen to take their course. But we are absolutely hoping to make some interventions in the areas that cause pressure. Employment issues around the household often cause family stress. We’re looking at improving job prospects for individuals, and finances, and making sure we can tackle the issues that Janet Finch-Saunders raised around mental health issues, too.

The £1 million St David’s Day fund I announced in March will support care leavers to move successfully towards independence and progresses many of the commissioner’s recommendations. The improving outcomes for children ministerial advisory group that you chair is leading this work.

And I very much welcome the St David’s fund. I think that is an innovative and imaginative way of improving the well-being of many looked-after children’s lives. I wonder how impressed you were also by the commissioner’s findings that social services, housing and education departments need to both co-operate and co-ordinate their work to improve the independence of care leavers, and that this work would be very much in line with the principles of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. And it’s important that we get that information across to local authorities and others.

Indeed, and the commissioner is absolutely right to make reference to this. We see much better outcomes where social services and housing departments work together, as opposed to in isolation. Otherwise, we see young people ending up in bed and breakfasts or other solutions that they may find appropriate within that department. I’ve told my team that I expect all organisations that have involvement here to have a joined-up approach to the delivery of services for looked-after children and children that are in care. I genuinely hope that we can make this better as we move forward, but I’m sure the Member, through his work, will keep scrutiny on and keep me well informed about how that’s working in practice.

I thank the Member for her question. House building is a priority for this Government, and latest quarterly statistics suggest an increase in new homes built in Mid and West Wales compared with the previous year. This progress has been supported by Help to Buy—Wales, rural housing enablers and our 20,000 affordable homes target.

The Cabinet Secretary has committed to building 20,000 new homes in Wales by 2021 and, of course, the Cabinet Secretary is aware that the affordability of homes in parts of rural Wales is a real issue. I just wondered if the Cabinet Secretary could give an assurance that mid and west Wales, which has approximately one fifth of the population of Wales, will get their share of those 20,000 new homes in Wales. What assurances can we give to our own constituents?

Of course, the Member’s right and is always an advocate for the mid and west region that she represents. I can’t say to the Member categorically that you will receive a fifth of the 20,000, but I can assure you that the products that we have in place, such as Help to Buy—Wales and the other projects that we are delivering across Wales, will be available to your constituents too, and it’s an important process where we do realise that there are homes needed for people right across the length and breadth of Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, will you outline what considerations the Welsh Government has made to ensuring that planning conditions for new homes include a requirement that fibre broadband should be installed?

I’ve actually had some discussions with the planning Minister, and also with some public companies to make sure we can consider this as we move forward. It is an important part of moving technology forward, and I often hear the Member relate to the adequacy of broadband in his constituency also. But, it is something that we are taking up with developers and registered social landlords.

Affordability, of course, isn’t just about buying a home or renting a home. It’s also about affordability of maintaining and being in a warm and safe home. That’s particularly true of Mid and West Wales, where a lot of homes are off-grid and don’t have access to the gas grid in particular and are reliant on solid fuel or oil or imported gas. What are you doing therefore to ensure that the homes that you are building or encouraging to be refurbished are of the highest environmental standards that both provide good environmental benefits but also, very importantly, benefits for the tenants or owners of those homes in terms of ongoing maintenance and costs of living there?

I think that there are two parts to this. I think the investment that the Government’s made with its programmes for refurbishment around gas boilers and insulation et cetera is an important part of that. But, I’m really encouraged about the innovation, and I talk this through often with one of my Members from the back benches, Jenny, regarding the energy efficiency of new homes and why we should be building new types of homes here in Wales rather than the traditional brick build. We should be looking at the long term, thinking about the energy conservation and the affordability of properties. We are trying to look at that, about leverage, with RSLs and our big investment of £1.2 billion, and what more we can get for our money.

Thank you. The Supporting People programme helps people avoid or overcome homelessness and live as independently as possible. In recognition of its vital role, we have protected the £124.4 million of funding from cuts since 2015-16.

Can I welcome the Cabinet Secretary’s response and certainly the protection of the money? I would also like to highlight how helpful the programme has been within my own constituency of Swansea East. Can the Cabinet Secretary outline how benefit changes have impacted on the Supporting People programme?

Well, what we do know is that, in Wales, we protected this. In England, they scrapped the Supporting People programme in terms of the ring fencing, which has a massive negative effect on individuals up and down the length of England. I’ve got a very progressive Supporting People sector that’s currently supported by a great leader in Cymorth Cymru’s Katie Dalton, who’s working very hard to ensure that our money invested is delivered on the ground by many of the organisations that the Member alludes to, particularly in Swansea East, as he raised here today.

During the debate on the Supporting People programme last year, you said that it

helps to reduce unnecessary demands on the NHS’,

particularly speaking about mental health, as you probably remember. I think we all accept that prevention is notoriously difficult to evidence and prove, but do you have any data that may help you promote joint spending across the two portfolios and actually lever some value into that protected budget?

Of course, and I’d be happy to write to the Member with some further details and examples. There are some great operating bodies across Wales that can very clearly show the investment of a small amount of Supporting People funding stream, which has multiple benefits in that way. Of course, that’s how Government and agencies should be thinking in the consideration of the WFG Act, making sure that the implications of one has a positive effect on the other, if we can possibly achieve that. But, I will write to the Member with some more detail.

I thank the Member for Newport West. Welsh Government has an important role in working with a range of partners in supporting resilient communities in all parts of Wales. Further details of a new regeneration programme will shortly be announced, and the regeneration priorities for Newport will need to feed into those considerations.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Two weeks ago, I joined Newport City Homes, Gwent Police officers, local residents and councillors on a walk around the recently started £7.9 million redevelopment in Pill. The improvements are long overdue and this project will help tackle anti-social behaviour and make a real difference to those living there. These ambitious plans are as a result of work with a dedicated group of residents, including young people, retailers and the wider community, working with the housing association. Does the Cabinet Secretary agree that putting residents at the heart of plans for regeneration from the beginning of the project through to delivery is crucial for success?

Of course, and I’m grateful for the Member’s involvement in that scheme. I’ve visited Pill three times over the last six months to see what progress has been made and it was remarkable only last week, when I visited on my last occasion. The Member’s right to raise the issue of community involvement because it’s their community and we’ve got to make sure that it’s built in the resilience about taking that forward for the future. And I’m encouraged by the work of all of those agencies that are involved. I’ve asked my team directly now to get involved in the public services board of Newport to make sure that we can have some leverage in terms of making sure we can turn that community around in Pill, to make it a success as it once was when it flourished in the years gone by.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

There are no topical questions that have been tabled today.

So, we move to the 90-second statements, and the first of those this week is Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This weekend, the Urdd Eisteddfod comes to the grounds of Bridgend College’s Pencoed campus. Many thousands will travel to the area from across Wales to enjoy the festival of Welsh language and Welsh culture and youth.

We are very proud to be hosting the Urdd Eisteddfod and I am very proud of the way in which my own local communities have taken this high point of the Welsh cultural calendar to their hearts: the way in which the staff, management and students of Bridgend College have worked so hard in preparation for the event; the fantastic fundraising efforts of local communities across the area; the enthusiasm and involvement of local schools; the support of local clubs and organisations, including Pencoed RFC, which hosted a very successful rugby sevens tournament; and so many more who have worked over many months to make Eisteddfod yr Urdd Pen-y-bont ar Ogwr, Taf ac Elái a success.

Those of you who haven’t before visited an Eisteddfod, I say to you: please come to enjoy yourselves and the welcome offered at the best youth festival and by the best of our talented young people. We hope to see you there.

This weekend the Merthyr Rising festival will commemorate the events of May 1831 when iron workers, miners and their families rose up against the deplorable living and working conditions they had to endure. During the protest the rebels bathed their flag in calf’s blood—believed to be the first time the red flag was used as a symbol of revolution. There are still buildings and sights in Merthyr that played a significant part in the rising, not least of which is the debtor’s court of requests, where those in debt often faced seizure of their property and belongings, plunging them into further destitution. But whilst buildings like the court are a reminder of the rising, it is the people behind it who matter most, and one of those was Richard Lewis, or Dic Penderyn as he was more commonly known. As least 28 people died during the rising, but it was for allegedly wounding a soldier that Dic Penderyn was scapegoated, brought before the courts, sentenced to death and hanged at Cardiff jail on 13 August 1831, protesting his innocence to the end with his last words: ‘O Arglwydd, dyma gamwedd’—O, Lord, here is injustice. Despite a subsequent deathbed confession by the real culprit, Dic Penderyn has never been pardoned, but I’m proud to have added my name to the support for the campaign by his family to achieve this.

So, this weekend we will remember Dic’s legacy and the spirit of the workers of Merthyr who rose up against injustice and tyranny, paving the way for future political and social reform in Britain, and we will continue the fight for justice for Dic Penderyn.

28 May marks the seventh World Hunger Day. Run by the Hunger Project, this aims to raise awareness of the nearly 800 million people across the world who do not have access to enough food, and to promote sustainable solutions to hunger and poverty. Globally, hunger kills more people than AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined. This year’s World Hunger Day takes as its theme the causes of chronic hunger. The Hunger Project states that this is a symptom of poverty and social inequality, and this an important context in which to note the recent statistics from the Trussell Trust. As Members will know, the trust maintains a network of over 400 food banks around the UK, providing emergency food to those who find themselves in crisis, many of whom are children. New information shows that supplies provided by the trust in the last 12 months around the UK went up by over 70,000. Here in Wales, there was a shocking 10 per cent increase in the numbers fed by food banks, and this is before the full impact of the switch to universal credit is felt.

I know, first hand, the excellent work Merthyr Cynon Foodbank does in my own constituency, and I’m happy to support them and raise awareness of their work. But when police officers and nurses are reportedly relying on foodbanks here in the UK, it becomes obvious that hunger is widespread and we must find a solution to this challenge, both here and abroad.

Thank you very much.

Item 5 on the agenda is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education: Assessment for Learning—A Distinct Welsh Approach. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Kirsty Williams.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The word ‘dysgu’ means both teaching and learning. As Professor Dylan William of University College London has pointed out, this linguistic and cultural perspective neatly demonstrates that the quality of teaching and learning cannot be separated. Assessment for learning means that teaching is always adaptive, specific to the learner’s needs and supports raising standards for all.

The recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report into our education reform journey recognised that a commitment to improving the teaching and learning in our schools is visible at all levels of the education system. The report recommended that the focus of our reforms should be on developing a high-quality teaching profession, making leadership a key driver for reform, ensuring equity in learning opportunities and student well-being, and moving towards a new system of assessment, evaluation and accountability that aligns with the new twenty-first century curriculum.

I spoke about our plans to develop leadership, to the Chamber, last week. Today, I want to focus on assessment: what good assessment looks like, what we have done to date and what we will do to take forward a new assessment and evaluation framework. And, along the way, Deputy Presiding Officer, I would also like to bust a few myths about our national tests. High-quality, ongoing assessment has a crucial role in teaching, learning and raising standards. It should be a natural and integral feature of classroom practice, and future assessment arrangements will give priority to this. We are working with schools, regional consortia and taking the advice of international assessment experts, such as Dylan William and John Hattie, to ensure that there is a renewed emphasis on assessment for learning and that the learner is at the heart of our proposals.

Assessment for learning is responsive teaching. It is the bridge between teaching and the way we discover whether activities and experiences in the classroom have brought about the learning that was intended. It is a powerful tool that can drive progress and raise achievement for all of our learners. Our vision is that assessment’s prime purpose is to provide information that can guide decisions about how best to progress young people’s learning and to report to their parents and carers on that progress. By so doing, assessment should improve learners’ learning, teachers’ teaching and parents’ and carers’ understanding.

Research from across the world has shown that assessment for learning offers us an effective way to meet our goals for a high-performing education system that provides learners with the means to become lifelong learners. Learners who are given high-quality feedback, who understand where they are in their learning, where they need to go next and, crucially, how they get there, are the most likely to make the most improvement.

As you will be aware from my recent written statement, perhaps one of the most exciting developments schools will see coming in the years ahead is the transition from the traditional paper reading and numeracy tests that learners sit each year, to an online, adaptive, personalised assessment. The new assessments will adapt the difficulty of the questions to match the response of the learner, adjusting to provide appropriate challenge for each individual. This means that all learners will be presented with questions that match and challenge their individual skills in reading and numeracy. Schools will receive high-quality, tailored information about each learner’s skills that they can use as additional evidence to plan the next steps for teaching and learning. The tests will be self-marking and compatible with schools’ information management systems. Teachers and learners will have high-quality, immediate and specific feedback, giving them a better picture of how they can address each learner’s strengths and weaknesses. There are many advantages to implementing personalised assessments, but let me be perfectly clear that the current paper tests share exactly the same purpose. There are still a few myths doing the rounds when it comes to the national tests, and I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight.

Firstly, the tests are completely different from SATs in England, where results are published and schools ranked on the basis of test scores. Our tests were implemented to support teaching and learning, and were never intended to be high-stakes. The test results are not used by Welsh Government to judge school performance. The key to our approach is that the focus is on what the tests tell teachers, which is then used to help shape planning for learners’ next steps and to develop core skills and knowledge. We know that, at the moment, assessment for learning is not always well understood or embedded across every school. That is why I have refocused activity to improve confidence in its use.

Earlier this year, I ended the programme of external verification, and outlined our intentions to put in place a programme that would maintain the original aim of improving teacher assessment, but with more focus on the needs of teachers and their professional learning. In addition, we have made changes to the reporting on the national literacy and numeracy framework. Last week, schools were notified that they would only be expected to produce parental reports on the national literacy and numeracy framework for English, Welsh and maths at key stages 2 and 3, and language, literacy and communication and mathematical development during the foundation phase. Taking away the expectation of literacy and numeracy reports all the way across the curriculum will allow schools to focus efforts on literacy and numeracy development in effective curriculum planning and assessment for learning approaches.

In a coherent and collective approach to raising standards and expectations, assessment and accountability is critical to our ongoing reforms and the development and delivery of the new curriculum. However, in the past, the lines between the two have often been blurred, leading to negative unintended consequences in the classroom and a lack of focus on overall standards. In the next few weeks, I will make further announcements about accountability. Taken together, these will recognise and promote high-quality teaching and learning so that we raise standards, reduce the attainment gap and deliver an education system that is a genuine source of national pride and national confidence.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement, and for giving me advance notice of it. I think we’d all agree in this Chamber that we want to see a rigorous assessment process here in Wales that is fair to the learner, that helps to inform teachers about how best to respond to their needs, but that also acts as a benchmarking system across the whole of Wales, so that we can compare and contrast performance both between pupils within schools and, indeed, compare and contrast performance between different schools as well.

We know that the current system isn’t perfect. There’s far too much self-evaluation, if you like, within the current system and not enough in terms of standardisation, and so that’s why I was very pleased to welcome the shift to more responsive and personalised testing online when the Cabinet Secretary announced it earlier this year, and I think that that’s absolutely a step in the right direction. But I will say, Cabinet Secretary, that what we must also not be afraid to do is to continue to put our children and our young people in examination-type situations with paper tests. Because, at the end of the day, those high-stakes paper tests that they’ll be doing when they get to GCSE age and when they get to AS and A-level age, they’re going to be less phased by those if they’ve had lots of experience of being sat in a test-like situation. They’re not going to be sat on computers doing those tests, so it’s important that they have the experience of those tests both in the classroom and in the schools at different points.

Now, I know that you say—and you like to draw the big distinction between the SATs tests in England and the tests that we’ve had traditionally here in Wales, and you say that that’s not something where we’re going to rank schools. But, at the end of the day, they do need to be things that are used to manage performance within schools, and to manage local authority attention to schools and regional consortia’s attention to schools if weaknesses are identified in those outcomes. I think it’s only right that the outcomes of that testing are shared with parents, because, at the end of the day, parents should be empowered to be able to make decisions about which schools they want to see their children educated in. I think that the more information they can have, including information on tests and outcomes from those tests, the better.

I appreciate that you can swing the pendulum too far and just use markers on things like the achievements in these sorts of tests and overemphasise them, if you like, and not consider properly other things in schools. That’s why we’ve been, as a party, supportive of the green, amber and red system that has been developed by the Welsh Government, and it’s important that that is also a robust system. I know, Cabinet Secretary, that you want that to be a robust system that truly reflects, in an all-round and holistic sense, the performance of schools. But let’s not forget that the results that children and young people have in tests like the ones that we’re talking about today—this assessment for learning—are an important indicator in terms of school performance, and we must not ignore them.

We know that the OECD told us that there are many teachers at all levels who lack the skills to implement quality formative assessments and to use those assessment data to support students in their learning. I think that it’s only right to pick up on that point, and I was pleased that you made reference to the OECD and the work that they’re doing to oversee some of the implementation of this work in the future. We know, also, of course, from the recent Education Workforce Council survey of the education workforce in Wales, that one of the other problems we have is communicating to our teachers about the changes that are taking place here in Wales in our education system. So, I wonder, Cabinet Secretary, whether you’ll be able to tell us how you’re going to ensure that there’s an appropriate response from the teaching workforce to these new testing regimes as they’re being rolled out here in Wales, what you’re going to do to monitor the way that the teaching workforce is using the information in a confident way to change their practice so that they can support learners better, and what assurances you can give us as an Assembly that we’re not completely ditching the paper tests in literacy, in numeracy, and all those other subjects, so that our children can still be well prepared as they get on into later life to take those high-stakes tests that will come down the line.

Thank you very much, Darren, for your questions. I had hoped that the statement this afternoon would be able to help develop a broader understanding of the difference between assessment for learning, which is a crucial part of how we raise standards in our schools—and how that is a very different beast to what is accountability. The fact that the two have been melded together in the past, some of it in reality, some of it, often, myth and in the minds of practitioners, is one of the reasons why we’re not making the progress we need to make. Let me be absolutely clear: we need accountability in the Welsh education system. We know from past experience what happens if that accountability is taken away. Therefore, I will continue to ensure that our schools, our LEAs, and our regional consortia are held to account for their performance.

But accountability measures have to be the right ones, and they do have to be, I’m afraid to say, divorced from the principles of assessment for learning. So, you’re absolutely right, we will continue to use the categorisation system to be able to provide a holistic view of how individual schools are performing. We will continue to develop a robust inspection regime, with the publication of inspection reports via Estyn, which give parents the information that they need when looking at prospective schools for their children. And there is more we can do to improve both categorisation and, I believe, potentially, in conjunction with discussions with Estyn, how we can improve the inspection regime also. But let me be clear: assessment for learning is not part of that accountability regime. It is simply not a robust way—it is not a robust way to use assessment tests to judge the performance of a school. Cohorts can differ hugely.

Just last week, I visited Blaenymaes school in Swansea. The children entering that school are significantly behind, developmentally, than you would expect in the Welsh—[Interruption.]—in the Welsh population. Sixty per cent of those children are on free school—[Interruption.]—on free school meals. That is very different from a school in the same local education authority, and therefore relying simply on scores around standardised testing is not a fair way to judge. [Interruption.] Yes, you’re right. How we monitor that school is the progress that they’ve made, and I’m delighted that Blaenymaes school was recently given a ‘good’ and ‘good’ evaluation by Estyn because of the progress they’re able to make for those children. But it would not be right to use individual children’s test scores to judge the performance of that school. But parents need to know. Parents absolutely need to know, and there are no plans to stop parents being given access to their children’s test scores. It’s really important as a parent, and I’m a mum myself whose children have sat these assessments most recently. It’s really important to me and other parents to know where my child is, to have a standardised benchmark assessment to work alongside the individual teachers’ assessments around my children.

The paper tests will be phased out, Darren, and they will be phased out to an online adaptive system. One of the problems with the current testing is it does not take into account where a child is. We could have a child with a number of additional learning needs who sits down in front of a test, looks at the paper, and can’t answer the first question. That, potentially, is devastating to that child’s confidence. The beauty of an online adaptive test is that the questions will adapt to the ability of that child, to see where they are, and to push them to see how much they can do. That’s good news for all children, because you can get a better, more accurate picture of where that child is. The idea that, simply, children will be completely fazed if they sit down in front of an exam paper at 16 is, if I might say, fanciful, Darren. The reality is that teachers in high schools prepare their children for sitting those exams with mock papers, mock exams. Those things happen, and we have to divorce the two.

There are professional learning needs. We do need to get self-assessment better. It’s one of the weaknesses in our system. That’s been acknowledged by Estyn. That’s why continued moderation is really, really important. But, by moving some of the emphasis away, that gives us more time for teachers to concentrate on developing their skills in this area, and, as you know, we’ve put aside £5.6 million in this financial year for the consortia’s professional learning funds.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement. Donaldson did say, of course, in his ‘Successful Futures’ report, that dissatisfaction with current assessment arrangements was one of the strongest messages that he received. So, it’s good to see that this is being pursued, and I’m a bit fearful of saying the word ‘tests’ now, after that exchange. It’s been given a decent airing, so I won’t pursue it too much, only to recognise, of course, what Donaldson tells us, that the frequency of tests should be kept to a minimum in view of their impact on the curriculum and teaching and learning, because the danger is that people are taught to the test and then, all of a sudden, you find yourself going off on a tangent and not maybe focusing on the work that needs to be done.

I didn’t hear you mention self-assessment and peer assessment in your statement. Clearly, they are important factors in encouraging children and young people to take greater responsibility for their own learning. I know my children have a success criteria that they adhere to when they have homework, where they’re given a task that they’re meant to achieve, they need to understand how they’re going to achieve that, and then how they’re going to demonstrate what they’ve learnt from that task. So, I’m sure you’ll be able to tell us about the importance of self-assessment and peer assessment within this context, and teachers have their professional learning passports now—no different, potentially, for pupils in future; I know that Donaldson mentioned e-portfolios and e-badges, even, to record key achievements and experiences, and I’m wondering where we’re going on that, whether that’s something that you’re actively pursuing or not.

Your statement talks of an online adaptive personalised assessment, and teachers and leaders having high-quality immediate specific feedback. Donaldson also mentioned, of course, that we should increase the use of digital media and explore the opportunities to improve the immediacy of feedback to parents and carers. So, I’m just wondering whether this could be extended to allowing parents access to some aspects of this so that they can, in real time if you like, track the development of their children. I know many schools use Incerts. Whether there’s a public-facing element that could be utilised in that respect, it would be good to hear what your thinking is on that front.

Moving to more of an automated online system clearly has its strengths. I’m just looking for reassurance—and I’m sure you’ll give it to me—that we won’t take our eye off the ball in terms of continually needing to build teachers’ capacity to assess, and that we don’t just leave it to computers. So, that’s certainly something that we need to be wary of.

The children and young people committee clearly have been scrutinising implementation of the new curriculum, and we did hear contrasting views about the relationship between designing the curriculum and setting the assessment framework. Some people were saying, ‘Well, tell us what you want to assess and we’ll design you a curriculum’, and others were saying—and more rightly as well, in my view—that a purposes-driven curriculum starts with purposes and proceeds from there. Although your somewhat discombobulated, maybe, response to us in committee that it isn’t a chicken or egg, that it’s chicken and egg at the same time—I’m not sure whether that’s possible, but I’d like you maybe to reassure us now that the sector is getting the clarity it needs about the interrelationship, which we touched on earlier somewhat, actually, so that we can be confident that the assessment processes that we’re moving towards are appropriate for the new curriculum and the future that we’re moving towards.

Thank you very much, Llyr, for those questions and observations. You’re quite right; Professor Donaldson told us that the frequency of testing should be kept to a minimum, but he was also very clear in his report that external standardised testing provides important benchmarking information and should be used in combination with school tests and teacher assessments. So, in no way did Donaldson say we should stop doing national tests. He saw that as part of a holistic picture of how we can develop our assessment regimes. Actually, what Professor Donaldson recommended in his report was that, and I quote:

Innovative approaches to assessment, including interactive approaches, should be developed’.

So, actually, our move towards interactive online adaptive testing is in response to a recommendation that was made in that report.

You’re absolutely clear: if you look at pretty pictures about what assessment for learning actually looks at, one of the crucial components of that is peer review and the ability of children themselves to look critically at their own work and, indeed, help mark the work of their classmate alongside them. I don’t know whether your children use the tickled pink/green for growth method, which allows them to use pink highlighters to highlight the good bits, and then you use a green highlighter to identify the bits that maybe need to grow and need to be improved, but it’s a very important part of a strategy of developing that self-critique and the ability to identify. There are many, many, many innovative ways of using it. Wrong answers, for instance: if a class is getting the answer right all of the time, who’s learning? Sometimes, we need to get things wrong to identify what is it that led us to give that answer to reflect on that. So, there are lots and lots of different approaches. But the ability to engage children in that, not simply have their work marked by a teacher or reported on by a teacher, but actually to be able to look critically at their own work and that of others, is crucially important.

You talked about professional learning passports. There’s absolutely a role for the professional learning passport, but I think we can do it better than what we’ve got at the moment. I don’t think it is in its optimum state to really get teachers to engage with it. But, for children’s sake, many, many, many schools employ strategies for compiling e-portfolios. Only this morning, I was discussing with a headteacher the use of Building Blocks, which is an app developed by a Llanelli company. They use that to capture and record work. It allows people to reflect on that, share it with other classmates to have a look at, and be able to send it home. So, I’m looking at what more we can do to use that kind of technology in our learning.

One of the significant improvements I hope that online adaptive testing will bring to us, Llyr, is more timely responses. You will know, like I will, that the tests were sat by our children a number of weeks ago. I don’t know about schools in your area, or indeed in Darren’s, but I will probably get my children’s tests in the last week of term—the last week of term—where there is little time to go into school and have a discussion with the teacher. And then, the summer holidays come, and the momentum around that is lost. So, one of the benefits of moving to this system is that you will have instantaneous results and schools will be able to do it at times of the year that best suit them and their children. So, I’m hoping that one of the benefits of moving to this is greater flexibility, and that it will allow for greater parental engagement in discussing test results with their schools, and that is crucial.

We know that, after the quality of the teacher in the classroom, parental engagement in your child’s education is the second most important factor. We have to find new and innovative ways to encourage parents to be engaged in their children’s education. Again, I think, digitally—because, let’s face it, how many school gates do you see with everybody on their smartphones—digitally is one area in which we can increase those conversations between schools and parents about their children’s learning.

We do need to do more in terms of professional learning to support teachers’ skills in assessment for learning. As I said in my statement, and acknowledged in my statement, it is not as embedded and as universal as I would like it to be, and this will continue some of the ongoing conversations we have with regional consortia around professional learning.

What comes first and how do we assess a new curriculum? One of the lessons I think that we have learnt from Scotland is that they developed their curriculum and then thought about the assessment later. That’s been one of the problems that I think the Scottish education system has suffered from. So, we are looking at assessment and evaluation as we develop the curriculum, so that we are mindful of the fact that, yes, we need to have a purpose base, but are also mindful about how actually we will assess for that, and how will we test for that as we develop it. So, you’ll be aware that that work is ongoing, in conjunction with the work on the AOLEs, because I think if we leave it till the end, and have it as an add-on, we will defeat the purpose of what assessment is about. And I go back to my statement: assessment shouldn’t be an add-on; it should be an integral part of teachers’ practice in the classroom.

And finally, Michelle Brown.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. Whilst I support the use of the latest technology in the classroom, it must always remain in a way that improves the education for the child, and doesn’t simply ease the teacher’s workload. The answer to overworked teachers should always be more teachers, not more computers. There is no substitute for the praise of a teacher who is respected and liked by their pupils, and a computer can never give the encouragement that a teacher can. On the one hand, we are telling parents it’s a bad idea for their children to spend too much time in front of their iPads and laptops, but when it suits us, we encourage it in the classroom. By increasing the use of computers for assessment, we are downgrading the status of teachers and encouraging isolation in the classroom, when we should be fostering interaction. An apple was only ever meant to be a gift for the teacher, not a replacement for them.

I welcome that the Cabinet Secretary values personalised assessment, but I certainly would question whether this is a new thing, as the statement infers. Surely, teachers assess pupils in terms of each child or young person’s individual development on an ongoing basis already. Surely, they’ve been doing this since the profession began. As regards the Cabinet Secretary’s attempt to differentiate the tests that school pupils in England and Wales sit, I’d say that it’s irrelevant to the child what the school or anybody else will do with those results. A test is a test is a test from the point of view of the person sitting it.

So, I would like to ask the Cabinet Secretary what thoughts she has had on making sure children remain primarily educated by humans rather than programmers. Would it be sensible to propose some kind of monitoring of the amount of time pupils spend working and being assessed via computer? Have you asked the young people and their parents for their thoughts on the increasing androidisation of their education?

Could I thank Michelle for her questions? Let me be absolutely clear for the Member and for the Chamber: this is not about replacing teachers with computers; it is about being able to supply teachers with instantaneous, good-quality information about the abilities of an individual child—something that, at the moment, we do in one way, but I think we can improve upon it.

As I said in my statement, the purpose of these tests is absolutely about the child. It’s about having the information that we need for teachers and parents to assess how we help that child to develop more. The fact that actually it reduces workload on teachers and gives us better quality information in a better time frame are some of the other reasons why this is a good thing to do. But I try and judge myself, in everything that I do, Michelle, on the basis of the mantra ‘child first and always’. I judge that moving to these systems is better for individual children in Wales.

We are all concerned about screen time for children and the impact of digital technology on children’s lives. We spent a great deal of time last week in this Chamber debating that. We all acknowledge that there are disbenefits and benefits, but let me be clear: this is a test over a short period of time that probably most schools will decide to do only once a year. This is not sitting children in front of a screen for hours and hours and hours. I reiterate again: this is not about replacing teachers with computers; this is allowing us to harness the power of new technology to help teachers do even better for the children in their classroom.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

We now move on to item 6, which is a statement by the Counsel General: consultation on the Welsh Government prosecution code. I call on the Counsel General, Mick Antoniw.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Welsh Government takes the enforcement of animal welfare, food production and fisheries rules and laws very seriously. Over the past nine years, marine enforcement officers, acting on behalf of the Welsh Ministers, have investigated infringements of fisheries laws in our waters, leading to 38 successful prosecutions, including 11 last year. We have also taken enforcement action that has in some cases involved taking a prosecution concerning breaches of legislation to control the spread of TB and TSE, to govern the handling of animal by-products, to regulate the marketing of horticultural products and the production of eggs for human consumption. Our prosecution responsibilities also involve social care, childcare and independent healthcare.

In all areas, we are committed to fair and effective prosecution as a way of maintaining law and order, protecting individuals, the public and our resources, and ensuring that we all live in a safe and just society. We also recognise that every prosecution has serious implications for all involved, including witnesses and defendants. When the Welsh Government takes forward prosecutions, it is important that the public has confidence in our actions, and a major part of that is explaining how we have made our decisions and how we support justice.

For that reason, I am pleased today to launch a consultation on the proposed Welsh Government prosecution code. Responsibility for prosecution decisions in the Welsh Government rests with me as the Counsel General, unless prosecution decisions are explicitly restricted to the Welsh Ministers by the relevant statutory provisions. How I take those prosecution decisions is set out in the ministerial code. So, I must exercise prosecution functions vested in me, independently of the Welsh Government, and other members of the Government must not become involved. Where I institute proceedings, defend or appear in legal proceedings relating to the functions of the Welsh Ministers, then again I must act independently of Government.

There are occasions when the function of prosecutor rests with the First Minister or one of the Welsh Ministers. The ministerial code requires liaison with me so that I may provide advice on the prosecution decision as the law officer. But in each and every case, I need to base my advice and exercise my decisions by considering whether the case is suitable for prosecution. I do that by reference to a prosecution code. Currently, I use the Crown Prosecution Service code for Crown prosecutors, which requires consideration of the full code test.

This test has two distinct stages: first, the evidential stage and, secondly, the public interest stage. The evidential stage requires prosecutors to be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each suspect for each offence. The public interest stage requires prosecutors to go on and consider whether a prosecution is required in the public interest. The CPS code sets out a number of factors for prosecutors to consider when deciding on the public interest.

The CPS code, however, was developed primarily for use in relation to mainstream criminal offences. It therefore takes into account the type prosecutions that are commenced by the CPS and the police. There are also parts of the CPS code that do not apply to the Welsh Government. So, in light of this, and coupled with the fact that the Welsh Government’s prosecution functions continue to grow, it is my view that it is appropriate for the Welsh Government to develop and follow its own prosecution code.

The proposed Welsh Government prosecution code will therefore provide guidance to prosecutors on the principles to be applied when making decisions about Welsh Government prosecutions. To be clear, the proposed code is based on the existing CPS code, but it has been adapted to take Welsh Government prosecution functions into account. Therefore, the proposed code does not include all of the matters that are contained in the CPS code. For example, the code does not include the threshold test that applies in respect of custody cases.

Our code does, however, include specific public interest factors that relate to Welsh Government prosecutions. For example, prosecutors will need to consider the impact of any offending on the environment. The greater the impact of the offending on the environment, the more likely it is that a prosecution is required. And prosecutors will need to consider whether there is an element of danger to the health or safety of the public. The proposed code also sets out my general power to commence prosecutions under the Government of Wales Act 2006.

As I have stated earlier, the decision to prosecute is a serious step. The proposed code is intended to ensure that fair and consistent decisions about prosecutions are made within the Welsh Government. Before I issue the code, I wish to give stakeholders and members of the public the opportunity to comment and provide their views. This will enable me to issue a Welsh Government prosecution code that is clear, accessible and fit for purpose.

Can I thank the Counsel General for his statement? The proper enforcement of animal welfare, food production and fisheries law is very important—these are serious responsibilities. And of course, with effective enforcement, self and natural compliance is increased. That, presumably, is the objective of what we want.

These powers have been held by the Welsh Government for some time, but, as we produce more law, we are also creating new enforcement responsibilities—for example, those in the recent public health Bill. In this area, I do think that the reference to the evidence base is important, because in many of these offences, the evidence for them, or the potential evidence, will be gathered by people other than police officers.

I wonder if the Counsel General listened to the debate on the public health Bill at Stage 3, when all the opposition parties backed an amendment, for example, on stating clearly the human rights responsibilities of enforcement officers. These officers aren’t necessarily even in the public sector. At least in that particular law, the public health Bill, that, in the end, was clarified—that they would be local authority employees.

But to have a clear statement in law of human rights obligations is surely important when we gather evidence. We, at the moment, rely on PACE and general principles scattered about the statute book, rather than expressing it clearly in the law that we are passing. I wonder if he is worried about the implications for meeting human rights obligations, which, of course, is one of the general prosecution principles set out in his proposed code, under section 11. So, it is something I think that we need to pay particular attention to, and it’s only by exercising our responsibilities properly there that we will give people full confidence that the law is being enforced with rigour but also with all appropriate fairness on the individuals and organisations concerned, particularly in reference to human rights.

I’d also like to know if he has made any—. He hinted that these responsibilities are growing, but has he made any assessment of the likely increase in prosecution and enforcement activity that will now occur as Welsh law becomes more and more distinct? What sort of capacity does the Welsh Government have to meet those responsibilities? The current department that he heads—does it have the required capacity to exercise these functions in the future?

I do think this is a welcome statement, and it’s brought attention to an area that is, perhaps, on our learning curve, but I suspect that it will become more and more important in the future.

Firstly, I thank the Member for, I think, the very important points and very thoughtful points that he has made. Of course, he’s absolutely correct about the points that are raised, actually, in the draft principles with regard to human rights. This code—although it has considerable similarities to the Crown Prosecution Service code, we did decide that because of the growth of responsibilities, and the growth of prosecution responsibilities in particular, we did need to have a Welsh code that actually reflected, I think, the nuances and some of the emphases particularly arising from Welsh legislation.

So, as well as that particular point, there’s the point that we made about the particular issues of impact on the environment, because many of our powers relate to things like the environment, food, agriculture and so on. But he’s absolutely right also, of course, that those powers are extending into a whole range of other areas as well, and we need to ensure that not only is the code effective but that the way in which it is applied is robust.

I think the point that the Member was beginning to get towards was the issue as to whether at some stage in the future there will need to be a Welsh prosecution service as opposed to the existing arrangements. That isn’t something that is intended at the moment, but it is not off the radar—it’s one of those things that, particularly in the current climate, as more powers come, as we increase legislation and as the Welsh criminal code effectively becomes more significant, we have to have considerable regard to. Of course, all of the points about the quality of evidence, the robustness of the evidence and the way in which we define the public interest, which is set out in detail in the guide, are, indeed, very important.

I think the other point he’s made is that there are other bodies, of course, within Wales. Local authorities, as he’s mentioned, are traditionally prosecuting bodies—very similar powers in respect to the Health and Safety Executive in areas within their jurisdiction. Of course, although they have their own code, I think we would hope, over a period of time, that the reliance on the Welsh code will become the basis for that. But there is obviously a lot happening—a lot in flux.

I think he mentioned also the issue of how we’re going to assess the increase. I think what we’ve started doing is to look at the numbers of cases we’ve really had over the past number of years: how they’re increasing and where they might increase, and what the challenges are for the enforcement officers and the issues there with the equipment they need, their own security and so on within certain circumstances—that’s something that I was very aware of when I went to see some of the environmental protection officers in west Wales, where they raised issues of needing the body cameras and so on, which would be of considerable assistance and I understand are now being implemented.

So, all of those are under review. It is something that I have been focusing my attention on, with the points in mind that the Member has made. It will be my intention in due course to make further statements on the record on the numbers of prosecutions, where they’re taking place, so that there is the greatest possible transparency.

Can I welcome the statement from the Counsel General for Wales, and also to welcome the general direction of travel, as it were, in developing Welsh Government’s prosecution codes, and this consultation is very much welcome? And as David Melding has already alluded to, we are talking about serious matters here in terms of animal welfare, food production and fisheries, rules and laws that need to be taken seriously.

So, just a couple of questions and issues arise. We have the number there for successful prosecutions. I was just wondering how many prosecutions were considered but then not brought forward—in other words, not captured by those figures? In other words, how realistic a prospect is it of a prosecution resulting from offending in terms of—? So, we have the 38 successful prosecutions, but have we got a handle on exactly how much potential offending in these fields was actually going on?

Following on from that, could the Counsel General for Wales confirm that we do have the legal tools at the disposal of Wales at the moment to enforce Welsh laws?

And the third point is that, obviously, policing and the courts are not devolved to Wales, and the Counsel General has mentioned that in passing as regards the general point about UK CPS codes. Bearing in mind that policing and enforcement are not devolved and that, in fact, we’re losing some enforcement issues with the new Wales Act, is there a danger that the UK Government’s codes will supersede the Welsh Government’s prosecution code in actual practice, that being the case? I’m looking for reassurance there, really. And in terms of—well, not really a philosophical debate, but in terms of momentous potential decisions happening, I’m talking about the interface between these prosecution codes and, say, matters pertaining to the great repeal Bill as regards the devolved powers we have in agriculture and fisheries, which are in this place now, we face losing them unless, obviously, there’s universal approval of the continuation Bill that this Assembly has passed to make sure that we don’t lose those European powers in the devolved fields that we have now. So, I’m looking for further reassurance from the Counsel General, really, that that interface is something that we’re keeping an eye on and, obviously, keeping our hands on those powers that we have now. Thank you.

Thank you. Again, you raise a number of important cases. At the moment, the prosecution decisions are taken by me, so the evidence will be before me. Where there are specialist areas, there will be analysis by agents and lawyers who are specialists in those areas, and then the decision ultimately is for me as to whether the prosecution takes place or not. You raise an important point in terms of how many cases are there where decisions have not been taken. That isn’t an area I have sufficient information on, but it is an important area. I think at this stage, where we are is that the number of prosecutions is relatively small, and I think where a decision was taken the success rate has been extremely high. It’s one of the things I wanted to look at.

The point you raise, and a very important one, of course, is the changing scenario within the whole area of legal jurisdiction that is interlinked in some way. And, of course, we want to make sure that where we are passing laws that there is the capacity to properly investigate and properly enforce the laws, otherwise those laws have little status and little value. At the moment, I’m confident that that is the case. One of the reasons for actually bringing this statement and this code before the Assembly is actually to inform Members of what is actually happening within that area—what we actually do with the prosecution powers that the Welsh Government does have, or that the Counsel General has, and how they’re used, and to make those more transparent and, I think, more accountable in terms of what we’re actually doing. So, I envisage further information on this over a period of time. Of course, the Member will be aware that, of course, as we pass more legislation, we actually increase those particular areas.

I’m satisfied that we have those legal tools and I’m satisfied that we have the skills. One of the first things I became acquainted with and became an expert in was the 2012 scallop dredging regulations and many other similar pieces of legislation that we have, which sort of sound amusing on the face of it but are incredibly important and involve quite serious criminal activity. So, the prosecutions that have taken place have been very important. And some of them, in terms of food protection—I think one I did report on resulted in one person receiving a fine of just under £3,000, another person receiving an 18-month suspended prison sentence, and action, under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, amounting to over £0.25 million. So, these are very serious areas.

There’s also an important point in terms of the fact that we do liaise with the police—that the enforcement officers, where appropriate, have that level of engagement. That is also very important because there are cross-overs between some of the offences that occur in respect of Welsh laws, but also other areas of criminal activity. So, that is something that’s important.

Do I worry about applying the UK code as opposed to our code? Well, no. The only code that I will apply will be ultimately the Welsh prosecution code. I obviously work in the environment that exists at the moment, but of course, once the consultation has been concluded and once a code has been finalised after considering all those representations, then that will be the code that I actually apply and am held to.

In respect of Brexit, losing powers—well, of course, the position of the Welsh Government is against any diminution of those particular powers. I stand very strongly by that. We will be monitoring very, very closely all the issues that arise in respect of Brexit and any implications that will arise from that. At this stage, it is too early to be more precise than that about that—only that it’s a very valid point and one that I’m looking at very closely.

Thank you very much, Counsel General.

Item 7 on the agenda, the debate by individual Members under Standing Order 11.21, has been postponed until 14 June.

Therefore, we move to item 8, which is the Welsh Conservatives’ debate on the Welsh economy. I call on Russell George to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to move the motion in the name of Paul Davies. The aim of our motion is to welcome the economic boost to the Welsh economy, which will be delivered by the Prime Minister’s commitment to scrapping the tolls on the Severn crossing and calls for the Welsh Government to recognise the need to address the regional disparity in economic prosperity, which still exists within Wales, through both a north Wales and mid Wales growth deal.

Firstly, Deputy Presiding Officer, there is consensus from across the Chamber in support of the abolition of the tolls on the Severn crossing. The tolls on both Severn crossings are, I believe, an economic and symbolic barrier to Wales, which is why I’m delighted, of course, that the Prime Minister has made this commitment, a move that is estimated to boost the economy of south Wales by around £100 million a year. This decision shows, of course, the rest of the world that Wales is open for business.

The motion also calls for a recognition of the need for a north Wales growth deal and a mid Wales growth deal for the future prosperity of both regions. I would like to focus my remarks on this. I’m aware that other Members hope to be called to focus on other areas of our motion.

North Wales has the combination of assets to be a thriving region of our nation. Its geographical location not only makes it uniquely beautiful for Welsh tourism—second only, of course, to my Montgomeryshire constituency—but it has a prime position for developing economic links with Ireland and cities like Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester. And Manchester, of course, as we’re all aware, is a city and a community that has shown in the last few days a great resilience and is a true credit, I think, to the rest of the United Kingdom, through its spirit and resolve in the face of a horrendous terrorist attack. And, of course, our thoughts remain with the victims and families who were involved in those shocking events.

Deputy Presiding Officer, the fact of the matter is, I think, that 1 million people of working age are living either side of the border, and rather than looking south to Cardiff, the people and businesses of north and mid Wales tend to look east towards Manchester, Liverpool and the midlands, as a result of cross-border movement. It’s a routine fact of life, and the border, I don’t believe, should be an economic barrier. On the contrary, the north Wales economy will undoubtedly benefit greatly from the prosperity and growth in the north of England, offering employment and business opportunities for people in the north Wales region. And this close economic alignment, I think, makes it incredibly important to ensure that cross-border collaboration takes place on the delivery of transport infrastructure projects, and regional transport authorities would go some way, I think, towards ensuring that infrastructure priorities are set at regional level. So, I think it is vital, therefore, that the Welsh Government not only strengthens the transport infrastructure surrounding the A55 corridor, but that it goes further in building a stronger working relationship, both with the UK Government’s Department for Transport and Transport for the North, in order to cement north Wales as an intrinsic part of this exciting new economic region.

Finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, I would also like to refer to the importance of developing a similar regional deal for mid Wales. I do believe that a mid Wales growth deal would go some way to driving and increasing productivity and social mobility in mid Wales. When I recently visited Lake Vyrnwy hotel in my Montgomeryshire constituency to discuss their plans for the future, it was clear that more investment in marketing mid Wales as a specific tourist destination and investment in transport networks and creating a world-class telecommunications infrastructure are desperately needed as part of a mid Wales growth deal to create a thriving mid Wales economy. Mid Wales, which is a viable place to do business, ensuring that key sectors such as tourism and agriculture are plugged into the midlands engine.

So, in order for the region to reach its potential, the Welsh Government must also devolve economic levers, I think, to mid Wales as well as north Wales. I see a mid Wales growth deal as the best way forward in conferring greater powers to mid Wales—a crucial and necessary step to regenerate the mid Wales economy, to deliver a mid-Wales-specific solution aimed at inspiring locally led economic growth. So, I commend our motion this afternoon to the Assembly and I look forward to other Members’ contributions over the next hour.

Thank you. I have selected the four amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Infrastructure and Skills to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

Formally. Thank you. I call on Dai Lloyd to move amendments 2, 3 and 4, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Dai.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. As you’ve already referred to, I’m pleased to be standing here and I move the amendments in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Plaid Cymru believes that the tolls on the Severn crossings should be abolished, and we’ve been saying that for many years, and that we should ensure the devolution of powers to allow these bridges to be managed by this Assembly. After all, this is a £100 million boost for the Welsh economy and we want control over this issue as well. The tolls on other bridges have already been abolished. We know about the bridge over the Humber in England, and there was a significant cost related to that. The tolls on the Isle of Skye bridge in Scotland have also been abolished, and more recent bridges that stand high above a river, such as the Britton Ferry bridge in my region, have no tolls. It’s not that I’m suggesting that we need tolls on that bridge, but the fact is that there are some bridges with the M4 going over them that have tolls and others that don’t have any tolls on them. Over the years, going back to the Severn crossings, we’ve paid over and over again as taxpayers and users of these crossings under the old PFI agreement for the Severn crossings. That’s an injustice that continues to hurt many people.

While we are talking about this, one of our amendments calls on the Welsh Government to campaign and to consult with Pembrokeshire County Council to abolish tolls on the Cleddau bridge as well. If we’re getting rid of one lot of tolls, we might as well abolish the tolls on the Cleddau bridge, too. The same arguments exist for stimulating and giving an economic boost to that region as well, stemming from the abolition of tolls. That’s all true for the banks of the Cleddau, as well as south Wales in terms of abolishing the Severn bridge tolls.

But as well as getting rid of the tolls, we need to invest in infrastructure to give a significant boost to our economy and create jobs for our young people. That’s the basis of our amendments that call for the urgent electrification of the south Wales main line from London to Swansea. I’ve been talking about this for more than 10 years now. As well as this, we need to electrify the Valleys lines and the north Wales coast line. We’re still waiting for that, and that’s the basis of another of our amendments. I’d be pleased if people could support those.

Finally, we’re still waiting for the UK Government to come to a positive decision in favour of funding the Swansea bay tidal lagoon. The arguments have been won, and every party here supports this innovative idea. What about having a positive decision to boost the Welsh economy? Thank you very much.

I’m pleased to support this motion, and in my contribution I’d like to focus on the first part of the Welsh Conservative motion relating to the Severn crossings. The Prime Minister’s commitment to scrap tolls on the Severn crossings is potentially a game changer for the Welsh economy, delivering, as Dai Lloyd referred to, a £100 million boost, potentially. It’s also a very exciting prospect for my constituents in Monmouthshire, which has close cross-border links with the south-west of England, and Bristol in particular—links that have been hampered, suppressed by the tolls for far too long.

Of course, as we all know, the tolls were part of the original agreement with the company that built the second crossing, which opened in 1996—21 years ago, now—Severn River Crossings PLC, and designed initially to cover the cost of construction and maintenance for the new bridge and the existing Severn bridge. But it is the imminent expiry of that agreement that now allows the bridges to come into public ownership, or for the new bridge to come into public ownership and for the original bridge to revert to public ownership. Of course, one of the obvious questions has been, ‘Who will now fund the maintenance of the bridges?’, so we welcome the confirmation that funding will be absorbed into overall maintenance costs for the M4 motorway.

A 2012 report estimated that removing the tolls would boost productivity by the order of 0.48 per cent, and increase the gross value added of south Wales by around £107 million. We know the problems that Wales has had with GVA; we’ve mentioned it many times in this Chamber—the Welsh Government doesn’t like us talking about the GVA figures, particularly in south Wales and the Valleys. We know what problems there have been with GVA, so this decision, or proposed decision, by the UK Government must be welcomed by all parties in this Chamber.

Back in my constituency, in my corner of Wales in Monmouthshire, Monmouthshire County Council has also noted the potential increase in tourism that the removal of tolls could facilitate. Councillor Bob Greenland, cabinet member for innovation, enterprise and leisure, has cited survey evidence that suggests that 22 per cent of residents said they would expect to make trips to Wales in the next 12 months if the tolls were removed. When you consider that tourism was worth £187 million or thereabouts to the Monmouthshire economy in 2015, you realise just what that increase potentially means for people living in my corner of Wales and for the wider south Wales economy.

Of course, scrapping the tolls has received massive cross-party support. In a symbolic vote in this Assembly held back in November 2016, the abolition of the tolls was unanimously supported. So, we do now need the Welsh Government to work closely with the UK Government to deliver the full benefits of this policy. We often talk about the need for the UK Government and the Welsh Government to work closely together, and this is a situation where that close working relationship can really deliver benefits for south Wales and the Welsh economy in general.

Other members of my group and, indeed, other Members of the Assembly will speak, I’m sure, about the benefits of the north Wales growth deal and other parts of Wales, but I would point out, as Dai Lloyd referred to, that there are other bridges in Wales—I think you mentioned the Cleddau bridge—that are currently run for profit. So, we believe that the Welsh Government should look at ways of reducing this burden to the economy in the future, so that all parts of Wales, not just south-east Wales, can benefit from toll-free travel. It’s all well and good for the Welsh Government and other parties, indeed, to talk about the need to reduce profit when it comes to the Severn crossings, but what about those other bridges? When we look across to Milford Haven and we look across to other parts of Wales, what about spreading the benefits of that fairness of scrapping tolls to other parts of Wales? I can see the Cabinet Secretary grinning over there, but I think this requires more than grinning, it requires action from the Welsh Government to—[Interruption.] You have a very nice grin, Alun, but, unfortunately, it’s not enough to deliver full economic regeneration across Wales, no matter how much you sometimes think it is.

For now, let us welcome the UK Government’s commitment to abolish the tolls on the Severn crossings and look at ways that Alun Davies, the Minister and the other Ministers can work with the UK Government to support the delivery of this policy and work to maximise the full economic benefits to Wales now and in the future.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak in this debate. As someone who lives in Newport, I know first-hand how important this issue has been over many, many years. The excessive Severn tolls have been charged to people making essential journeys, and are a tax on Welsh businesses and commuters. For years, the Tories have ignored the pleas of businesses and commuters on both sides of the bridges to scrap this tax in Wales. I’ve examples of constituents who had to turn down job offers because of the cost of the tolls, which equate to nearly an hour working on the minimum wage.

The Severn crossings are a crucial transport and economic infrastructure part of the M4 corridor. For south Wales, it’s the gateway to Wales. The Welsh Labour Government have been clear on the importance to the Welsh economy of scrapping the tolls. As far back as 2012, a Welsh Government report found that it would boost productivity by over £100 million a year. That fell on deaf ears in the UK Government. While I very much welcome the Tories agreeing with Labour policy to scrap the tolls, it’s vital that we look strategically at the implications.

The first are the repercussions for traffic management in the local area.

Are you taking an intervention?

A Welsh Government report found that if the tolls were scrapped, there would be an estimated 12 per cent increase, equivalent to about 11,000 vehicles a day, in traffic volumes. This impact would have a major effect on congestion in Newport, especially in the Brynglas tunnels. Already, an estimated 80,000 vehicles use the crossing every day, and any increase in this makes a solution to the congestion at the Brynglas tunnels even more critical. I know that the Cabinet Secretary recognises the importance of this.

The second point is the effect that this will have on house prices in Newport and the surrounding areas. The Bristol house market is booming, with the average house price hovering around £290,000. In Newport, the average house price is £170,000. Newport is a fantastic place to live and visit. It has lots of wonderful parks, green spaces, a range of historical sites, and it’s been boosted by the redevelopment of the city centre in Friars Walk. It has excellent transport links and a strong community spirit.

The combination of cheaper house prices, the tolls being scrapped, and the attraction of Newport as a place to live—we could see a surge in people moving from Bristol to Newport. This will have a dramatic effect on local house prices. Indeed, there’s already evidence that parts of Monmouthshire in close proximity to the bridges have experienced a spike in prices. This, of course, is fantastic news for local homeowners, but we must be mindful and careful that local people, particularly young people, aren’t priced out of buying a house in the area they grew up in. Although Newport City Council and the Welsh Government are doing their best, there are still not enough affordable homes in Newport. A surge in house prices over a relatively short period of time could exacerbate this situation.

And, finally, while I very much welcome the Tories’ epiphany moment on this, some may say it’s cynical electioneering, with another u-turn. The Tory UK Government has been dragging their feet for far too long. Some Members here are very new to the issue, and I’d like to pay tribute to Labour Members in particular, over many years, who’ve campaigned on this issue—

[Continues.]—particularly John Griffiths, Paul Flynn, Jessica Morden and Rosemary Butler. Go on. I’ll take an intervention; I’ve got time.

Would you accept that in the Conservative—in Theresa May’s—manifesto, she made an absolute, clear commitment on the Severn crossing, but that Labour—. In Jeremy Corbyn’s manifesto, all that was said in there was—there was a light, ‘We’ll try and work with the Welsh Government’. Don’t you accept there’s a much firmer, cast-iron guarantee commitment in Theresa May’s manifesto?

I don’t think that that’s something you were saying only a few months ago. In fact, I even read a quote from you a few months ago where you’d reduced the prices quite—. An arbitrary figure, I think, came out of thin air. Another u-turn; I’m not quite sure that the public will believe that. Anyway, while—[Interruption.] They’re not alone. I think it’s only fair and right to recognise the long-standing record of Members, as I said, like John Griffiths, Rosemary Butler, Paul Flynn and Jessica Morden, who’ve worked hard for many years on their long-standing and unwavering commitment to scrap the tolls.

Of course, I’m old enough to remember the days before the bridge, when we drove across in a coracle, as it seems to me in retrospect now, and I well remember—[Interruption.] I well remember the official opening ceremony of the bridge itself. I can welcome this conversion of my Conservative friends on this issue. It’s only a matter of months since, of course, they were raising all sorts of pettifogging objections to the policy that they now espouse. As the Minister for lifelong learning, from a sedentary position, has perspicaciously and mischievously observed, the Conservative party has now been converted to nationalisation as a principle. I’m not quite so sure that that is something that I would welcome, but nevertheless it just goes to show how fluid politics is today.

This, of course, is just the latest u-turn to be found at the hands of Theresa May, who is ‘Theresa May’ one day, and maybe ‘Theresa May Not’ the next, in the case of the social care changes announced recently. Indeed, the general election that we’re now having is itself a u-turn, because it wasn’t so long ago that she was saying, ‘We can’t possibly have one until 2020—totally unnecessary.’ But now it is. Nevertheless, we welcome the sinner that repenteth, and it is, of course, going to be a very, very good thing for south Wales to remove those tolls and the time delays that are involved in paying them.

As we know, south Wales, and particularly south-west Wales in my region of Mid and West Wales, has some of the poorest parts of western Europe. And with a GVA in Wales of only 75 per cent of the national average—the UK average—clearly something has to be done. The Welsh Government has only limited powers—economic powers—to improve the state of the economy in Wales. Not having the power to vary corporation tax is a significant restriction, obviously, on its power to do good, and the removal of these infrastructure inhibitions upon doing prosperous business in Wales is vitally important to changing the economic background that we’ve lived with all our lives and the depressing nature of the economy in some of the more depressed parts of the country. So, this is a bright gleam in the gloom, and I’m sure that it will be welcomed on all sides. I don’t know where it leaves Russell George, who so effectively advanced the case for this in his speech, whereas a few months ago he was the voice of caution about how it was all going to be paid for and what about the traffic volumes and impact, as Jayne Bryant spoke about so eloquently a moment ago. That’s all now evaporated in the spring sunshine. I give way.

You may recall there was a vote on this, and this group here supported in favour of the motion that you put forward on this.

Well, I have the Record in my hand, and the general rule is that—

Read it, then.

[Continues.]—your vote should follow your voice. And, in that debate, I think there was a certain amount of variation between the two. It may well be that the Conservative group has been infected by a defection in recent weeks. If so, that’s only to be welcomed, because there may be other changes to come in due course, no doubt. But it is of vital importance to the economy of the whole of south Wales, and the links that were mentioned in Nick Ramsay’s speech between Bristol and Monmouthshire are very important. It’s very important for the future that we develop those and that we don’t isolate ourselves across this side of the Severn bridge, which is one of the reasons why I think political independence for Wales would be such a disaster. If we had a hard border all the way down Offa’s Dyke then that, of course, would negate a great deal of the advantages that will come from the removal of the tolls. We hear a lot from Plaid Cymru on the doom and gloom that is likely to arise from a hard Brexit, but a hard UK-exit would be far, far worse, given that the Welsh economy depends far, far more on the economy of the United Kingdom than it does on the European Union.

So, I warmly support this motion by the Welsh Conservatives this afternoon. I suppose that’s a reciprocation for their support for the UKIP motion in these terms that Russell George referred to a moment ago, which we had in a debate in this Chamber only a few months ago.

Not only did the Conservative group support my motion in November 2016 to scrap the tolls following their return to the public sector, but a Conservative Government in 1992, of which I think the previous Member may have been a Minister, legislated for those tolls to be scrapped following the return of those bridges to the public sector. I think one thing I just hugely welcome about this decision, for which the Prime Minister, the Secretary of State, and, frankly, this group as well—as well as others in this Assembly—deserve a lot of credit, is actually that politicians are doing what they promised. Having said, under the Severn Bridges Act, ‘This bridge will be built by the private sector. You’ll be able to raise tolls on it until a fixed sum is raised. It returns to the public sector, and then we will see tolls abolished’, we are doing that, and I think that is very good for the credibility of politicians, particularly when they are trying to fund and develop infrastructure. The idea suggested, I think from a sedentary position, by Alun Davies that this is a nationalisation is surely preposterous. It’s quite the reverse. The private sector has built this bridge—the southern bridge—under provisions from the public sector and the Severn Bridges Act, conditional on them giving it to the public sector once a certain sum has been raised. That is happening, and the UK Government, I’m delighted to say, is taking on a full commitment for the maintenance of those bridges out of the Highways England budget. I think it’s absolutely fantastic news. I also believe that the benefit to the Welsh economy may be even larger than suggested in a report, which I think was some years ago now, of a £107 million boost, because things have moved on since then. The economy is stronger, particularly along the M4 corridor. What we’ve seen in terms of prosperity and job generation in Bristol has been very strong in recent years.

Also, I think, for Wales and the south-east Wales region I represent, there is a return of confidence, and I think scrapping these tolls, along with electrification of the railway and improvement—15 or 20 minutes quicker to get to London once that electrification is complete, with, we hope, an M4 relief road—. And it is a serious point that there will be more congestion at the Brynglas tunnels once tolls are removed, and it does increase the importance of getting on with building that relief road. But I think in combination, and also with the south Wales metro, all those together will change what for a long time, I think, has been an unfair perception, to the extent others elsewhere may hold it, that there is a distance let alone any remoteness to south Wales. But when you bring those travel times down, I think you will link the south Wales economy much more closely with the M4 corridor, with Bristol, and with London, with the far higher GVAs we see in those areas, and I think there will be a huge boost to the economy of south Wales. I think it’s fantastic this Chamber voted unanimously to scrap the tolls and the UK Conservative Government are now delivering on that.

I’d also just like to speak briefly to the other part of the motion, about the north Wales growth deal. I think it’s very encouraging that the UK Government is developing an ever more flexible approach to how these growth deals are arranged. There’s been difference in terms of what’s devolved between different regions and also the degree of money put in by central Government. I think, for a period, there was a requirement that areas had to have an elected mayor for the metro region if they were going to go down that route. That has now been removed, at least for rural or, I think, mixed rural-urban areas, and whether that’s a choice or whether that’s something that’s right for north Wales I hope will be driven by north Wales and what people there think of the proposition.

But I think the flexibility is particularly important for north Wales because nowhere more than Deeside, even with the Newport-Bristol links—. I think that agglomeration of economic activity across the England-Wales border around Deeside is hugely important for generating the future prosperity of the region, but also I think makes it very difficult to have, in some ways, a national border running through that agglomeration. Even if we can’t have a growth deal that crosses a border, I do hope that the north Wales growth deal will be particularly sensitive to those unique needs, given how closely integrated the economy in those parts is. While there’s great flexibility, I think, from UK Government, I hope that will be matched by Welsh Government and that there will be a real appreciation that devolution should not end at Cardiff Bay. For north Wales in particular, as well as the references to mid and west Wales, we need a sensitivity and we need particular solutions that are going to be right for them, just as scrapping the Severn tolls is so right for south Wales.

In the same way that the European regional development fund takes a certain collection of criteria to divide Wales in two, so does the city deal model, for all its many advantages, run the risk of doing the same. It’s hard to conceive, quite frankly, how most of Powys will feel the ripples of the big urban investment within Wales itself. Russell George is quite right to talk about the flexibility and the ability to start looking east. It’s not just north Wales, Mark Reckless, that needs that element of flexibility.

Some years down the line, post Brexit, regional policy of course may look very, very different, as we find strategic and planning levers in unexpected places. The very concept of regional support may be shaped by considerations that we may not even have started to explore yet. More balance in the economy within Wales, as well as within the UK, isn’t going to happen if we simply replicate what we’re doing under EU structures. But, in the short to medium term, Wales is right to take advantage of UK regional policy to maximise the potential of the two city deals and the north Wales growth deal.

It is a glorious opportunity to show how Governments and local authorities of different political stripes can work with common purpose. If local squabbling or uninspired ambition or even lack of confidence means that these golden opportunities are squandered, then it makes a mockery of devolution and any claim we have to be big thinkers in a small country.

And, in that short to medium term, we need to keep our eyes on inequity in Wales and remember that, for all the very welcome focus on the city deal in my region, it is not to my constituents’ advantage if their rural neighbours to the north conclude that they can’t live on scenery and head south in droves to jobs, schools, and houses that the city deal will prompt but which aren’t there yet.

So, I pay tribute to Russell George, who began exploring what a rural deal might look like in Wales back in the last Assembly. I’m pleased that the idea is gaining traction, as indeed Paul Davies’s longstanding campaign on the tolls on the Cleddau bridge is gaining traction. It’s with that spirit of common purpose that I say how dismayed I am to see the Government’s amendments regarding the Severn bridge tolls. Although I’m very pleased to say that Jayne Bryant did say that she welcomed the Prime Minister’s commitment on this, because our motion doesn’t claim that the Prime Minister has the sole intellectual property to the idea of the toll-free Severn bridge. It is inviting Members simply to welcome her commitment to doing this, a commitment coming from someone who will actually be in a position to scrap those tolls. By deleting that point, Welsh Government does not welcome a commitment that can actually be delivered by a UK Government for the benefit of Wales, preferring instead to have a bit of a sulk because they didn’t get a shout-out. You even missed the opportunity to mention Jeremy Corbyn’s take on the tolls, so I’m assuming that you either don’t foresee him being in a position to deliver that or that you can’t bear the thought that it’s he who seeks to be in a position to deliver that.

And so I come to amendment 3, which we will be supporting. I hope I don’t need to reiterate that the Welsh Conservatives are completely committed to the Swansea tidal lagoon, both here and in Parliament, and the First Minister’s been gracious enough to acknowledge that in this very Chamber very recently. Arguments across the range from its catalyst effect in reliable clean energy production, to its catalyst effects for domestic economic regeneration, to its catalyst effect on our reputation in the eyes of the world—this is absolutely a no-brainer. But even so, we cannot conveniently ditch the hours of argument made by all parties and both Governments dedicated to tackling fuel poverty, lowering energy costs for industry and capping energy prices, which have been balanced with other arguments demonstrating a growing interest in safe energy supply and clean air. That balance is difficult to manage, it’s difficult to find and it takes careful dealings with it from a responsible Government. The last thing the lagoon needs now is Corbynomics. Diving in at this point and saying ‘Give us the lagoon at any cost’ is giving up. It is saying that neither the company nor the UK Government—nor the UK Government—has more to give on this to get us nearer that delicate balance and that balance that means a positive decision on funding.

Now, perhaps there was probably a bit more that the Welsh Government could’ve helped with—I don’t know, maybe something like cheaper finance through Welsh Government streams rather than 100 per cent private investment. I genuinely don’t know—it’s a bit late now, anyway—but where the Welsh Government can act is to ensure that the timeline for granting marine licences is aligned with the timeline for the major projects for which those licences are needed. And this time—

I’ve only got 20 seconds, sorry, David. This time, the slow progress in London has disguised a serious delay here and I don’t think any of us would be proud if devolved responsibilities were the sole reason that the lagoon were held back. And with Wylfa B ahead of us, I don’t think marine licences should be what we’re all talking about down the line.

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

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I start by thanking Members across the Chamber for their contributions today and for giving me an opportunity to respond to this debate? As a Government, we are absolutely determined to spread prosperity, growth and opportunity across Wales to generate prosperity for all, and that is the foundation upon which the work to refresh our economic strategy and develop the economy of each region is to be based. The Severn tolls, given their strategic importance to Wales, are very much part of that thinking. We’ve been in regular discussions with the UK Government about the tolls to ensure that future arrangements represent the best deal for Wales and we’ve made it clear on many occasions that the tolls on the bridge are an unfair tax on our people and on our businesses. It’s a barrier to business activity across the bridge, hampering Welsh growth and acting as a deterrent to inward investment, as Members have identified. In particular, the tolls adversely affect small businesses looking to operate in the south-west of England, as well as those engaged in the tourism, logistics and transport sectors, which rely heavily on Severn crossings links for their businesses.

A number of Members have identified our 2012 study—the one that we commissioned—which concluded that removing the tolls would increase the GVA of south Wales by £107 million. Although GVA has grown faster in Wales than across the UK as an average in recent times, we believe that the increase in GVA presented by the removal by the tolls would offer a huge boost to the regional economy. I would agree with Mark Reckless as well that the sum could be in excess of £107 million, and I also welcome his assertion that the economy today is now stronger along the M4 and that there’s a returning confidence to south Wales—that is, of course, thanks to this Welsh Labour Government.

Despite the Conservatives’ support at Westminster now for abolishing the tolls, the last time we debated the Severn crossings here in the Chamber, the UK Government’s opposition to removing the tolls was very clear. But, I am glad to see that the weak and wobbly position adopted by the Prime Minister has finally, albeit reluctantly, come around to a better position—one that has been championed by this Welsh Labour Government over many, many years.

Will the Cabinet Secretary take an intervention?

Of course, yes.

You were saying that this has been championed over many, many years. When I asked the First Minister, he said it had been championed since the Labour manifesto in 2016. I think prior to that, he’d suggested keeping the tolls to fund the relief road.

Many, many months.

Many, many months—and two years, indeed. Can I thank Mark Reckless for taking a very consistent position on this matter himself? He’s not taken such a consistent position on which political party he should be a member of, but on this issue he has remained very consistent indeed.

Turning to our priorities for north Wales, I should say that I was very pleased to be able to attend earlier today the inaugural meeting of the north Wales group on cross-border issues, chaired by my colleague Hannah Blythyn, where we discussed a number of important matters that will be faced by the region and that we must face here in the Assembly in years to come. It’s my view—and I share the view of Russell George in his assertion of the potential of the cross-border economy—that north Wales’s growth deal bid must be dovetailed with the growth deal that is emerging on the English side of the border through the Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership. They must be complementary and must also seek to build on the existing capabilities of the cross-border area of the Mersey-Dee and north Wales region.

I think it’s absolutely essential that the case for a north Wales growth deal is maintained—one that does reflect the cross-border nature of the economy. In terms of transport alone—and transport will be a critical element of the growth deal, I have no doubt—this Welsh Labour Government has already committed to spending more than £200 million on resolving the Deeside corridor, which, of course, is crucial. Mark Reckless identified the Deeside area as being a primary engine for the Welsh economy. Well, that single route—that A494—is critically important and requires upgrading, and I’m very pleased to be consulting with the public on the two proposals that we have developed for the A494 and the A55. But we’re also looking at investing tens of millions of pounds in rail infrastructure, even though we are not responsible for it—the UK Government is—to enhance capacity in north-east Wales, developing the metro concept, but also looking at investing considerable sums in resolving pinch points in the trunk road network and, of course, taking forward the important third crossing for the Menai. Of course, one of the biggest single boosts that could be given to the economy of north Wales would be the electrification of the north Wales main line, but I fear that that has not yet been promised by the UK Government, certainly not in the near future.

Returning to the contribution made by Russell George, I thought his contribution specifically with regard to mid Wales was absolutely essential. North-south links are crucial to the economy and mid Wales makes a vital contribution to the culture and economy of Wales. I also believe that whilst the north-south links are significant indeed, so too are east-west ties. I see three primary arcs of prosperity emerging for Wales: one that crosses north Wales, one that crosses mid and west Wales and a third that spans south Wales—all three potentially benefitting from cross-border collaboration and ties. I’m very keen—

In a moment. I’m very keen, in terms of supporting mid Wales, to look at how we can turbocharge the activities of Growing Mid Wales, which is an important partnership. Certainly, insofar as a growth deal for mid Wales is concerned, I’d be very keen to see what the UK Government, however 8 June pans out, actually looks at delivering as part of an expanded offer of growth deals, potentially, for the UK. I’ll take an intervention by the leader of the Conservatives.

I’m grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for taking the intervention and, in particular, his emphasis on the whole of Wales—mid and north Wales as well. If I could draw his attention back to south-east Wales, it is excellent news that the Conservatives—and, indeed, I think there’s a consensus now, politically, that tolls need to be got rid of on the Severn bridge across parties. But there’s a real issue, as we heard from the Member for Newport West, that with house prices being so much lower this side of the Severn bridge, and the huge economic activity that is going in the Bristol area and, indeed, in the greater south-west area, actually, wealth in your arc of prosperity ends up travelling out of Wales and we end up being a commuter belt. I’d be grateful to understand how the department is going to work with local authorities, and businesses in particular, to make sure that businesses locate here to drive wages up, and we don’t just become a dormitory.

This is, in part, what I was just going to come on to in my final point: the important structural element of the Welsh economy that needs to be resolved as part of a new economic strategy. We need to ensure that productivity increases. We need to ensure that our manufacturing base, in particular, is future-proofed against automation. And, crucially, in regard to avoiding dormitory communities, that we raise skills levels of the people of Wales so that we can capture more of the work, more of the economic benefits of infrastructure investments, not just as a dormitory territory serving the south-west, but for the south-east of Wales and, indeed, the whole of the south of Wales. It’s our keen intent to ensure that, through a new place-based approach for economic development, working with leaders of the city deals in the south and the growth deal in the north and, potentially, a growth deal in mid Wales, we do move towards creating opportunities to grow wealth across Wales, and deliver prosperity for all.

I call on Mark Isherwood to reply to the debate.

Diolch. Thank you everybody who’s spoken in this debate. Thank you to Russell George for opening this by welcoming the economic boost to the Welsh economy being delivered by the UK Government’s abolition of the Severn crossing tolls, showing that Wales is open for business. And also for emphasising the need for north and mid Wales growth deals, where people and businesses in north and mid Wales not only look south to Government, but in terms of their economic and social lives, they look east for their cross-border movements, and also west to Ireland. We need to, as he said, cement north Wales as an intrinsic part of an exciting cross-border economic region linked up to the Northern Powerhouse. He said the Welsh Government must also devolve economic levers to mid Wales.

Dai Lloyd supported the abolition of the Severn crossing tolls and the devolution of powers to the Welsh regions—it’s very heartening to hear that—and shared his in-depth knowledge of bridge tolls across Britain. I suggest he writes more about that; I’d actually be very interested to read about that. Of course, there are no tolls on the Menai bridge, but we do need the third Menai crossing, something that Ken Skates, of course, referred to. It is nearly a decade since the Welsh Government last commissioned an independent report on options for that, which made recommendations. It’s a shame we’ve had to wait this long for groundhog day to arrive all over again, but I hope the Minister’s aspiration of having a decision to move forward by 2021 is reached for all concerned.

Dai Lloyd extolled the virtues of the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, as did many others, and emphasised the need to electrify the Valleys lines and the north Wales coast line, something the Welsh Conservatives certainly strongly support.

Nick Ramsay referred again to the Prime Minister’s decision to scrap tolls on the Severn crossing as a game-changer, with exciting prospects for the good people and economy of Monmouthshire. He referred to the GVA figures in the south Wales Valleys, of course, part of the west Wales and Valleys sub-region, which has had the lowest value of goods and services produced per head of population, or GVA, across the 12 UK nations and regions for almost now 20 years—for 19 years; the whole period of devolution. Unfortunately, the relative gap has widened, and even the most prosperous corner of north Wales and the north-east has seen the relative figure against the UK level fall from almost 100 per cent of UK GVA to just 84 per cent. He’s emphasised the need for the Welsh Government to work closely with the UK Government. It is critical that the next UK Government is seen, whatever its colour, as a positive partner with the Welsh Government and by the Welsh Government.

Jayne Bryant again emphasised the importance of the Severn crossing, in this case to Newport, another wonderful place not so far from here. I regret the partisan comments that followed—I won’t respond to those other than to acknowledge we are in a general election period. The UK Government, in fact, announced tolls in 1962. It is this UK Government that has announced it’s going to scrap them. As she said, there are risks—or possibly costs and benefits—of attracting people from Bristol, which might have an impact on house prices, and there is a need to support local young people onto the housing ladder here and everywhere else, especially given that Wales had the largest cuts in affordable housing budgets after devolution of any UK nation. It’s important you referred to another u-turn, but in my mind it’s strong leaders who listen and decide; it’s weak leaders who ignore the facts and shoot the messenger, sadly something we hear too often in certain other places.

Neil Hamilton again welcomed Theresa May’s announcement, with a few added generous comments to my party and his former party. As he said, political independence for Wales would be a disaster—as it would be, may I add, for the rest of the UK.

Mark Reckless pointed out it was the Conservative Government in 1992 that legislated to scrap the tolls following the return of the bridges to the public sector and that the Conservative Government was now delivering on that. He said that this will add to a return of confidence along the M4 corridor, strengthening links between south Wales, Bristol and London. He referred to the sensitive and flexible way the UK Government was approaching regional development in Wales as encouraging, but it needs to be matched by the Welsh Government.

Suzy Davies said the post-Brexit regional policy may look very different in the future, but it was right for Wales to take advantage of UK regional policy now. As she said—the wonderful phrase—big thinkers in a small country. We should welcome the commitment coming from the Prime Minister rather than go, as she said, into a bit of a sulk. Welsh Conservatives are committed to the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, as acknowledged by the Prime Minister to us, as Suzy emphasised. The last thing, as she said, the lagoon needs now is Corbynomics.

The Cabinet Secretary then responded by saying the Welsh Government is determined to spread prosperity across Wales—it’s just a shame that since 1998, we’ve remained the part of the UK with the lowest GVA. As he said, the Severn bridge tolls are a barrier, which is why Theresa May has announced she’s removing them. He then made a weak and wobbly proposition that confidence is returning to south Wales thanks to the Welsh Government. In reality, most things have been going backwards since devolution—not because of devolution but because of government—but it’s interesting that the improvement in jobs and employment and inward investment has happened since the Conservative Prime Minister and Conservative-led Government took office in 2010. It certainly wasn’t happening beforehand. I regret he resorted to a petty personalised attack against a colleague. I’ll say no more about that.

He referred to the north Wales and Mersey Dee cross-party group meeting today. I also attended. I welcome his attendance. I think I was elected as a joint deputy chair of that group. There’s critical work to do. The growth deals on each side of the border, the Cabinet Secretary said, must be complementary. No, Cabinet Secretary—this is a single growth deal for both sides of that border. That’s why we have the Mersey Dee Alliance, that’s why Warrington were represented there today but why also Gwynedd was represented there today. We wonder, in the future, perhaps if Ireland could be engaging with us as well.

He referred to the Deeside corridor consultation. In fact, it’s nine years, I believe, since the last scheme had to be scrapped by the Welsh Government after its proposals were—[Interruption.] Would you like to stand?

Is it not true that you campaigned against that scheme?

Yes, I campaigned against that 13-lane monstrosity in support of local people, which your colleagues actually did when they realised there was an election just a couple of months ahead. I gave evidence to that consultation. I hope that what comes out this time is more in keeping with the sustainability needs of the local community.

You talked about enhanced rail capacity in north-east Wales. It would be wonderful if the Welsh Government could catch up with the Mersey district, the Liverpool districts, and actually announce that it’s going to support and invest in this side of the border so the Halton Curve proposals do not simply end at the border. Similarly, it would be nice if the Welsh Government could announce it was going to restore the two miles it removed from the Wrexham-Chester line.

He referred to a third crossing of the Menai. Again, we had a consultation—I believe eight or nine years ago—which made a series of recommendations. It appears it’s groundhog day there as well because we’re having another consultation on options for a Menai crossing—I referred to that earlier. But as he said, we need to ensure productivity increases and futureproof against automation through a new place-based approach, working with the UK Government-supported growth deal in north Wales, through the city deals in south Wales, and hopefully through a mid Wales growth deal, too. But that will require the Welsh Government to recognise that the proposals of a north Wales growth vision and in the bid that’s going forward require it to give up some power to the region also. Thank you very much indeed.

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

The next item is the debate that was withdrawn by Plaid Cymru on live music.

Therefore, item 10 is the Plaid Cymru debate on a national energy company and I call on Simon Thomas to move the motion.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m pleased to move the motion in the name of Plaid Cymru, which puts forward evidence on the establishment of an independent energy company for Wales. In beginning the debate, I’d like to highlight the fact that we, as Plaid Cymru, have published a research paper on the issue and have used the Assembly’s research and communication policy fund. The paper is attached to the debate. I very much hope that Members of all parties will read the paper, to criticise it or to agree with it, or whatever. I think it is important that we use Assembly resources to build the evidence base for our debates and to disseminate information. If anyone wants a hard copy, I’d be more than happy to provide one to you.

It’s true to say that Plaid Cymru has always been in favour of an independent energy company for Wales, but the evidence for that has increased over the past few years. Perhaps the main shift in this area was the report of the environment committee in a previous Assembly that identified the opportunity for an energy company for Wales to do a great deal to close the gap in terms of fuel poverty, to invest in new forms of energy, particularly renewable and hydrogen, and also to identify opportunities to challenge the current trading climate in energy.

Underpinning the situation is that fundamental question: does the current energy market work for the everyday resident, does it work for business, and does it work in terms of long-term investment in the kind of energy industry that we want to see in Wales? Plaid Cymru is of the opinion that the answer to those three questions is, ‘No, the current system isn’t working’, and we need at least one more mover in the current system to make things more lively. That opinion is shared by the Labour Party—well, at least the Corbyn Labour Party, because that Labour Party has put in its manifesto for the general election on 8 June a call for an independent energy company in all regions. They use the word ‘region’—and I think Labour sees Wales as a region; it’s a nation for us, of course—but that’s why I was surprised to see that the Labour Party here had tabled an amendment watering down our requests and undermining what they are saying and what their own party is standing on in this election. But that is a matter for them to explain, and I’m sure that they will do so in due time.

There’s no doubt that the current market system is damaging Wales. Low-income households are, of course, particularly badly affected by high energy costs, and this is common to all parties now. The Labour Party proposed a cap on energy prices two years ago, and that was derided by the Conservative Party at the time, but now it’s the Conservatives who are proposing a cap on energy prices. But that is something that is a temporary fix; it’s not tackling the fundamental problem in the market. That’s what we’re proposing here—something long term that would actually intervene in that market.

Here in Wales, where 23 per cent of homes are believed to be in fuel poverty, and 3 per cent—which is quite a small percentage, but a large number—are in severe fuel poverty, paying more than 20 per cent of their income on energy costs. That puts you in a very difficult position indeed. What’s interesting is when you compare that with the rest of Britain, because only 11 per cent of homes in England are considered to be in fuel poverty.

Now, in the past, and possibly today as well, some may argue that moving towards renewable energy has increased prices, and that we are responsible, in a way, for arguing for an energy system that is less reliant on carbon because that will raise energy prices for our poorest customers. But what’s interesting is that energy prices in Wales are far higher than they are in the rest of the UK. But we produce less renewable energy than the rest of the UK, so the percentage of electricity produced by renewable sources in Wales at the moment is some 20 per cent; in Scotland, it is double that, over 42 per cent; in Northern Ireland, it is 26 per cent; and even in England, it is some 2 per cent higher than Wales. Therefore, there is no clear link between energy production using renewable sources and the price paid by customers. The market is far more complex than that and the fact is that we are storing up problems for the future as we continue with an energy distribution system that is very centralised, that isn’t distributed at a local level, is not devolved in that sense, and isn’t therefore appropriate for the kind of energy production that we will very soon see developing. One of those is something we’ve already discussed with the Cabinet Secretary—the shift towards vehicles of all kinds running on electricity, or certainly hydrogen, particularly in terms of transport.

The tidal lagoon is something we are very supportive of, and we’re disappointed that it isn’t being reflected in the UK manifesto of the Conservative Party, although it’s in the manifesto of all other parties. But developing a tidal lagoon, particularly developing tidal lagoons in north Wales and the Bristol channel, requires a more localised distribution centre where local people see more benefit from the investment made in renewable energy. Now, although more is to be devolved to Wales in terms of energy planning consents, up to 350 MW, it is true to say that the funding systems underpinning energy developments of all kinds will remain in London. In that context, too, the establishment of an energy company for Wales will be, in our opinion, of benefit.

So, what could such a company do? Well, broadly speaking, the report that we’ve commissioned looks at how a company could bulk buy, so buying energy on behalf of customers in Wales and passing on the savings in that context to those customers. We’re looking at how an energy company could be a vehicle to provide some of the other objectives of the Welsh Government, for example insulation, improving housing quality, energy efficiency and so on. We would use this company as a vehicle for those improvements, and the company could be an envelope for investment in renewable energy. I don’t think it’s broadly recognised that the Welsh Government is already investing, to be fair to it, in renewable energy. I think they have an investment in a solar farm in Monmouthshire somewhere—I think some millions of pounds were invested there. We’re also seeing a number of local communities coming together to invest locally—menter Awel Aman Tawe is a very good example of that, and I congratulate them on reaching their target of over £5 million just this week. But surely it would be better if a national company would co-ordinate these deals, and get better deals in the market, in the city, for investment, and in turn pass on those benefits to the customer.

Now, a national energy company could also lead research—[Interruption.]

Yn wir. Fe ildiaf, gwnaf.

Just to help you out with the geography of Monmouthshire here, there are some major solar farm developments—one just outside Llanvapley and one not far from Llancayo. Would you agree with me that, as good as those development are, it’s important that the local communities get the necessary benefits from those developments? Because in some cases, those communities haven’t been fully involved along the way and they’ve felt a bit isolated from the benefits that they rightly should get in law.

I agree with the general point that he’s making. I don’t know if those are the projects that the Welsh Government has also given support to. But I think the point that I’m making is that a more national infrastructure would be a way of delivering those benefits more directly to the local consumers. So, I think that point is that it’s something that’s frustrated many of us over many years who want to see these developments happening, but also are frustrated with the national infrastructure that holds the benefits at a very centralised level and doesn’t deliver them, even though the local people are actually seeing that development locally. I think bringing the two together is what a national energy company could, potentially, do in the Welsh context.

A gaf i jest gloi wrth agor y ddadl gan ddweud y byddwn i hefyd yn hoffi gweld yn bersonol, wrth gwrs, ac o ran Plaid Cymru, fod y cwmni yma’n cael ei ddatblygu naill ai ar ffurf gydweithredol neu yn sicr ar ffurf a oedd yn gallu cynnwys y cynghorau lleol neu ddatblygiadau ynni rhanbarthol? Mae’n dristwch imi ein bod ni wedi gweld mwy o ddatblygiad yn Lloegr o dan systemau datganoli Llywodraeth ganolog Lloegr, sydd wedi defnyddio’r Ddeddf ‘localism’ i ganiatáu, er enghraifft, i gwmni ynni ym Manceinion gael ei sefydlu a chwmni ynni yn Nottingham—Robin Hood Energy, sy’n gyfarwydd iawn inni. Rwy’n credu ein bod ni hefyd eisiau manteisio ar y cyfle yna ac rwy’n mawr obeithio os nad pob gair o’r cynnig yma, y bydd ysbryd y cynnig yn cael ei dderbyn gan y Cynulliad.

I have selected the amendment to the motion. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

Can I start by being polite and commending Plaid Cymru’s initiative in using the new flexibility in Assembly resources to commission research projects? Generally, I think it’s a good idea and, in fairness, you’ve put your ideas out and we can have an excellent debate, I’m sure, on this proposal. So, I think we need more of this, and you deserve a serious response to your central suggestion.

For us, we won’t be supporting it for reasons I will indicate, but we certainly do share the aim for more efficient energy use at more competitive prices. It’s our view that this can be achieved without heavy Government intervention or nationalisation. I do note that the thrust of the Plaid Cymru recommendation is to have a sort of national company that’s bought into by local communities and local authorities, potentially. I suppose if something does emerge that is built up from the local direction and mirrors something like Glas Cymru, then there’s more feasibility for that. But I have to say that imposing this sort of structure, pushing the initiative and forcing it, is something we would be suspicious about.

Would the Member just give way on that point?

Yes.

Just briefly, if I could put it to him, if I was a Conservative I would have thought that an energy cap was also a very heavy-handed intervention into the market. [Laughter.]

Well, it brings me nicely on to the point that it is not an efficient or perfect market.

Oh, we agree there. [Laughter.]

I can hear a UKIP Member muttering, ‘There’s no perfect solution either’, and that probably does sum up the difficulty we’re in.

But energy prices are high and they’re also very difficult to understand whenever you get your energy bill. Unless you did double maths at A-level, I don’t think you’ve got a hope, and perhaps you need to have studied it at university as well. But, in general, we are about 15 per cent higher on electricity prices than the OECD average and that pinches on us all. It’s particularly, I think, dramatic and unfortunate for those in fuel poverty.

According to some calculations, it would be feasible to deliver energy effectively, use it efficiently and reduce the costs by as much as 50 per cent. So, if there is that type of potential saving, I think it is something that we should very much aim for, with, of course, efficiency being key to that part. If we all use more energy as it becomes cheaper, it’s not going to really get us anywhere.

I think we do sign up to the principle that more local generation is important and the use of other models, innovative models, like co-operatives. I think many of us would have visited some of these schemes and found them very noteworthy and inspiring. There are some drawbacks. We need a balanced diet here, really, of providers. There’s a need for resilience and you don’t always get that in local community-run projects. Also, we still need a wider strategy, and I think that is a very, very important matter to be borne in mind.

Can I just say that whilst we have some reservations about Plaid’s approach, we are pleased to note them and welcome this as part of a healthy debate? Perhaps Plaid Cymru will find comfort in this, but we actually find the Government’s amendment broadly right in terms of its approach, although that is not me praising full-scale all the current approaches taken by the Government in terms of energy, and we would very much urge them to look at some of the longer term structural issues that are limiting growth and development in mid and north Wales, in terms of the grid and access to it, and how smaller scale hydro projects, in particular, connect to it. But can I say that I think we need a policy based on increasingly efficient use and distribution of electricity? We need to reduce fossil fuel use. I think that is very, very important, and reference has been made to electric cars, but of course that only then invites you to think about how you’re going to generate that electricity at source, and we do not want to be fossil fuel dependent, and our aim is a low-carbon economy, and also plenty of room for innovative community projects. Again, I’ll just finish by commending Plaid Cymru for, I think this is the first debate on a commissioned report by a political party using the new resources, so at least, on that, I can say ‘well done’.

If we are serious about tackling climate change as one of the greatest threats facing humanity, then we must first of all reduce our energy use—that’s always the starting point when it comes to energy policy—but then increase the percentage of energy that is produced from renewable sources. Plaid Cymru’s aim in order to enable us to cut carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, and 40 per cent by 2020, is to produce as much energy as is used in Wales from renewable sources by 2035, and Ynni Cymru would have a key role to play in achieving that particular ambition.

As we’ve heard, in the last Assembly the Environment and Sustainability Committee produced a report entitled, ‘A Smarter Energy Future for Wales’, and it received cross-party support. What it was in reality was a blueprint in terms of moving this agenda forward. It suggested ways of achieving the economic potential that emerges from using our natural resources in a responsible and sustainable manner, and creating jobs and wealth for the people of Wales in so doing. It allows us to tackle the issue of fuel poverty, to clearly tackle climate change and also, of course, to empower local communities to be far more proactive and far more engaged in deciding their own energy futures. Wales doesn’t have to wait for further powers from Westminster in this area before delivering much of what is contained within the committee’s vision. We could start on much of this work now, and far more of it should have already been commenced over a year ago.

One of the committee’s recommendations in that report was to create an umbrella not-for-profit energy company. We heard that local authorities across England have established such companies. We know of examples in Bristol and in Nottingham, and of course we can use that in order to target and tackle fuel poverty. We know that, in Nottingham, Robin Hood Energy offers a particular tariff for residents of Nottingham only, but also within that they can set lower rates in specific areas where there is a great deal of fuel poverty.

That isn’t to say that nothing is happening in Wales. We know in Bridgend council, for example, about the local heat networks there. Wrexham council has already done a great deal in terms of solar energy. But this should be the norm rather than exceptions, as is too often the case. The creation of a national energy company for Wales would be a chance for us to get to the core of some of these issues of fuel poverty, to invest in infrastructure, to undertake joint bargaining and energy generation, to strengthen research and development in energy, and in so doing create those commercial opportunities that will bring broader benefits to the people of Wales, never mind, of course, the environmental benefits.

Reducing demand for energy is a very important way and a key part of that process of moving to a smarter energy future, and we know that households in the UK spend some 80 per cent of their energy cost on heating rooms and heating water in homes. We therefore need to ensure that homes are as efficient as possible in terms of energy usage. We know that there are schemes such as Arbed and Nest making a contribution, but as I’ve said time and time again, they are nowhere near enough in terms of responding to the scale of the challenge facing us and the level of investment that’s truly required when it comes to that agenda. But I would certainly feel that Ynni Cymru would have a role in that area in terms of encouraging and educating people on how to tackle this whole agenda.

So, we need to move away—and I’ve said this previously, but I can’t make the point strongly enough. We have to move away from this hub-and-spoke model of energy production, where energy is produced in large centralised power stations and is transferred inefficiently, in a very costly way, across an ageing grid, which is creaking very often. We need to move to a model of a grid that is more of a spider’s web—a smarter grid with the energy being produced closer to where it is to be consumed. Ynni Cymru could certainly be part of that transformation. It could also look at new storage systems in homes and on a civic level—[Interruption.] I have only 10 seconds left, unfortunately. We also need to look at the planning system, and the committee’s report has done that. My plea is that the template and the blueprint are in place; what we need now is the political will to drive this agenda forward.

Well, I’m delighted to take part in this debate and I’ve read with interest the paper that has been produced by Simon Thomas, but I have some difficulty in understanding how such a company could, in practice, make any material difference to the provision of power in Wales if it doesn’t have access to capital from private markets. I assume that we’re not thinking of setting up a nationalised energy company. Of course, there is a role for co-operatives and so on, but that is not likely to make more than a marginal difference to the current state of the market. I’m not opposed to this, in principle, but I do see certain practical difficulties in bringing it about to make a difference.

I do have some difficulty with some of the claims that are made in the context of this paper, on which the proposal is based, which I’ll come to in a moment. But, I mean, the background to all of this is the Climate Change Act, and this is explicit in the foreword to the document. We have an obligation to reduce our carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. We need to be absolutely clear that this can only be done by imposing colossal costs, both on households and businesses in Wales. In considering, as we heard in the last debate, that we have some of the poorest parts of not only the United Kingdom, but also western Europe, that is a significant burden that has to be taken into account.

The costs of the Climate Change Act distributed amongst the population in 2014 were £5 billion per annum. This is reflected in our electricity bills, as well as parts of the costs of providing ourselves with power, which are met by companies and feed into the power bills in other ways as well—a combination, therefore, of direct green taxes on the one hand and increased generating costs on the other. That figure of £5 billion in 2014 will rise to £14 billion a year in 2020. Let’s put these figures into real perspective. What does it mean for average households? In 2020, the average household in the United Kingdom will be paying £584 a year for the obligations that we’ve assumed under the Climate Change Act. In 2030 that figure will have risen to £875 a year. By 2050 it will be £1,390 a year extra that people are paying on their electricity bills. Those are in constant prices today. So, in the 16 years between 2014 and 2030 the average household in Wales will pay an extra £11,000 in the costs of electricity. That is not an insignificant sum and, of course, the further down the income scale you go, the greater the burden that is felt. So, we have to be pretty clear that what we’re doing is worthwhile and ultimately to the public benefit. I don’t believe that that is the case.

It is said in the justification for this change that there is a list of present and future challenges facing energy supply in Wales. It refers to, for example, increased incidents of erratic weather events due to climate change. I know of no evidence whatsoever to justify that claim. In fact, the evidence is all the other way. What is it that we are seeing in world weather patterns that is any different from any time in the last 100 years? The data sets, of course, beyond that are not available, so we can’t compare like with like for a very long period. So, we’re making dramatic assumptions on the basis of inadequate data, on the basis of which we’re imposing real burdens upon real people. I don’t believe, as legislators, that it’s a responsible way for us to behave.

If we just take hurricanes, for example, after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the climate alarmists in the world said that, you know, the end of the world was nigh and we had moved into an era of greater volatility that was going to impose massive costs upon the world. Well, the evidence of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data, which go back to 1851, is that no major hurricane of category 3 or more has hit the continental US since Wilma in October 2005. So, we have the longest pause on record, and the NOAA says:

It is premature to conclude that human activities—and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming—have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane…activity.’

In the bulletin of the American Meteorological Society in 2015, there was a very interesting article upon understanding trends in extreme storms and the state of knowledge. That noted that there was:

No significant trend in the number of US hurricanes hitting the US since 1900; the increase since 1970 appears to be natural variation.’

The variation occurs within years and within decades, but not over the whole length of time of the data sets. This experience could be replicated for tornadoes, for droughts, and all sorts of other natural weather conditions.

In the course of five minutes, of course, I can barely begin to argue this point. But all that I would like to say in conclusion in this debate is that there is no scientific basis that we can rely upon unambiguously to justify the vast costs that we, deliberately, as legislators, are imposing upon ordinary and vulnerable people.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs, Lesley Griffiths.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I’m very pleased to be responding to this debate. Welsh Government has clearly stated its ambition to deliver a low-carbon energy system for Wales. In doing this, we have committed to deliver the maximum benefits for Wales from this transition and protect the most vulnerable. So, I very much welcome the work that has been done on developing the Ynni Cymru model.

Certainly, reading the report, I think it’s very clear that the report identifies very similar strategic priorities to those that I set out in my energy statement in December: using energy more efficiently, moving to low-carbon generation, and gaining economic benefit from the new technologies and business models that are emerging from the transition.

Most of the types of activity proposed here are already being taken forward by Welsh Government funded programmes of support, such as Welsh Government Warm Homes, the Local Energy service, and the public sector support offer. We continue to identify sources of capital finance that can be used to support the development of energy efficiency and renewable energy projects across all sectors. I think we’ve had significant impact with our energy efficiency programmes to date and we are keen to continue to address the energy efficiency challenge and set out actions to be taken forward.

I think it was an initial exchange between Simon Thomas and myself that sort of got this conversation going around having a not-for-profit company. Simon Thomas and I had an initial meeting and then Welsh Government held three events across Wales in March to collect evidence and views about the potential for an energy service company for Wales, and Simon spoke at the event in Aberystwyth. I think it’s really helpful to see that the aspirations that you’ve spoken about today, Simon, are really set out in the report that we’re considering today.

The Environment and Sustainability Committee of the last Assembly recommended setting up an energy company and its report recognised the risks and challenges in entering what is now a highly competitive market, with over 50 players. Certainly, the feedback that we had from those three meetings is that it is very challenging at the moment to sell cheap energy that is also low carbon unless you own the generation. Profits are, therefore, uncertain. As one participant told us at an event, the supply sector is about high customer volumes and very low margins.

The feedback we got was that people felt we needed to be very clear on the purpose of an energy company. There is a danger that an energy company could become a distraction from what is really needed, which is the work we’re already doing in driving investment in energy efficiency, renewable generation and infrastructure to enable that transition to a decarbonised smart energy system in Wales.

We do need to look at the benefits and the risks of such a company. We also need to be clear about the purpose of a company—it could tackle energy prices, it could address issues of trust in providers, or it could help to provide a market for Welsh generators, but it’s unlikely that any single model would be able to tackle all of the issues.

So, it’s good to be working with people who are interested in this idea to understand what activity is already under way and clarify how the Welsh Government can best add value in this area. We’re also aware of a number of organisations within Wales that are already considering or taking action, against a background where the number of energy companies is increasing rapidly. As I said, there are already 50 providers with a supply licence, some of which have social outcomes at their centre, providing greater choice. However, we have seen the failure of GB Energy, and I think that demonstrates that it is difficult to compete in an increasingly crowded market.

We also got some feedback from the events about the fact that Welsh Government needs to continue to provide a supportive policy environment and co-ordinate activity across Wales to enable projects to be delivered for the benefit of Wales. Another bit of feedback was that people felt that the Government’s job should be to act as an honest and trusted voice above the sales patter of competing energy suppliers, looking at the strategic and regulatory issues. We’re already doing this—we work very closely with Ofgem, distribution network operators, the National Grid, and UK Government to ensure they deliver on our priority to deliver an energy system that enables the low-carbon transition in Wales. An arm’s-length body without the convening power of Government would not be able to do this.

We’re focusing Government’s resources on identifying and addressing the gaps in the market, linking up activities and supporting developments that won’t happen naturally. So, this is exactly what we’re doing by supporting projects such as Energy Local in Bethesda, which is piloting the local selling of electricity, and I’m looking forward to visiting there very soon. I think that will help us understand how regulation needs to change to help this to happen more widely.

We’ve already identified heat as a key area, and have been working with Bridgend to identify new approaches to delivering low-carbon heat. We are now gathering evidence to inform the development of the support services we provide to public bodies and local energy groups in Wales. These services have already captured local benefit from delivering energy projects across Wales, and they will continue to form a key part of our approach to creating the right environment for that transition to low carbon in Wales.

So, I very much look forward to publishing our report from those recent events, along with our position on the proposal. I very much look forward to continuing to work with Simon Thomas, and any other elected Members who support our vision, to identify how to continue to use the available resources in the most innovative ways to deliver our energy aims.

I call on Simon Thomas to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I thank everyone who’s taken part. I think if we can try and come to at least one thing we’re all decided upon and agree upon, which is that it is an imperfect market and it is not delivering the efficiencies that you would expect a good market to do—that’s why it needs such heavy regulation. I think I could test that by asking Members to raise their hands if they still remain with the original energy company that they were with before privatisation, and I think there’d be quite a few who are already just slightly indicating that they are, indeed, still with those originals—Swalec or British Gas or whatever it was. I think that just shows that the market is very difficult for the average consumer to do battle in. That’s why we do need consumer champions, and that can be a regulator or it could be a company that’s set up to intervene in a particular way.

I’m very pleased that the Welsh Government has undertaken its consultation events, and I look forward to hearing more detail from them—I certainly was very pleased to attend the one in Aberystwyth, and I think it’s fair to say there was enthusiasm in that event for a development like this, though I accept that purpose and focus will be very important. What would the main purpose or focus be? There are a wide range of things that an energy company could be. It could be fuel poverty, it could be renewable energy, it could be investment, and it has to specialise—well, not specialise; it has to lead with some of these to really be effective. That’s a decision that I’d like to engage with the Welsh Government on, but not one that simply says, ‘Well, let’s carry on the way we are’, because I think there’s so much wrong with the market at the moment that we’d be letting the people of Wales down if we don’t have a more substantial intervention.

Llyr Gruffydd described the ideal scenario as more of a spider’s web kind of approach to maintaining or catching the flies or whatever it might be, but maintaining our energy. I would like to think that a Wales energy company would be just one of the threads—it wouldn’t be the whole spider’s web, but it would be one of the main threads that held that web together, and the stickiest one, of course; that’s very important.

We heard—I think the substantial part of Neil Hamilton’s argument was around costs and around investment. I think it’s important to note that the proposal we have—and it’s just a discussion document, but one of the proposals in that document is that you could float such a company, but that we’d want the Welsh Government to retain a controlling stake. But there’s no reason why private markets can’t get involved here. But I think there is a fundamental mistake in trying to argue that the world is not changing. China is investing £300 billion in renewable energy just by 2020. India has a target of getting 60 per cent from renewable energy by 2027. We’re actually old-fashioned in this regard; it’s the new economies that are moving ahead.

And it’s fair to say that there are, of course, carbon taxes, if you wanted to call them that, but there’s £6 billion a year of subsidy going into the current fossil fuel industry—£6 billion; twice that which is going into renewables—twice that—and that’s mainly in tax breaks in North Sea oil and gas, of course. There are also substantial subsidies through the strike price into nuclear, and I think we’d be remiss if we didn’t acknowledge that there’s an ongoing subsidy to the way we live today, and that the demand to have new subsidies for a change to meet the challenges of the future is not unreasonable in that context. I think—though Neil Hamilton wouldn’t agree with this, I think, and I accept what David Melding said—we have to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. That’s good for us environmentally, but it’s good for us as a nation as well because it makes us more reliant—self-reliant, I should say. We have the energy here, with our coastline and our mountains and our rivers, to become more self-reliant in energy. Who wouldn’t want to become more self-reliant in energy?

Does he agree that a significant proportion of the subsidies to fossil fuel currently are in respect of decommissioning in the North Sea and, presumably, that’s something he wants to see rather than the oil infrastructure simply left there?

Well, it’s a mix, to be honest with you; some of it is that, but that’s only a continuation of the previous tax breaks that were for exploration. So, they’ve simply just changed it the other way round.

I wanted to conclude just on that, actually, and just to thank Members for at least acknowledging that this debate has been engendered not only by Plaid Cymru policy, but also using the resources of the Assembly, and I hope we see more debates like this. I encourage Members to use their funds for policy development in this way; I was very careful there, Presiding Officer, to say what I meant to say—for policy development in this way. Please bring forward more debates in this regard. The resources are there to support us as Assembly Members. It does mean that we can think outside the box from time to time as well. I think this is something that will develop naturally and organically in Wales; we will see local energy companies develop over a period of time. I’d just like to see us to take more national leadership on the issue.

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

Voting time now proceeds. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

The first vote is on the Welsh Conservatives debate. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 29 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

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 23, no abstentions, 21 against. Therefore the amendment is agreed.

Amendment 3. I call for a vote on amendment 3 tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 44, no abstentions, none against. Therefore the amendment is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 4 tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions, 21 against. Therefore amendment 4 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, six abstentions, 15 against. Therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

We now have a vote on the Plaid Cymru debate on the national energy company. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour seven, three abstentions, 34 against. Therefore the motion is not agreed.

Amendment 1. I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 34, three abstentions, seven against. Therefore amendment 1 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 35, nine abstentions, no-one against. Therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

If Members who are leaving could do so quickly and quietly, we are about to move to the short debate.

I call the short debate and call on Dai Lloyd to speak on the topic that he has chosen. Dai Lloyd.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. The subject is defending Wales for the next generation. The purpose of my short debate today is to discuss the current challenges facing Wales, particularly around economic inequality and our relationship with the rest of the world. I am of the firm belief that Wales needs to be defended against a wide range of looming threats if we are to improve the opportunities that are available for the next generation.

During my short debate today, I would like to reflect, and ask, essentially, what role the National Assembly has, and what role the Welsh Government has, and which alternative models we are prepared to consider as we look to defend Wales, and future generations, against some of these challenges.

The proud history and identity of this nation goes back to the distant past, and is clearly reflected in our language, our culture, our art and our faith. I have often spoken about the importance of our history in this Chamber, and I’m not going to apologise for doing so again. It is vital that future generations learn about the rich history that we have. They need to hear a lot more about the history of Aneirin and Taliesin, Gwenllian, Prince Llywelyn the Last, Owain Glyndŵr, Bishop William Morgan, Williams Pantycelyn, the Rebecca riots, the betrayal of the blue books, the Welsh Not, and much more. Learning about our past and recognising our successes will certainly lead to a better understanding of our place in the world, and of what we have contributed to the world, and vitally, it provides a context for what can be achieved, and creates a precedent to inspire our future.

Many among the previous generations here in Wales were innovators. They created new things, they invented things, they were bold and they responded to the situation in Wales and the world as it was at the time. We often talk about our pride in the fact that the NHS was developed in the twentieth century by a Welshman, and that is appropriate: healthcare, free of charge, and for all, with Wales leading the way. However, long before Bevan, back in the middle ages, the physicians of Myddfai were great pioneers in the development of medicine in these isles hundreds of years ago. Then, about a century and a half ago, we had Hugh Owen Thomas and his nephew, Robert Jones, pioneering in the field of bone surgery, with Robert Jones being acknowledged globally as the leader and founder of orthopaedics as a specialism.

As we meet here today, we should be proud that we now have two medical schools—in Cardiff and Swansea—that will produce the next generation of bright junior doctors. But we need to produce more, which is why we need to see the establishment of a new facility in north Wales as well. While the foundations are there, it is clear that we need to do more to develop our medical expertise and to do more also to support medical innovation in the future.

Health is not, of course, the only area in which Wales has led the way historically. Industry is another. The industrial revolution was developed here in Wales—the start of a journey to a brighter future. Education is another one, with Wales leading the way through the innovative work of Griffith Jones of Llanddowror in the early eighteenth century, educating children in the day and adults in the evening, with these individuals then going on to teach others. This system of learning reached the point where the majority of the population of Wales was literate at that time—a quarter of a million people out of a population of less than half a million. Indeed, by the time Griffith Jones died in 1761, the country had the highest literacy level in the world, which led Catherine the Great of Russia to send a commissioner to Wales to learn lessons, and to see how the system could be adapted for Russia. Again, Wales leading the way. That’s where we’ve been, and that’s where we can be again.

Mae angen i ni allu troi at ein hanes, nid er mwyn dod o hyd i esgusodion am berfformiad gwael, ond fel ysbrydoliaeth i wella ein perfformiad. Ar gyfer ein presennol a’n dyfodol, gall Cymru wneud yn well. Mae’n ymddangos fel ddoe, ond 20 mlynedd yn ôl, roedd mwyafrif tenau o bobl Cymru yn feiddgar, ac roedd ganddynt ddigon o hyder i bleidleisio ‘ie’ i’r syniad eu bod yn byw mewn cenedl a oedd yn deilwng i lywodraethu ei hun. Mae’r hyder hwnnw wedi tyfu ymhellach ers hynny, wrth gwrs, gyda chefnogaeth lawer cryfach yn 2011. O ganlyniad, rydym yn rhannol hunanlywodraethol yn awr, ac mae ein cenedl, o’r diwedd, ar daith gyfansoddiadol. Mae’n daith gyffrous, ac yn daith sy’n llawn o bosibiliadau. Ond mae hyder cynyddol y Cymry yn golygu bod dyletswydd ar bob un ohonom yma i arloesi ac i ysbrydoli.

Hyd yn hyn, nid yw Llywodraethau datganoledig wedi gallu gwneud hynny mewn sawl maes. Maent naill ai heb gael y pwerau, neu’r uchelgais, neu gyfuniad o’r ddau o bosibl. Am wlad sydd wedi arwain y ffordd ym maes gofal iechyd, addysg a diwydiant, ai dyma’r gorau y gallwn ei wneud mewn gwirionedd? Byth ers i mi gael fy ethol gyntaf i’r Cynulliad Cenedlaethol ym 1999, anaml y mae rhyddhau ystadegau rheolaidd ar ddiweithdra, anghydraddoldeb economaidd a thlodi wedi bod yn ddeunydd darllen cadarnhaol. Trwy gydol y cyfnod o 18 mlynedd, mae rhannau o Gymru wedi parhau i fod, yn ystyfnig, yn rhai o’r ardaloedd tlotaf yn Ewrop. Mae ystadegau gwerth ychwanegol gros y pen yno i bawb eu gweld, ond yr hyn sy’n aml yn cael ei anwybyddu yw’r straeon dynol go iawn y tu ôl i’r ffigurau hynny. Mae’r ffigurau cyflogaeth diweddaraf yng Nghymru a gyhoeddwyd y mis hwn yn dangos mai etholaeth Dwyrain Abertawe yn fy rhanbarth sydd â’r gyfradd ddiweithdra uchaf yng Nghymru, sef 9 y cant, gyda’r gyfradd ddiweithdra ymysg pobl ifanc hyd yn oed yn uwch.

Ar ôl gwasanaethu fel meddyg teulu yn Abertawe am dros 30 mlynedd ac wedyn fel Aelod Cynulliad yn ysbeidiol dros y 18 mlynedd diwethaf, rwyf wedi gweld yn uniongyrchol yr effaith y gall diffyg cyfle a gwaith ei chael ar deuluoedd a chymunedau. Mae diweithdra sy’n pontio’r cenedlaethau yn rhemp yn rhai o’n cymunedau, nid yn unig yn Abertawe, ond ar draws Cymru, ac fel meddyg teulu, rwyf wedi gweld teuluoedd yn cael eu rhwygo oherwydd problemau iechyd meddwl, camddefnyddio cyffuriau ac alcohol, a’r teimlad o ddiymadferthedd.

Mae’r system bresennol yn gwneud cam â phobl. Mae llywodraethau’n gwneud cam â phobl. Roedd yr her a’n hwynebai yng Nghymru o greu cyflogaeth, o leihau anghydraddoldeb economaidd a lleihau tlodi yn anodd ddigon fel ag yr oedd. Mae’r penderfyniad i adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd, ein prif farchnad allforio, yn gwneud y dasg honno hyd yn oed yn anos, a bydd yn arwain at her a risg ddigynsail. Mae’n cyflwyno cwestiynau ac ansicrwydd yn ei sgil o ran ein gallu masnachu economaidd, cyflogaeth, addysg, ymchwil ac arloesedd a mewnfuddsoddi. Ni chafwyd dim sy’n debyg i hyn yn hanes datganoli.

O’m rhan i, mae angen inni weld ymdrech gyfunol, newid go iawn, ar ran Llywodraeth Cymru a chynrychiolwyr gwleidyddol Cymreig ar bob lefel er mwyn ceisio amddiffyn Cymru rhag y bygythiadau hyn. Trwy gydol fy amser yn y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol hwn, rwyf wedi teimlo ers tro fod Llywodraethau olynol wedi bod yn edrych llawer gormod tuag at i mewn—heb fod yn barod i edrych y tu hwnt i’n ffiniau. Nid yw hynny’n golygu copïo beth sy’n digwydd yn Lloegr yn unig, ond edrych tuag allan go iawn a bod yn wirioneddol ryngwladol ein hymagwedd tuag at bolisi a datblygu strategol. Mae cymaint i’w ennill drwy edrych ar lywodraethau eraill, edrych ar fodelau eraill, lle mae cyrff etholedig wedi llwyddo i gyflawni ar gyfer eu poblogaethau. Mae angen inni arloesi a dysgu gan yr ardaloedd hyn, yn enwedig gan wledydd is-wladwriaethol eraill a strwythurau ffederal. Llwyddodd Gwlad y Basg, er enghraifft, i sicrhau cyfradd twf economaidd blynyddol o 3.69 y cant rhwng 1995 a 2008. Pan oedd Gwlad y Basg yn creu cyflogaeth a chodi pobl allan o dlodi, nid oedd Cymru yn mynd i unman ac mewn rhai achosion, roedd yn mynd tuag at yn ôl.

Fy ngalwad ar Lywodraeth Cymru a chynrychiolwyr etholedig eraill yn syml yw na allwn adael i 18 mlynedd arall o ddatganoli fynd heibio heb wneud enillion economaidd sylweddol. Byddai hynny’n golygu y byddem wedi gwneud cam â’r bobl yn ein cymunedau mwyaf difreintiedig, gan gynnwys y rhai yn Nwyrain Abertawe ac eraill ledled Cymru. Mae’r teuluoedd hyn, y cymunedau hyn, yn chwilio am rywun i amddiffyn eu buddiannau o ddifrif. Fel sefydliad sy’n datblygu, mae angen i’r Cynulliad Cenedlaethol hwn, a’i Lywodraeth, wynebu’r her a chofleidio a gwthio go iawn am newidiadau arloesol a all symud Cymru ymlaen. Mae’n golygu bod angen inni edrych gyda meddwl agored ar sut y gallwn ddatblygu model o lywodraeth yng Nghymru a all ddarparu ar gyfer y genhedlaeth nesaf, ac ydy, mewn rhai achosion, mae hynny’n golygu edrych ar ein cymhwysedd fel sefydliad a beth rydym yn barod i wneud drosom ein hunain. Daw’r cyfle cyntaf i wneud hynny yn ddi-os yn ystod y trafodaethau Brexit, yn enwedig mewn perthynas â datganoli pwerau sydd ym Mrwsel ar hyn o bryd, a’r posibilrwydd o golli £680 miliwn y flwyddyn, a gawn ar hyn o bryd gan yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Anwybyddwyd ein buddiannau ar bob cam o’r trafodaethau Brexit hyd yn hyn, ac mae angen i Lywodraeth Cymru wella ei gêm o ddifrif os yw’r pwerau a’r arian hwnnw i ddod i Gymru. Ni ddylai fod rhaid i ni dderbyn ceiniog yn llai.

Mae Cymru mewn perygl o ddod yn genedl angof yn yr hyn a elwir yn Deyrnas Unedig—yn ddim mwy na rhanbarth llai pwysig o Loegr. Pam y dylem oddef cael Senedd sydd â llai o bŵer nag unman arall yn y Deyrnas Unedig? Mae’r Cymry’n haeddu gwell, ac mae angen pwerau ar y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol i gynrychioli’n briodol y bobl sy’n ei ethol. Mae safbwynt presennol Llywodraeth Geidwadol y DU ar Brexit yn golygu bod diwydiant ac amaethyddiaeth yng Nghymru mewn perygl difrifol. Sut y gallwn ystyried datblygu swyddi a lleihau tlodi yng ngorllewin Cymru a’r Cymoedd os yw’r ddau ddiwydiant hwn yn dioddef y fath ergyd? Mae angen iddynt gael eu hamddiffyn, nid cael eu bwydo i’r bleiddiaid. Wrth negodi cytundebau masnach neu mewn trafodaethau economaidd eraill, dylai Cymru gael dweud ei barn yn gyfartal, yn enwedig os ydynt yn effeithio ar swyddogaethau datganoledig megis amaethyddiaeth ac iechyd.

Gyda busnesau’n bygwth symud o Gymru am fod arnynt ofn costau uwch o ganlyniad i adael yr UE, dylem wthio i sicrhau pŵer i Gymru osod ei chyfraddau treth ei hun, gan gynnwys treth gorfforaeth, toll teithwyr awyr a thâl ar werth. Mae angen i ni ddenu busnesau i Gymru, a byddai ystod ehangach o bwerau cyllidol yn ein galluogi i wneud cymaint yn fwy i fynd i’r afael â’n heriau economaidd. Sut y mae’n deg fod rhannau eraill o’r DU yn cael pwerau dros dreth gorfforaeth a tholl teithwyr awyr, ond nad oes gan Gymru bwerau o’r fath? O ran cynorthwyo busnesau lleol i dyfu, gwyddom fod llawer gormod o gontractau caffael cyhoeddus ar gyfer nwyddau a gwasanaethau yn cael eu rhoi i gontractwyr y tu allan i Gymru. Dylem fod yn gwneud llawer mwy, o gymharu â chymaryddion rhyngwladol, i gynorthwyo cwmnïau lleol i wneud cais am y contractau hyn, ac i sicrhau bod cymaint o’r bunt Gymreig yn cael ei gwario yma yng Nghymru i gefnogi cwmnïau lleol a chyflogi pobl leol drwy gymalau siarter gymdeithasol. Clywsom lawer o sôn am hyn dros y blynyddoedd, ond mae’r canlyniadau’n dal i fod yn wael.

Mae seilwaith yn elfen allweddol amlwg ar gyfer sicrhau twf a datblygiad economaidd ac o ystyried gwariant di-nod Cymru ar seilwaith yn hanesyddol, ni ddylai fod yn syndod fod rhannau o’r wlad mor dlawd. Pan edrychwch ar y seilwaith mewn rhai rhannau o Gymru, yn syml iawn, nid yw’n addas at y diben, ac mae’n amlwg fod angen i ni gynyddu ein gwariant yn sylweddol os ydym i wneud cynnydd, ac mae angen i ni edrych ar fodelau ariannol arloesol i wneud hynny. Mae gan hyn ran allweddol i’w chwarae yn ein hadferiad economaidd, gan gydnabod nad yw seilwaith ffisegol traddodiadol yn ddigon ynddo’i hun, a bod yna gêm newydd yn y dref.

Yn erbyn y cefndir hwn rwy’n arbennig o obeithiol ynglŷn â bargen ddinesig bae Abertawe, gyda’i ffocws clir ar ddatblygu diwydiant a swyddi yn seiliedig ar gynnydd technolegol. Mae gan glystyrau o fusnesau mewn meysydd megis gwyddorau bywyd, ynni a gweithgynhyrchu botensial i roi hwb sylweddol i’r economi yn y rhan hon o’r byd. Yr hyn sy’n arbennig o galonogol am fargen ddinesig bae Abertawe yw’r uchelgais a ddangoswyd, penderfyniad, nid yn unig i oroesi, ond i anelu am rywbeth gwahanol, i anelu at fod yn arweinwyr byd, i feddwl y tu allan i’r bocs, a gwneud hyn ar sail drawsbleidiol.

Y math hwn o feddwl sydd angen i ni ei weld ar lefel Cymru gyfan—ymagwedd sy’n dweud bod Cymru wedi cael digon o fod yn ail orau ac wedi cael digon ar fod yn sinderela. Mae angen i ni weld agwedd, yn enwedig gan Lywodraeth Cymru, sy’n dweud mewn gwirionedd ein bod yn chwilio am rywbeth gwahanol, rydym yn mynd i anelu at fod yn arweinwyr byd, rydym yn mynd i feddwl y tu allan i’r bocs.

Yn rhy hir, yr hyn a welsom gan y DU a Llywodraeth Cymru yw agwedd hen ffasiwn, ymerodrol, ‘Llundain sy’n gwybod orau’—nid yw hynny’n wir. Y math hwnnw o feddwl, yn syml iawn, sydd wedi arwain at wneud gorllewin Cymru a’r Cymoedd yn un o ranbarthau tlotaf Ewrop, ac at eu cadw felly.

Yn ogystal ag ymladd am ragor o bwerau economaidd i helpu i fynd i’r afael â’r tlodi cynhenid, mae angen inni hefyd hyrwyddo Cymru dramor fel opsiwn byd-eang ar gyfer twristiaeth a buddsoddi. Dylai’r gwaith da a gwblhawyd yn ddiweddar ym Maes Awyr Caerdydd ar ddenu Qatar Airways, er enghraifft, gael ei weld fel y dechrau. Yn hanesyddol, byddai Cymru wedi bodloni ar hynny i orffen y gêm. Ni all hynny ddigwydd yn awr. Os yw Cymru am lwyddo mewn sefyllfa ryngwladol, a denu ymwelwyr a buddsoddwyr posibl, yna mae angen iddi gael ei gweld ac mae angen iddi fod o fewn cyrraedd.

Er mwyn cyflawni hyn, mae angen inni wneud llawer mwy i hyrwyddo Cymru dramor, felly pam nad oes gennym bresenoldeb Cymreig yn llysgenadaethau’r DU i hyrwyddo ein pobl a’n busnesau? Mae angen inni ddatblygu polisi rhyngwladol i Gymru, gan sicrhau presenoldeb ar y llwyfan rhyngwladol a fyddai’n helpu i ddatblygu ac adfer ein safle fel cenedl fasnachu fawr.

Mae gennym gymaint o adnoddau heb eu defnyddio—edrychwch ar y potensial ar gyfer cynhyrchiant ynni’r llanw ym mae Abertawe, Caerdydd a Bae Colwyn, a photensial rheoli ein hadnoddau hefyd er budd ein pobl ein hunain—adnoddau heb eu defnyddio a chyfoeth heb ei ddefnyddio. Mae’n fwy na phosibl y bydd llawer o’n pobl ifanc, sy’n gadael Cymru ar hyn o bryd i astudio neu i chwilio am waith, yn canfod yn y dyfodol y byddant, mewn gwirionedd, yn gallu cyflawni eu nodau a’u huchelgeisiau yn agosach at adref, yn union fel y mae pobl yn ei wneud yng ngweddill y byd. Trwy gadw ein pobl ifanc dalentog yng Nghymru, i ddechrau cwmnïau, i wneud gwaith ymchwil, i arwain ein cyrff cyhoeddus, byddai Cymru’n hedfan fel na hedfanodd erioed o’r blaen.

Ond i gyrraedd y pwynt hwnnw, mae angen arweinyddiaeth wleidyddol—arweinyddiaeth wleidyddol i weithredu’r mathau o syniadau a drafodais yn ystod y ddadl hon. Dros y 10 mlynedd neu fwy nesaf, mae gan Gymru ddau ddewis clir iawn: y cyntaf fydd parhau yn ei ffurf bresennol, gan edrych tuag at Lundain i raddau helaeth am arweiniad a chyllid; neu gall ddechrau arwain, dechrau gadael ei hôl ei hun ar y byd a dechrau cyflawni peth o’i photensial sylweddol.

Pan agorais y ddadl hon, siaradais am y diffyg cynnydd economaidd yn y 18 mlynedd ers datganoli. Ni fyddaf yn feddyg teulu na’n Aelod Cynulliad ymhen 18 mlynedd arall, ond os byddaf yn ddigon ffodus i fod o gwmpas, byddwn yn gobeithio gweld bod Cymru wedi bod yn feiddgar ac wedi penderfynu gwneud ychydig yn fwy o’r gwaith caled drosti ei hun. Amser a ddengys pa un a fydd y Cymry a’u Llywodraeth yn mynd i’r afael â’r her honno. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much. And I call on the leader of the house to reply to the debate—Jane Hutt.

Diolch yn fawr, Dai Lloyd. You have given us an opportunity this afternoon, in your short debate, to provide an important picture of the historical achievements of influential figures and also progress in terms of what Wales has offered and delivered, not only to its own country, but to the world. That historical perspective is too often lost, and it’s important that you’ve reflected on that this afternoon.

From our perspective as a Welsh Labour Government, and, of course, during the times when we were in partnership as well, we have been standing up for Wales and Welsh interests for the last 18 years—in fact, of course, since the dawn of devolution, and we reflected on that yesterday in the tributes to Rhodri Morgan. We are now staging Wales in the world with impact and outcomes that I will reflect on. We will continue standing up for Wales and for our future generations in Wales through the policies and laws—and laws we can now, actually, put into effect—that we are putting into place today to respond to the emerging challenges we face. Our country continues to be a place of dynamic, generous and creative people, and also compassionate people, and people who are looking outwards as well as to the nation—people with massive potential. We want to nurture that potential, to create the conditions and the environments for that potential to flourish and grow.

Dirprwy Lywydd, this Welsh Labour Government has always acted, and will continue to act, in the best interests of Wales. Health outcomes are improving: cancer survival rates are improving, fewer people are dying from heart disease, and deaths from strokes are falling. Education outcomes are improving: GCSE results are the best on record, and the gap between children receiving free school meals and their classmates is closing. Our economy is performing better than ever: economic inactivity is down, employment is up, and we’ve had record inward investment. It’s important, as you said, that we see the progress at a local and regional level like the Swansea bay deal, which, of course, also, is very much linked to the expansion of the university, and I mentioned that all-important development we achieved so many years ago of the Swansea graduate medical school, and the second campus, which, of course, would not have come about without European funding.

I think Dai Lloyd is right to highlight that Wales, like other parts of the UK and the wider western world, faces challenges—challenges that will be faced by us and by the next generation. After seven years of austerity from a Conservative UK Government determined to slash public spending, including our own budget, by £1 billion, we are witnessing falling living standards, growing insecurity and a threat to our public services, but we strive to defend and improve our public services in Wales—free prescriptions, keeping our free prescriptions: that tax on health is so important. It is about choices and priorities: one way we can defend and protect those on low incomes in Wales who are working, to help address in-work poverty. We continue to invest in our public services in Wales despite those cuts to our budget from Westminster, in our NHS and social care, in our schools and in our local councils. We are building a better future for our children by reforming our education system, investing in skills and apprenticeships, in childcare and better public transport, and in 20,000 more affordable homes for the future.

The Welsh Labour Government was the architect of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. The United Nations said:

What Wales is doing today, the world will do tomorrow. Action, more than words, is the hope for our current and future generations.

No other nation has taken such bold steps to legislate for long-term well-being goals. Wales is at the forefront of an international dialogue that’s seeking to engage people across the world in a debate about the world that they want to see, now and in the future.

Dai Lloyd will have seen the changes—coming back to the Assembly—the maturing of this Assembly, of the Senedd, in terms of our opportunities to not only use our law-making powers, but actually now expand our fiscal powers. I do want to say a few words about the international stage. Yes, we live in an uncertain world. We face the very real and ongoing threat from international and home-grown terrorism, as we saw so tragically yesterday from Tuesday night. Despite our best efforts at diplomacy, many countries and states remain ravaged by war. New and life-threatening diseases are emerging all the time, to which we have few defences. And, of course, we face the uncertainty of a future outside the European Union. We’ve accepted the results of the EU referendum, but it’s no exaggeration to say that the next two years of negotiations will determine the future of not just our country, but of our children’s futures.

The Welsh Government is determined to protect this country’s vital interests and the future prosperity of Wales, which is why we published, with Plaid Cymru, the White Paper ‘Securing Wales’ Future’. It sets out our key strategic interests and priorities, as the UK prepares to leave the EU. We published the White Paper together, because we are clear that leaving the EU in no sense means that Wales will turn its back on Europe, a shared understanding between us, and, of course, continued full and unfettered access to the single market is fundamental to our future.

There are risks ahead, as the UK moves towards Brexit, and you’ve commented on the risk to our agricultural, our farming, sector and industry. These risks must be managed and mitigated—risks to environmental protection, workers’ rights—but, of course, there are opportunities that we must grasp. I spoke of Rhodri Morgan’s commitment to Wales and the wider world yesterday. He did reach out, and tomorrow, we’ll see the product and outcomes of the Wales for Africa programme, which he initiated, but also his commitment to opening up and sharing Wales in the world. I was very much taken forward by his commitment to stage Wales in the world on St David’s Day, not just in the States, which, of course, were very important in terms of trade and cultural links, but actually in European countries and capitals where we now have that very important annual event.

The Welsh Labour Government wants to build a country where we invest our wealth to give everyone the best chance. That means building the homes we need to rent and buy, keeping our communities safe, giving our children’s schools and our NHS the funding they need to thrive. We want a Wales—and I think we share this—where no-one is held back, a country where everybody is able to get on in life, has security at work and at home, is paid for the work they do, and lives life with the dignity they deserve. Diolch yn fawr.

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