National Assembly for Wales

I call the Members to order.

As we begin, I would like to take the opportunity to welcome the delegation from the Sudanese Parliament, who are visiting our Parliament today. Welcome.

Our first item is questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Janet Finch-Saunders.

Yes, we will continue to work side by side with our farmers and other key stakeholders to deliver our shared vision of a prosperous, resilient agriculture industry.

Thank you. ‘Panorama’ this week looks at how Brexit could impact on our farmers here in Wales. Now, as Mr Jacob Anthony from your constituency said on the programme, the EU has

‘one agricultural policy that’s meant to fit all 28 nations…countries farming reindeer in the Arctic Circle all the way down to farmers in the Mediterranean growing olives.’

How are you, therefore, working with the UK environment Secretary, and others, including the Farmers Union of Wales, towards developing the best possible deal for our farmers that is better suited to Wales, and will you outline your response to the National Farmers Union’s policy document ‘The Vision for the Future of Farming: A New Domestic Agricultural Policy’?

Well, it’s not actually correct to say that one size fits all in Europe; of course there are variations across Europe. And nor should it be the case that one size should fit all, nor should it be the case that one size should fit all in the UK for that matter, because our farming is quite different. The structure of our farming is quite different, for example, to that of many parts of England. We’d be more than happy to work with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary of State if only he would bother to meet with us, because one of the things that he did was to cancel his quadrilateral meetings with Lesley Griffiths as Minister, and with Scotland, for last month and this month. So, we’d be more than happy to meet with him. I’m sure the Minister is looking forward to doing that. I understand he will be at the Royal Welsh. Perhaps he will meet with us then. But what I can say, absolutely clearly, is that it does not bode well when the first action of a DEFRA Secretary of State is to cancel meetings with devolved administrations, and, secondly, it is hugely important that, when the repeal Bill is published, there is an acknowledgement that it is not for the UK Government to take the powers away from Brussels that should come to Wales and keep them in London. Under no circumstances will we support that.

Does the First Minister agree that we should look into the possibility of employing an experienced industrialist to ensure that if there are any barriers to farmers, in terms of high tariffs, in accessing the European market, we can say what we can of Welsh agriculture through ensuring that far more Welsh produce is procured for our schools and hospitals, even if that costs a little more? This industrialist could also be responsible for developing better collaboration between farmers in order to ensure that Welsh food that is of high quality can be provided in a reliable way to Welsh supermarkets and supermarkets across the UK.

Well, first of all, of course, any kind of tariff would be a disaster for Welsh farmers, and, secondly, any kind or restriction as regards access to the European market would be bad for the farmers of Wales. We’ve been working with farmers and food companies to try to ensure that more bodies in the public sector in Wales actually procure their food from Wales, and, of course, local authorities or other organisations don’t have to buy the cheapest. We’ve seen an increase, for example, in the amount of meat procured from Wales going into the health service because we worked with producers to ensure that they can ensure that the supply chain is reliable. But we must, of course, emphasise the fact that this won’t make up for seeing the loss or any restriction on the European market.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m sure the First Minister would want to join with me in congratulating South Caernarfon Creameries, the co-operative company, on making the best profits ever in their long history. I visited the site very recently and saw that there’s a future for this sort of collaboration in the agricultural sector, and it is also true that those profits were based on significant investment of European funding and support from the Welsh Government. Now, in moving forward, your own Cabinet Secretary for finance has given us an assurance that there will be an internal target of 80 per cent as regards spending from the structural funds in order to meet the needs and ensure we make the most of that. Will you set a similar target for your expenditure on the rural development programme, so that companies such as South Caernarfon Creameries can invest for the future, and everyone else in Wales too?

Well, the funding is actually being issued, or is being spent, at the rate that we would wish. We have until 2023 to spend that money, and there is no reason to believe that the money would not be spent. May I join the Member in congratulating South Caernarfon Creameries? That’s the very first place that I went to when I was a Minister—some time ago now. And I remember the history—I think that it was established in 1933. So, that demonstrates how successful it has been.

But, I’ve said before that we must ensure that more co-operative groups, or companies, come into the farming industry in Wales. It’s not a view that is always welcomed by farmers or others in the industry. But we must ensure that farmers can secure a fair price for their produce, and one way of doing that is to ensure that they work together in order to ensure that they don’t have to sell as individuals. We know that that would mean that the buyers would have all the power.

We are aware that a number of institutions are currently reviewing their staffing structures. We expect them to engage in meaningful discussions with members of staff and trade unions, and also the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, to explore the implications for individual institutions and their students.

I’d like to congratulate my local university, Bangor, because that’s the only university in Wales to win a gold award under the UK Government’s teaching excellence framework, which is a wonderful result, confirming that Bangor University is maintaining excellent standards of teaching and learning consistently for its students, and that the provision in Bangor is of the highest quality seen in the UK today.

But, I also note that Bangor University, along with almost every other university in Wales, is consulting on possible redundancies—117 possible compulsory redundancies in Bangor alone. Unfortunately, so many of our universities are being forced to take these steps at the moment. Do you agree that it’s about time that the Welsh Government considered this situation in earnest, and provided additional financial resources for our universities as a matter of urgency?

Well, the universities are, of course, independent, and so it’s up to them to take their own decisions. We, of course, do not welcome any situation where people could lose their jobs. But funding should not solely come from the Government. They have a responsibility to ensure that more funding comes in from outwith the public sector and the public purse, and they should seek research funding, for example, and funds from the commercial world. They are duty-bound to do that. But, of course, we don’t wish to see anybody losing their jobs in any university. And I would say to the universities that it’s crucially important that they do everything possible to ensure that that doesn’t happen. That should be the last resort, not something that they do on their first consideration of the situation.

Well, Welsh universities, of course, make a huge contribution to the Welsh economy; around 5 per cent of the Welsh economy is as a result of Welsh university activity. And, of course, if you are losing staff from a university, very often they’re experienced and expensive staff, which the university tries to move on first. What guarantees have you had from the university sector that that will not undermine the opportunity for the sector to perform very, very well in terms of its contribution to the Welsh economy, particularly if significant numbers of staff are going to be shed as a result of reductions in terms of certain courses and income?

Well, I think it’s hugely important that our universities don’t hamstring themselves, in terms of the way they compete not just with each other—Wales is a very small market—but across the world. And universities must consider whether losing staff would mean that they are no longer able to provide a service for their students, and possibly no longer able to attract an extra income as a result. As I said in answer to the Member for Arfon, redundancies should be considered as a last resort and not as a first.

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the opposition, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, the interim report from the commission on health and social care published its findings today. The Government obviously set this commission in motion, and the final report is due at the end of this year. Previous Labour Governments haven’t got a very good record when it comes to implementing detailed findings from commissions, such as the Williams commission for example. Can you give us a feel of what importance the Government attaches to the findings from the commission, and will they be the central plank for this Government, going forward in this Assembly, in the way it shapes health and social care—the recommendations that the report comes out with?

Well, we wouldn’t have set up the review on a cross-party basis if we weren’t going to take it seriously; obviously not. We look forward to the report when it’s published, and that will form the basis of our thinking for the future.

I think what’s important for us to understand, in fairness—. And I commend you for setting up the parliamentary review, because some of the findings that they’ve made available today are backed up by evidence, showing, obviously, in the next couple of years, we’ll see a 44 per cent increase in over-65s, and yet a 5 per cent contraction in working-age people, which shows that there are real challenges to be faced. And where those challenges can be faced cross-party, obviously, those solutions will come a lot easier. But it is vital to understand whether this commission and its recommendations will meet the end of many other commissions that the Government has commissioned—and I use the example again of the Williams commission—or whether these findings will actually form the central plank of Government thinking going forward to the end of this Assembly in 2022.

We have to remember, of course—. He mentions the Williams commission. The Williams commission was opposed by other parties in this Chamber; it wasn’t as if the Government decided off its own bat, despite the support of others, that the recommendations would move forward.

With regard to health, this is a major commitment for us to make. We made it, of course, as part of our programme for government, and it is hugely important that we can do as much as we can to find common ground on health across parties, to understand what the challenges are, because the challenges are the same regardless of politics, and then to see how those challenges can be met. That’s very much part of our thinking. As I say, we will look forward to receiving the report and look forward to acting on as much of it as we can.

I think what would have given us more confidence is if we could have had a clearer answer that would have said, ‘Yes, this will form our thinking going forward—the recommendations’, and that ultimately you look forward to delivering those recommendations, rather than just looking forward to getting the report and then deciding what to do, because time is of the essence. As Mansel Aylward points out, the demographic time bomb has already gone off. The other part of the report talks about the skills crisis within the NHS and social care that needs addressing now—it talks of now, not in the future, but actually happening with our workforce planning at the moment. And, importantly, it talks about structures and the way structures will—and I think the words that they use is:

‘The scale of challenges mean the system is becoming unstable, which cannot be resolved by small, step-by-step changes.’

So, on this basis, then, do you believe that that leads to the obvious conclusion that there will have to be wholesale structural change within the NHS here in Wales and the social care sector, or do you believe that a more incremental approach can deliver the solutions that the interim report points to and that the final recommendations will suggest need to be taken up by the Welsh Government?

There has to be change—it’s clear. I wouldn’t use the word ‘wholesale’. I’m reluctant to express a view without seeing the recommendations of the report, for obvious reasons, but we would want to implement as much of it as we can and to seek consensus across the Chamber in order to do that.

In terms of skills, there is no doubt that any kind of restriction on migration will make the skills situation worse because, of course, the social care sector recruits heavily from outside the UK, as, of course, does the medical and nursing professions. That’s an impact we can’t control directly here. But if he’s asking me the question, ‘Is this simply an exercise that we are taking forward without there being a clear end game?’, the answer to that is ‘no’. We want to make sure that, working with other parties around this Chamber, we can implement as many of the recommendations as possible. We have to see them first in order to make a judgment as to whether we can do that for all of the recommendations, or most of them.

Plaid Cymru leader, Leanne Wood.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, all of the opposition parties in the Assembly have called for a full independent inquiry into the decisions surrounding the Circuit of Wales project. Indeed, some of your own backbenchers have said that there are serious questions to answer. The first step in that process will be the publication of your own external due-diligence report, and you’ve agreed to publish this, but only when the Assembly is in recess. Now, for many of us, this looks like a Government that is seeking to postpone scrutiny for a decision that was itself postponed until after the election. Can the First Minister say whether his Government has yet asked the company and the external advisers if they are happy for that report to be published? And in terms of the one piece of information placed in the public domain, which you described as ‘unfortunate’, is the First Minister able to assure us that no-one associated with the Government was involved in its disclosure?

A leak inquiry has been initiated by the Permanent Secretary; that will have to take its course. Secondly, the process of talking to the organisations involved who are mentioned in the due diligence report has begun, with a view to publishing it. We want to publish as much of it as possible.

One of the reasons that an independent inquiry has been called for is because of a series of misleading statements made by the Government, often during election campaigns. I’m sure that is coincidental, First Minister.

Name them.

You were asked on 7 April 2016 why the proposal had been rejected the day before, and you said, and I quote, ‘What happened originally was that they were looking for a guarantee of £30 million from us, it then went up to £357 million.’ When asked when that happened, you said, and I quote: ‘In the last few days.’ You, again, said to Wales Online on 11 April, and I quote again:

‘It was in the last few days beforehand. We weren’t to know the guarantee would be inflated.’

Yet a senior director of Aviva investors, Mark Wells, contradicts what you said. He denied that Aviva had requested a 100 per cent underwrite a few days before the rejection. He says and, again, I quote:

‘this deal had been worked up with the Welsh Government (through civil servants) for many months and nothing in our funding structure changed in the run up to this announcement.’

First Minister, only one of the two of you can be right. Can you tell us today which one of you is right and which one of you is wrong?

I was told on 5 April 2016.

So, that wasn’t a long-term discussion, is that what you’re saying, that you hadn’t been in long-term discussions with that company? Are you denying that now? You said on BBC Wales on 26 April this year, in the run-up to the election, just a few days before, ‘I want the Circuit of Wales to work, end of.’ You added that, since last year, the funding model had changed, in your words: ‘That is changing now; the model is better’, you said.

Can you explain what changed between that statement before the election, and then the rejection a month later, after the election? You’ve told us that in the last 10 days or so, you were told about the balance sheet classification issue. Lots of concerns seem to have been arising for you, First Minister, in the last few days. Your Government’s been looking at this project for six whole years. Why was the classification issue not once, on this floor, raised by you? Why wasn’t it raised in the 28 different meetings that you had with the developers? And considering the £10 million or so of public money that has gone into this project, that could go up because the company behind the project says that there is a legal claim against this Government to be made?

First Minister, you decided to postpone this decision until beyond an election. You decided to postpone the due diligence publication to when this Assembly was in recess. Why didn’t you decide to postpone the final decision so that you could have at least got Aviva and everyone else around the table to see if these issues identified in the last few days could have been resolved?

Well, first of all, I’m sorry I gave a direct answer to a question she asked; she was clearly knocked backwards by it verbally. But let me give you some more direct answers: the project six years ago is not the same project as the project we dealt with. It has changed many times in terms of its financial structure. The project that we looked at was a project that we had seen recently in the course of the last few months. It’s a project, of course, that was based on the guarantee that’s out there publicly. We looked at the financial structure that was proposed, we went through the due diligence, and the due diligence revealed that there was a very high risk of the cost or the guarantee being regarded as being on balance sheet. I don’t know if she knows what that means, but ‘on balance sheet’ means that it'll be treated as if we had given the company money now. It would mean we would find £157 million-worth of capital reductions in this financial year—that’s the risk that we took. We worked with the company to see what we could do to help. There was a meeting between the company and officials after the decision. It was explained to the company what the issues were, and they accepted it. They clearly haven’t spoken to her because the company accepted the issue with regard to the issue of being on balance sheet and the risks that that posed to us—they did not argue with it. Could I suggest she talks, perhaps, to the company to take their view on this?

One thing that Plaid Cymru have never said is whether they agreed with the decision or not. Until we know whether they agree or not, so we can assess whether they think that there are high risks to be taken with Welsh public spending, then, of course, I cannot accept a lecture from the leader of Plaid Cymru.

The leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

Llywydd, I agree absolutely 100 per cent with everything that the leader of Plaid Cymru has just said—[Interruption.] There are occasions when UKIP can be ecumenical. In the interests of the Welsh people, this is one of them, and it’s something that, perhaps, we can follow up in the Public Accounts Committee, if not in a public inquiry, if that be not granted.

But I want to ask about the First Minister’s forthcoming meeting with Michel Barnier, the EU chief negotiator on Brexit, which I understand is happening on Thursday. Is he going to use this opportunity to complement the UK Government’s negotiating strategy or to seek to undermine it? I believe that the First Minister accepts that we are going to leave the single market, and the Government has said it is going to leave the customs union. That is something that I don’t believe to be negotiable. I read that he is going to say to Michel Barnier that it is vital in the interests of Welsh jobs that we remain, if not members of the single market, at least with full frictionless access to it, but does he not accept that, when you go into a negotiation, like Michel Barnier himself, you should play hardball, not softball. If you go into a negotiation accepting the fundamental tenets of the other side’s arguments, then you’re not likely to get the deal you want, but a worse one. So, what he should explain to Michel Barnier on Thursday is the advantages of mutuality here, both to the Europeans and to the British of having the maximum possible free trade between us. Simply using it as an opportunity to grandstand against the negotiating strategy of the UK Government is likely to fail anyway, but will also do the Welsh Government no good in its dealings with the UK Government at home.

Well, I’m grateful for his display of telepathy, telling me what I’m going to say on Thursday, and I’m grateful for his advice on that. I can say that I’m not going there to negotiate; I’m going there to explain the position that we have taken as a Government in our White Paper, agreed with Plaid Cymru, and our position is very clear publicly that, whilst we are leaving the EU, the terms upon which we leave the EU are hugely important. As regards undermining the UK’s negotiating strategy, I have no idea what that is. Until we have a better idea of what the UK Government’s own view is on these things, rather than different voices—Boris Johnson again today, Michael Gove saying something different, David Davis saying something different, the Prime Minister saying something she’s repeated several times over that she’s seen on a piece of paper—. We need to know what the position of the UK Government actually is. We don’t know that.

The First Minister’s obfuscating here. He knows perfectly well that the aim of the UK Government is the same as the aim of the Welsh Government, and that is to achieve the maximum possible degree of free trade between the UK and the EU. But this is a reciprocal process. If we are not granted free trade to Europe, we will not grant the EU free trade with us, and, given that they have a trade deficit of £61 billion a year with us, it’s as much in their interests as it is in ours—as it is in trade worldwide—that we reduce barriers to the free exchange of goods and services. So, if he uses this opportunity on Thursday to reinforce that message, he may do himself a bit of good with the UK Government by going with the grain. I wholly agree with what he said earlier on about DEFRA Ministers not meeting with Welsh Ministers. I do believe that that was disrespectful and unhelpful, but it may be that the attitude of the UK Government towards the Welsh Government is informed by the approach that he and his colleagues have taken to the Brexit negotiations. They may think, ‘What is the point of meeting with them, because they’re only going to disagree with us?’

Well, the Prime Minister went into the general election on the basis of obtaining a mandate to leave the single market, leave the customs union and leave the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. On each of those points she failed. She failed. The British people did not support that view, and so now it’s incumbent on us to find a way that provides the greatest level of consensus. Yes, we’re leaving. Yes, nobody wants WTO rules to apply, but they will apply unless there is at least a transitional period, because there’s not going to be a deal by March 2019. Nobody, surely, can believe that, given—. I’ve spoken to trade negotiators and they say to me that it takes 18 months to agree on what you’re going to talk about, let alone getting a deal. These things are, by nature, very, very complicated, so it is hugely important that we look at transitional arrangements.

We have put forward our view: it’s in the White Paper. It’s very clear. Whether people agree with it or not, at least people can see that it’s there. I have no idea what the UK Government’s current position now is. That’s in no-one’s interests, and it’s hugely important that they work with the devolved administrations to get there. We don’t start from a position of trying to undermine the UK Government. We will be vocal, publicly, if we disagree with what they’re saying, but that’s not where we start. But, unfortunately, we can’t even get to that point because the UK Government at the moment has shut up shop to ourselves and Scotland. Now, that is not a sensible way forward if we’re going to get a Brexit deal that attracts support across the UK.

Well, I’ve made my point on that, but the EU comprises another 27 member states. With almost all of them, we have a trade deficit. In Germany’s case, for example, we have a trade deficit that amounts to £25 billion a year. One in 10 of every car made in Germany is exported to the United Kingdom. There is a massive interest in Germany in retaining the maximum possible free trade with Britain. There is a huge deficit in most agricultural products in the UK, and therefore there is, again, a mutuality of interest in maintaining the maximum possible freedom, for example, to export French wine subject to the lowest possible form of restriction. Therefore, I’m asking the First Minister whether he will take steps, along with his colleagues, to do a tour of the capitals of Europe to talk to the Governments of individual member states, because they won’t be involved directly in the Brexit negotiating process, in order to see what mutuality of interest we can engender there to help put pressure upon the EU Commission, which is, of course, unelected, to take the most liberal attitude towards free trade between our respective countries.

Well, first of all, it’s been made absolutely clear, and there is no dissent amongst the EU 27 about this, that the UK’s future arrangement cannot be as beneficial as membership of the EU. For obvious reasons, they take the view that you can’t have your cake and eat, to use that phrase. That’s the first thing to remember. The European Union is now stronger and more united, probably, than ever it has been. We must be very, very careful that that isn’t a unity against the UK, and diplomacy must be used to make sure that that doesn’t happen. This is not a negotiation of equals. The EU is eight times bigger than the UK. Its market is far, far larger. It’s far more attractive to foreign investors and exporters than the UK is, because it’s got far more consumers than the UK. So, we have to come at this from a realistic viewpoint.

He makes the point about the EU exporting more to the UK than the UK does to the EU in terms of numbers. Well, it would be odd if it didn’t, given the fact that it’s eight times bigger; of course it’s going to export more in terms of money and numbers. But, if you look at percentages, actually we export far more of our exports into the European market than EU products coming into the UK. I think about 8 per cent of the EU 27’s exports go into the UK. From Wales’s perspective, it’s 67 per cent the other way. So, actually, as a percentage, we stand to lose far more than Europe does. Bear in mind, of course, the EU has just signed a free trade deal with Japan. The German car manufacturers will eye that very, very greedily, because they will look at that free trade agreement with Japan as a huge opportunity for them in a market that’s twice the size of the UK, bluntly—twice the size of the UK. The German car manufacturers have already said that, from their perspective, they’d want the UK to stay in. They are not going to press their own Government for some kind of special deal for the UK, and the Germans value the EU and its unity more than anything else. That’s been very clear over the course of the past few months. BMW are not a member state of the EU, and that’s something we should remember.

We are realistic. Mutuality is important. A good deal for all is important, but, of course, we are now faced with a position with a Prime Minister who went into an election with a clear programme of what she wanted to do and lost, or failed—failed to win the election as a result of that. And that’s why it’s so important that the UK Government works with the devolved administrations to get to a position on Brexit that we can all try and support. But so far, the door’s been shut.

We’re providing £500,000 for 2017-18 to accelerate the roll-out of the Welsh Local Government Association summer holiday programme, and Penywaun Primary School in Aberdare is one of the sites benefiting from funding.

Thank you, First Minister. During the year 2015-16, there were over 8,300 children who were eligible for free school meals within Rhondda Cynon Taf. This means that more than one in 10 of all children in Wales who are eligible for free school meals reside within my county borough. New research from the Trussell Trust suggests that, and I quote,

‘lone parents and their children are notably more likely to use foodbanks, suggesting that, even compared to the low-income population, lone parents and their children are particularly vulnerable to needing food banks.’

This is especially a problem within larger families and is exacerbated greatly during the school holidays, when these families have no access to free school meals. We know that the Welsh Government has plans for an extended system of lunch and fun clubs, so I’d like to ask: how are preparations going ahead of the school holidays, which start in just a few weeks’ time, and what evaluation of the scheme in tackling holiday hunger will take place?

We are working with the WLGA in order to move the scheme forward, of course, in the coming summer holidays. Evaluation is in place. Evaluation, for example, of the previous scheme—of the pilot scheme, rather—was done, and indeed was published in February 2017, and the findings made in relation to health, social, and education outcomes, and the findings that we saw from the pilot scheme, are very encouraging.

First Minister, this is a very important issue, and I commend the education Secretary’s announcement, earlier this year, to pilot these lunch and fun clubs for primary schools at first. But I just wonder if it’s going to be a scheme you will examine for the secondary school sector, because helping those that receive free school lunches, in terms of healthy nutrition, eating, and a healthy programme of activities, educational attainment—all these things are very, very important. That group has some of the poorest educational attainment of any that attend school, some of it because the school holiday itself is not very conducive to keeping their pattern of learning going. So, this is an area, I think, that needs careful examination.

Of course, we’re—. Money restricts what we might want to do, but, with the programme rolling out over the course of this summer, of course there will be an evaluation of it, as I have said, and in future years, of course, we’ll keep under consideration how the programme might be extended, when and if the finance becomes available.

First Minister, your party has been running the Welsh Government for 18 years, and yet there are still children going hungry—200,000 children in Wales live in poverty. Don’t you think that it’s a disgrace that a member of your own party has to stand up here and ask you about children going hungry in the Cynon valley, when you’ve had so long to do something about that? Why have you failed? Why have you failed?

What does he do, as deputy leader of Cardiff, I wonder, in terms of taking this forward? Not much, I suspect, but he’s always keen, of course, to point the finger elsewhere. Look, he is right to point out that there are children going hungry. Much of that is to do with the current policies of austerity pursued by the UK Government, over which we have little or no influence, but we can see that there are more and more children who find themselves in families who are unable to cope financially, which is why we’re putting this programme in place, in order that, in Wales, we have a programme that helps young children through the summer, and makes sure that they can have food in their bellies over the summer. That is, to my mind, true socialism—true socialism—and something, indeed, we should be proud of in terms of what we’re doing in Wales.

The Minister for Skills and Science will make a statement setting out the Welsh Government’s approach to employability later this afternoon. That will set out how we’ll deliver our ‘Taking Wales Forward’ commitment to reshape employability support in order to enable individuals to gain and maintain sustainable employment.

Thank you for that. As you’ll be aware, the UK Government’s Work and Health Programme in Wales is currently out to tender, forecast to reach 16,000 disabled people, those with health conditions, or those out of work for more than two years, although there are 270,000 economically inactive people in Wales, excluding students and pensioners, according to Welsh Government figures. How will you address concerns expressed to me that the Welsh Government’s employability programmes, which we will hear more about later, are currently, we understood, not projected to begin until April 2019, having slipped a year, and, further, that there will be only one prime contractor operating left in Wales despite the Welsh Government’s statement that it wants to use multiple suppliers, and that if it doesn’t act now it will be forced to rely on external companies coming into Wales to provide those services? Finally, in this context, to address the statement to the cross-party group on industrial communities today by the Bevan Foundation that, in terms of employability, we need a one-stop shop, with ‘wiring of schemes behind the scenes in a seamless service’, whether they’re UK, Wales, or third sector.

The Minister, as I said, will make a statement later on this afternoon. He is right to say that we’re looking to commence delivery of our new programme in April of 2019. While we transition to the programme—the new programme, rather—we are looking at what we can do now to better support individuals into employment. Those transitional arrangements will focus on making amendments to the current employability programmes for the interim period up to April 2019 in order to deliver greater impact. We’re testing and trialling these approaches to support the Valleys taskforce agenda. Again, there’s a statement on that, if I remember rightly, this afternoon, and that will inform the development then of the employability delivery plan.

The Welsh Government programme for government, ‘Taking Wales Forward’, includes a commitment to reshape employability support for job-ready individuals and for those furthest away from the labour market. It is important to recognise that employability is not just about jobs and skills, it is about getting every aspect of Government policy—education, health, housing, communities—working together to support people into sustainable jobs. First Minister, what does the Welsh people’s endorsement of Welsh Labour at the Assembly, local, and general elections over the last year say about how the people view our plans for increasing employability in our nation?

Well, can I say that it shows that the people of Wales trust Welsh Labour to deliver economically, socially, and for their communities? And, of course, we saw that again last month.

Well, we are working with local partners to support business growth, to improve infrastructure, and to create a more attractive economic environment across the region.

Can I thank the First Minister for that response? The first supplementary budget provides an extra £20 million for the Cardiff city region. Will the Swansea bay city region get the same financial support from the Welsh Government when it needs it?

Yes. The Swansea city deal is structured around 11 major project proposals. There is a process set out that triggers the money going to Swansea in the same way as Cardiff. It’s not identical, but the Welsh and UK Governments have committed to jointly invest, subject to the submission and approval of full business cases in relation to the 11 identified projects and the agreement of governance arrangements for the deal, a sum of up to £241 million on specific interventions.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. It’s been over three months now since the deal was signed between yourself and the Prime Minister, yet, as far as I understand it, the governance structure is still unresolved. I think work does need to move on now on delivering those projects that are worth £1.3 billion to the local area and beyond, with a strong focus on the commercialisation and economic development of ideas, as well as the social and well-being goals, of course. I’m wondering: have you given any consideration to delivering the Welsh Government oversight of this through the economy and infrastructure department rather than through the finance and local government department?

No, there are no plans to change that. The reason why the governance arrangements haven’t been agreed yet is because the general election intervened, and that, of course, set back the timetable. But we are keen, of course, to get to a position where the governance arrangements are agreed in order to see the deal being delivered successfully.

What message would it send to those involved in the Swansea bay city deal region if we lose a huge renewable investment project in the tidal lagoon due to dither and delay by the Westminster Government? And have you had any indication at all that they’re going to make a decision on this?

What impression does it give? A poor one. Have we had any suggestion that they are close to making a decision? No. Again, there is no reason why this project should not proceed. The Secretary of State for Wales I think today said that he supported the Swansea bay tidal lagoon. Well, if he says he supports it, he must deliver it. He is the Secretary of State for Wales. He can’t say that he supports something and then say, ‘Well, of course, I can’t help to deliver it’. He has said that, and it’s hugely important then that he is able to make sure that his voice is heard around the UK Cabinet table. If the tidal lagoon doesn’t come, what assessment do we make of the voice of the Secretary of State for Wales around that table? So, yes, we know that 1,000 jobs will be created by the tidal lagoon. We know that the UK Government needs to make its mind up now in terms of the financial arrangements surrounding the lagoon. We know there’s been a review. We know that there’s no reason now why it should not proceed. If £1 billion can be given to Northern Ireland, there is no reason why the lagoon can’t proceed.

First Minister, the city region has the potential not only to transform the Swansea bay region but also to deliver wider benefits to Wales as a whole. The internet of life science and well-being could help reshape the way we deliver healthcare in future. Key to the success of the internet coast vision of the city region is the transatlantic cable. Can you provide an update, First Minister, on the progress made in bringing a fibre-optic cable from New York to Oxwich bay, which is within my region?

Well, I’ll write to the Member on that, but, of course, this is part of the ongoing development of business cases as part of the city deal. But I will write to her with more detail in terms of that specific project.

I very much welcome the news today that we’ve had that the Secretary of State, Greg Clark, will actually meet with a cross-party delegation of Chairs of prominent committees here to advocate the case, once again, for the tidal lagoon. I thank him for the courtesy he’s extended to that cross-party delegation. The First Minister will know that we had a debate here before the general election where there was universal support for the tidal lagoon and for the findings of the Hendry review here in this Chamber. It also has the backing of the higher education sector, the construction sector, the business sector, the CBI, individual businesses, the unions, local government, cross-party, right across the board. So, we’ll welcome the opportunity of taking that delegation and stressing the strong commitment. Would he agree with me that there could be no better signal of the UK Government taking an active direct interest in Wales in terms of energy, but also in terms of national infrastructure, than to give the go-ahead for the tidal lagoon in Swansea?

Absolutely. It presses all the right buttons, if you’ll pardon the use of that expression, in terms of job creation, in terms of sustainability, in terms of the environment, in terms of it being a clean source of energy, in terms of reliability and predictability. There is no reason why this project should not go ahead. We need that decision soon, so the UK Government shows that the amount of money it has already committed to Northern Ireland can be matched in part to the money it’s prepared to commit to Wales.

Welsh Government places a great value on the teaching and learning of all languages, be that English, Welsh, or modern foreign languages. As a demonstration of this, the Welsh Government has put in place Global Futures, a five-year plan to improve and promote modern foreign languages in schools.

Thank you for that response, First Minister. You may be aware of the Scottish language fair, which is free of charge to the public, and receives official support from the Scottish Government. The event is held for anyone who takes an interest in languages, and it includes seminars and taster sessions on languages and cultural performances in an incredible celebration of world languages. It’s a lively, exciting celebration that places minority languages alongside the major, or so-called major, languages of the world. Now, following this success, is the Welsh Government open to the concept of holding and supporting a language fair here in Wales?

Well, it’s true to say that we would be open to the idea. We would have to study how it works in Scotland. May I say to the Member, of course, that one of the things that will be happening in the autumn is that the language institutions of France, Spain, and Germany are going to open offices in Cardiff? That’s a very major step forward, because, of course, we need to ensure that there are a sufficient number of teachers available to teach modern languages. Therefore, that’s vital. But that idea is one that is worth considering.

The latest ‘Language Trends Wales’ report found that the teachers were extremely worried about the future of modern foreign languages. More than a third of Welsh schools now have less than 10 per cent of 14- to 15-year-olds studying a modern foreign language. The statistic is that 44 per cent of schools have fewer than five pupils studying foreign languages at AS-level, and 61 per cent have fewer than five foreign language pupils at A-level. Given that Global Futures is having a limited impact, what action will the Welsh Government take to stem the serious decline in modern foreign language learning in Wales, please?

Well, ‘Global Futures’, remember, is a five-year plan that’s aimed at improving and promoting modern foreign languages. So, the judgment of that will be after five years. There is no question that there will be a need for our students to develop foreign language skills in the future. One of the issues around Brexit that has not yet been properly understood or explored is that English is per se the second language of people in the European Union. If the UK leaves, the influence of English starts to diminish. What does that mean? It may mean nothing, but we don't know what that will mean in terms of other languages becoming more predominant then within Europe and the need for our own children and young people to learn those languages as a result. It’s why, of course, ‘Global Futures’ was published in October 2015 with a view, of course, to improving the situation markedly by 2020.

On very similar lines:

Well, I'm not very fond of saying ‘Can I refer the Member to my previous answer?’ but, of course, my answer is along the same lines, namely that we have a strategy in order to ensure that more language teachers are available and also, ultimately, that more pupils study modern languages.

It's been a pleasure to welcome pupils from three primary schools from Anglesey to the Assembly today: Ysgol Porthaethwy; Ysgol Corn Hir, Llangefni and Parc y Bont in Llanddaniel. I was discussing learning additional languages with pupils from Parc y Bont and Corn Hir, and the pupils from Corn Hir are already being given French lessons on a weekly basis. As bilingual pupils, they were very eager to see opportunities to push their linguistic boundaries. But, of course, the evidence tells us that there has been a great decline in the number of pupils learning a modern foreign language in secondary schools in Wales. The latest report from the British Council on language trends in Wales shows a decline of almost 50 per cent in terms of the pupils taking a GCSE and A-level now in a modern foreign language as compared to the situation 15 years ago.

A series of Labour education Ministers has failed to prevent that slide. Does the First Minister now agree with the latest demand of the cross-party group International Wales that the talk of an ambition of creating a bilingual Wales ‘plus 1’ should turn now to action, particularly in the context of the fact that the new curriculum is in the pipeline?

It’s extremely important that we consider this. There is an emphasis, of course, today, in this Chamber and outside this Chamber on how we attain the target of a million Welsh speakers by 2050. But, of course, as the Member has said, that doesn't mean to say that we’re going to forget other modern languages. Of course, one of the things we will ensure that is done is that we yoke our Welsh language strategy to the ‘Global Futures’ strategy in order to ensure that our children have the opportunity to learn more than two languages in future.

I thank the First Minister.

Thank you, First Minister. The next item is the business statement and announcement. I call on the leader of the house to make that statement—Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd. I have added three oral statements to today's agenda. The Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport will make a statement on the interim report of the parliamentary review on health and social care. The Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language will make oral statements on the Welsh language strategy and an update on the ministerial task force on the south Wales Valleys. And finally, I've reduced the length of questions to the Counsel General tomorrow. Business for the next three weeks is as shown on the business statement and announcement, found among meeting papers, which are available to Members electronically.

Leader of the house, two things, if I may. Firstly, I attended Monmouth School's speech day on Saturday—a school that is achieving increasingly good results. Meanwhile, just up the road, Monmouth Comprehensive School's new school building is under construction, partially funded by Welsh Government’s twenty-first century schools programme. Two excellent schools, and schools that work closely together. I wonder if we could hear from the education Secretary as to how the independent school sector in Wales and the state sector are working together and how they are being encouraged to work together. I think there’s a lot of cross pollination that can happen between the two. I know, traditionally, the independent sector is allowed to get on with doing its own thing, but I think lessons can be learned. It's certainly happening in Monmouth, and I think that there is good work that can be done across Wales.

Secondly, I’d like to thank Julie James, the Minister for superfast broadband—or not superfast in some cases, in some parts of Wales. She attended a meeting in my constituency last night that was well attended, and she reassured my constituents that a prominent notspot just outside Chepstow in the Wye valley does have hope of connection at some point in the medium-term future. I understand the Welsh Government’s consultation on broadband is coming to an end shortly, possibly later this week, and it’s very important, I’m sure you’ll agree, leader of the house, that as many people and businesses contribute to that consultation as possible, so that the Welsh Government knows where notspots are, and the type of services that will be needed—bespoke in many cases—to fill those notspots moving forward. They weren’t dealt with in the phase 1 of broadband roll-out, but it’s important now that people across Wales do contribute to that consultation so that you have the fullest picture possible as to how to move forward.

Thank you, Nick Ramsay, for two very positive questions on the business statement. Clearly, I recall visiting Monmouth Comprehensive School and being able, as education Minister at the time, to help secure the funding through twenty-first century schools. I actually would like to revisit, perhaps when I’m passing by, because I’m sure it now has splendid premises that are having an impact on learning, but also, obviously, working in the education community within Monmouth. I know that the education Secretary will have heard your point about the interactions that, of course, are fostered between the independent and our publicly funded sector in education. That’s about sharing facilities, sometimes, as well as shared learning.

On your second point, I’m sure that Julie James will very much welcome the fact that you’ve reminded Assembly Members to ensure that they get in their points from their constituents in terms of superfast broadband, in terms of those hotspots and notspots and those particular areas where we have difficulties. I think the consultation on the next stage is, as you say, the final few per cent of premises not covered by Superfast Cymru roll-out, or indeed by the telecommunications companies’ own plans. We do want to make sure that everybody without access takes part in this consultation, and that is a message I’m sure that needs to be shared again. Thank you for that, Nick Ramsay, today.

I met with residents from a housing association in Bridgend recently, Hafod Housing, and I was wondering if we could have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for housing with regards to some of the issues that they’ve raised with me with regards to how housing associations are monitored by the Welsh Government, what checks are made to ensure housing associations comply with the Welsh housing quality standard, and whether there are any sanctions for those that fail to comply. Could the Welsh Government look at which housing associations charge tenants for their services? For example, some of the tenants that I spoke to at Hafod Housing were saying that they don’t actually need some of the services that they are paying for within these particular service charges, and feel aggrieved by that very point. I understand that we are short on time because we are coming to the end of term, but if we could have a statement on the relationship between the Government and housing associations and monitoring their progress, I would be very grateful indeed.

The second statement that I wanted to request from Welsh Government was one from the education Cabinet Secretary with regards to financial education. I note from today’s news that the report from Estyn—its thematic review—has come out, and says that more needs to be done to train teachers on financial education. Again, as I identified through my private Member’s Bill, it’s very patchy from area to area, with secondary schools being less effective in teaching financial education than primary schools. So, I would welcome a statement on this to understand what the Welsh Government is doing in reaction to this particular thematic review, and how we can progress on this particular agenda through the Donaldson recommendations.

Thank you, Bethan Jenkins. I think, on your first point, there may be particular issues that you will feel it’s appropriate to write to the Cabinet Secretary on in terms of your meeting and visit to a particular housing association. Your general points are important in terms of the governance and accountability arrangements for registered social landlords and the housing association sector, particularly in terms of progress to the Welsh housing quality standard.

On your second point, yes, there are opportunities that I know the Cabinet Secretary for Education would want to take forward and address in relation to the curriculum and other responsibilities, and indeed a forthcoming LCM where we will have a committee scrutiny opportunity to consider the impact on Wales as well.

Leader of the house, I’d like a statement on discretionary housing payments, please. Figures from Shelter Cymru have clearly shown that £100,000 of this money, which was there specifically to help people whose housing benefit didn’t cover the cost of their rent, was sent back by local authorities to Westminster last year. Five councils, three of those in my constituency, did account for 75 per cent of the money returned; they were Carmarthen, Gwynedd and Ceredigion. That is in stark contrast to other councils, including Torfaen, Monmouthshire, Cardiff, Vale of Glamorgan, and Anglesey, who spent all of the allocation and, as is the case with Torfaen, it was boosted with some of their own funds. The discretionary housing payment fund is extremely important in helping those who are struggling with their rent to be able to stay in their home and to stop them from becoming either evicted or homeless. So, I’m keen therefore to understand if the Welsh Government has had any discussions whatsoever with the local authorities regarding this money being sent back, to understand why it is that some councils can not only spend the allocation but add to it, while others are, in my opinion, completely failing their tenants.

Joyce Watson is right in saying how important discretionary housing payments are. In fact, it was very clearly highlighted in the Shelter Cymru campaign, which I’m sure we all heard about last week—the Waste Not Want Not campaign—highlighting their concerns and raising awareness that people could be entitled to additional help through the discretionary housing payment scheme. Clearly, from the outset, in terms of my response, we must recognise that the discretionary housing payments are non-devolved and they are administered by local authorities on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions. However, working in collaboration with Welsh local authorities, we have introduced improved guidance, ensuring more consistent handling of applications, targeting those in greatest need, and of course, that must include understanding—. Clearly, the Welsh Local Government Association has an opportunity here to spread the good practice from those authorities that the Member has highlighted, who are not only spending to the limit, but some of them are spending more and deciding that this must be a priority, such as Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan.

Cabinet Secretary, just following on from Joyce Watson, can we ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government on the procedure followed by local authorities regarding the issuing of certificates of lawful use or development in their areas? A constituent of mine, who has been running a family business for over 30 years in the same area in Newport, applied to Newport City Council for a certificate of lawfulness of existing use for the same business and paid £380, whereas the initial payment is only £190. After meeting the official and getting scrutiny of the application, he had to pay extra on the £190 to get his application put into the council. After two months, due to a small error in the application, he was refused on the grounds that he could not get approved for lawful use because he did not provide the minimum period required—for 10 years in the same area in the same business. But, as I said earlier, he’s been running the business for 30 years, and the rates department is only next to the licensing department—and he paid £380. The answer he got last week is, if he has to get this licence again, he’s got to pay to reapply again and pay £380 again. Could we ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary on what guidance the Welsh Government has issued to local authorities in Wales to ensure common sense prevails over bureaucracy in such situations? Thank you.

Well, I think the Member clearly is listening to and representing his local constituent, a business. But I think you have explained, indeed, in terms of recounting the experience, that that business, local constituent has had, why he or she has found themselves in that situation. This is a matter for the local authority, and it is a matter, not just in terms of regulation and statutory underpinning, it is a matter of discretion on many occasions, but it is also in terms of compliance. And businesses do need to comply.

A fortnight ago, a motorcyclist was killed on what is unfortunately called the ‘“Evo” triangle’, which is a series or network of roads in the Pentrefoelas-Cerrigydrudion area, which has been promoted by the ‘Evo’ car magazine as a good place to test your driving skills and to push your car to the limit. Now, all of this, over a period of time, has created a culture where you can now buy car stickers and t-shirts that promote this as some sort of destination. It’s described as a life-size Scalextric track. It’s called ‘Disney World for driving enthusiasts’. But the result, of course, is that people are killed on these roads. Just Sunday, there were two fatal accidents on the A5, a stone’s throw from that area.

So, could I ask for a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for the economy explaining what the Government is going to do to tackle this issue, because we need a multi-agency approach to tackle this, or otherwise I do fear that we won’t see this coming to an end? But, I would also ask the Government to consider whether ‘Evo’ magazine has crossed a line here in the way that they have been promoting the ‘“Evo” triangle’. And is there scope to refer that publication to IPSO, the Independent Press Standards Organisation, because public roads aren’t racetracks, and we must put a stop to this, once and for all?

Rwyf hefyd yn ymwybodol bod yr Ysgrifennydd cymunedau wedi gwneud cyfres o ddatganiadau ynghylch diogelwch rhag tân yn ddiweddar. Ond yn dilyn y tân tŵr ofnadwy yr ydym i gyd, wrth gwrs, yn gwybod amdano yn ddiweddar, a oes modd inni hefyd gael datganiad gan Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn egluro beth mae'r Llywodraeth yn bwriadu ei wneud i sicrhau nad yw’r gwasanaeth tân yn y gogledd yn wynebu toriadau pellach ar ôl yr hyn sydd wedi bod yn ddegawd o dorri yn ôl ar wasanaethau?  Gwyddom y collwyd 20 y cant o’r diffoddwyr tân yng Nghymru dros y 10 mlynedd diwethaf, a bod cynigion bellach hefyd i gael gwared ar oddeutu 24 o'n diffoddwyr tân yn y gogledd—dyna un o bob chwech o'r holl ddiffoddwyr tân sydd gennym—a hefyd i gael gwared ar un o'r ddwy injan dân sy'n gwasanaethu ardal Wrecsam. Cyni sy'n gyrru’r agenda hon, tra mai achub bywydau ddylai fod yn flaenoriaeth inni, wrth gwrs. Felly, onid ydych yn cytuno bod torri ar wasanaethau rheng flaen fel hyn yn gwbl annerbyniol, ac mae angen datganiad yn esbonio yn union beth y mae'r Llywodraeth yn mynd i’w wneud am y peth?

I thank Llyr Gruffydd for those two questions. In terms of the first question, which, as you say, is not just a matter of road safety, which of course, the Cabinet Secretary regards as a high priority, but about a particular area in north Wales, where there has been this attraction, and, clearly, risk-taking, encouraged, it appears, and fatalities as a result of it, and you mentioned the latest with the motorcyclist. So, that’s something that the Cabinet Secretary, I think, will certainly look at, but it may be helpful if you could also put that in writing to Ken Skates, just to highlight the particular situation and the occurrences that you’ve described.

On your second point, clearly the Cabinet Secretary for communities is working very closely with the Welsh fire safety advisory group that‘s been established, and it is very important, in terms of those responsibilities that fire and rescue authorities have in terms of their legal duties to promote fire safety, and recognising their huge responsibilities. And, again, we can only say that recognising not only their responsibilities, but their courage and their skills, is vitally important. But, of course, this is back to the point where we would say to the UK Government, ‘Well, it is very clear that the people, the public, and certainly the public of Wales, and this Government, want for them to step up to the mark, in terms of anti-austerity, and giving us the resources in order to support our public services.’

There are two issues I wanted to raise. First of all, I had been intending to ask the Welsh Government what more could be done to ensure that there was a public inquiry into the contaminated blood scandal, following the letter from all the party opposition leaders in Westminster, and, of course, support from all parties here in this Assembly. But it is great news that the Prime Minister has finally announced, during the last few hours, that there will be a public inquiry. And I think it’s a tribute to all those patients and families who have campaigned for decades to get this public inquiry, because, in Wales, 70 people died, and many more families have had their lives absolutely ruined, and they deserve answers. So, it’s very welcome there will be this public inquiry.

But, of course, there are lots of questions now about the public inquiry—what form it will take, who will head it, how will people in Wales be involved. So, can I call for a statement, as soon as possible, from the Government, about how they see the setting up of this public inquiry, and how Wales will take part in it? It is absolutely essential that Welsh victims have representations in the process. So, I ask for a statement, as soon as we possibly can, to look at what is a victory for all those people who’ve campaigned for so long. But we want to make sure now that this public inquiry does answer all those questions.

Now, the second point I wanted to raise, which is linked, because it is about hepatitis C, of course, which was also, in some cases, contracted through contaminated blood—we had a very successful debate here on hepatitis C on 14 June, and everybody agreed that the big challenge is to get more people tested, to come forward. And there’s an event tonight to launch the ‘I’m worth…’ campaign, to highlight this issue. But how would we be able to get regular updates from the Government about whether the campaigns that the Government, and the NHS and others are doing to get more people to come forward—how are we able to keep track of how that is actually working? And I’d like to ask the leader of the house whether there are some ways that the Assembly can be kept updated on how what has been so successful—you know, the Welsh Government paying for these drugs, 95 per cent success rate in curing people, absolutely tremendous developments, and everybody we know of being treated, although at least 50 per cent of people who have got hep C don’t know they’ve got it.

Thank you, Julie Morgan, for those questions. And it was Julie Morgan who led the debate on this issue—in terms of your first question—here in the Senedd. And there was unanimous support from AMs and the Cabinet Secretary for health in terms of pressing for a full public inquiry. And we do, of course, now welcome the Prime Minister’s confirmation that an inquiry will be held into the contaminated blood scandal.

And I think it is important, as Julie Morgan has said, that families particularly of those who lost their loved ones, as a result of the contaminated blood, are consulted about the form that that inquiry will take. I understand that it has been expressed—that desire to consult families has already been expressed. It’s right that we now—. I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport, who added his support for the call for the UK inquiry, will make a statement to that effect. I think we have to say that we are pleased, as Welsh Government, that, at last, the UK Government is going to recognise the strength of feeling of those affected, and their families, but clarify what had happened to them, and fully respect and engage with them, in terms of the form that the inquiry will take. And I would also like to pay tribute to the role that Julie Morgan has played in taking this forward.

Also, in terms of your second question, we need to make sure that we do continue not just the cross-party work, which you lead, Julie, but also, as a Government, that we’re responding in terms of taking forward awareness, in terms of hepatitis C, enabling people to come forward. The campaign launch is very important. And I know that the Cabinet Secretary will want to update on future engagement of the Welsh Government in terms of that opportunity.

Could I call for a single statement on diagnosis of autism spectrum conditions? Only today, I received a letter from Betsi Cadwaladr University Local Health Board regarding a constituent’s daughter who had not received the diagnosis of autism through her child and adolescent mental health service, but did receive a diagnosis from an independent, experienced doctor—a clinician, who is actually so esteemed in the profession that she contributes to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, is part of the NICE insight community and part of the World Health Organization's internet-based study group in relation to the diagnostic criteria, which is supposed to apply in this country. And worryingly—of course, that was a diagnosis that she was on the spectrum, but, worryingly, the letter from the health board said that the two assessments do not suggest significant differences, only a difference in label, and it’s not an issue because Flintshire CAMHS do not work exclusively upon a diagnostic label and most of the interventions on offer do not require a specific diagnosis. However, as no doubt you’re aware, yesterday, across Wales, there was widespread media coverage that failure to correctly diagnose autistic children could lead them to self-harm; of a mother saying that if her daughter had had an earlier Asperger's syndrome diagnosis it would have saved her much anguish; and of the Swansea University medical school academic who warned that parents fear children are suffering mental health problems because autism spectrum conditions are not being recognised. She said:

‘What is consistent across the research is you are more at a risk, if you have autism, of suicidal thoughts or engaging with self harming behaviours. It's particularly prominent in females and particularly prominent in females who have remained undiagnosed until adulthood.’

Given that the new Welsh Government autism service that’s being rolled out through the WLGA is going to take some time to reach north Wales and remains non-statutory, and that Paul Davies’s long-awaited and hoped for Bill is going to take some time to pass through the Assembly—hopefully with universal support—we need to know what guidance and what interaction the Welsh Government will have with our health boards and CAMHS services to ensure that this sort of situation doesn't keep occurring.

Well, Mark Isherwood, you know, as a Welsh Government, we’re committed to delivering the improvements that people with autism and their parents and carers tell us they want to see. Indeed, the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 is beginning to transform the way that people receive care and support. We’re also delivering on the priorities of our new autistic spectrum disorder strategic plan, investing £13 million in a new national integrated autism service. Now, this is crucially important—it's about that single, Wales-wide assessment pathway. Of course, you're reflecting concerns about how that can be taken forward and be meaningful for children—because it's a new, single, Wales-wide assessment pathway it will make the system much clearer for families. It does include a 26-week waiting time target for children referred for possible ASD or ADHD. And also, referrals to CAMHS can be made across different areas. So, it is important that parents who have concerns about their children contact their GPs, but the wider strategic arrangements and investment is very clear.

Today the Westminster Government published the Taylor review into workers in the gig economy and I think it's fair to say that the report has been seen as pretty much a damp squib. There's nothing concrete on the eradication of zero-hours contracts. There is a right to request guaranteed hours from an employer, but, of course, in an age where workers have to fork out £1,200 to get to a tribunal, it's very difficult to see how such so-called rights are going to be enforced. But a particular concern is the suggestion that a new category of worker should be introduced in UK employment law—a dependent contractor, which looks like it's the result of special pleading from those companies who don't like paying taxes, and also not that keen on paying the minimum wage either. I wonder whether the dependent contractor category might become something that increases over the years, especially as we leave the European Union and workers’ rights are replaced by UK frameworks. Could we have a statement from the Welsh Government as a matter of urgency, especially given that this country is now increasingly becoming the exploited workers capital of the UK?

It is important that this report was raised. It is an independent report, as Steffan Lewis has said. I think, in Wales, we’ve talked about the importance of the way in which we’re tackling these issues. We have a consultation at present and, indeed, Rebecca Evans is taking forward the consultation about zero-hours contracts in terms of the social care sector. I hope Assembly Members will be responding to that consultation. But I think also, importantly, in terms of tackling the gig economy is our Government’s code of practice on ethical procurement, and looking at the ways in which we in Wales in terms of fairer work—. And, of course, the work that we’ve been taking forward as a Welsh Labour Government as far as that’s concerned—our workforce partnership, particularly with trade unions—Is crucial for us to take forward what we are proposing to do in Wales to tackle the inequities, and also the abuse of this economy, which we’re, of course, very aware of.

Can I ask for two statements? I make no apology for asking for one on the tidal lagoon. I know the tidal lagoon has been mentioned twice this afternoon in questions to the First Minister, but I think it is of such great importance to those of us who live in the Swansea bay city region that I think we would like to have a statement on it, covering two points: one is the marine licence that the Welsh Government is responsible for; and, secondly, what discussions the Welsh Government has had with the Westminster Government about giving it the go-ahead. It’s of such great importance, and I think of how Aarhus in Denmark has created a whole industry in terms of wind turbines, because it was the first to do it. We’ve got an opportunity in south-west Wales to be the first to do tidal lagoons and get the whole benefit of that.

The second statement I would like to ask for really follows on from what Steffan Lewis was asking. We have had a large-scale casualisation of the workforce over recent years. We’ve gone from the days of people queuing outside docks to being called to now getting a text message, but the principle is exactly the same. This casualisation of labour is not good for the workforce, it’s not good for the country and it’s not good for the taxation system. So, I think I would add my voice to that of Steffan Lewis in asking for a statement on what we can do. And I know what the Welsh Government can do is limited because of what is devolved and what isn’t, but we need to try and reduce the number of people who are plainly being exploited within this system.

I’m glad that Mike Hedges has taken the opportunity to ask another question on Swansea tidal lagoon. As the First Minister has said, we continue to be supportive of the benefits of the proposed Swansea bay tidal lagoon, and we are waiting for the UK Government’s response to the Hendry report—waiting with exasperation, I would say, in terms of the slowness. It is interesting that the Prime Minister is asking for ideas and engagement with other parties. Well, at least she’s got something on her doorstep that she could say ‘yes’ to straight away in terms of engaging. Of course, there is cross-party support from this Assembly for the tidal lagoon. The Welsh Government’s been meeting with Tidal Lagoon Power on the proposed Swansea project for a number of years across a range of areas to ensure Welsh businesses and the local economy gain maximum benefit. In fact, in his review, Hendry recognised the integrated approach we’ve taken on skills and supply chain development in support of this important sector. And, indeed, we’re recognising the role that the private sector and investors have played in taking this forward, to the point where we now await the response from the UK Government. I think Huw Irranca-Davies earlier on reported on the fact that there’s going to be a cross-party meeting, I think, with Greg Clark as chair. So, I think that is very welcome. We would want to hear from that, but, again, we will be pressing the UK Government for a speedy response.

I can only say, ‘Yes, Mike Hedges is absolutely right’. I think the Welsh Labour Government is doing a great deal to tackle the casualisation of labour and the inequities of zero-hours contacts, particularly in relation to social care. So, I will seek a statement to update on all aspects of that work.

We are over time on this statement, but I will call a few additional speakers if they promise to be succinct in their questions, and we’ll have succinct answers as well. Darren Millar.

Can I second the calls from Llyr Huws Gruffydd for a statement from the Minister with responsibility for transport on the Evo triangle in my constituency? I’m very concerned that safety is deteriorating as a result of the glamorisation of this route to irresponsible motorists. One of the other features, which Llyr was unable to mention in his contribution to request a statement, was the fact that the internet is being used to glamorise this significantly. There are YouTube videos that are encouraging people to go and visit and petrol heads to gather in order to speed around this route and, indeed, there are gaming companies, as well, which are also doing versions of this within their games in order to encourage people to visit. We have had some record improvements in road safety in Wales in recent years. I certainly don’t want things to go in the opposite direction because we failed to deal with this particular problem in my own constituency. I do wonder whether there can be some move towards actually getting not just visiting enforcement, but some speed cameras along this route because that would absolutely stop this problem once and for all.

Thank you. Darren Millar strengthened the case for a focus on the Evo triangle and the way that it’s been promoted. In fact, Assembly Members can also—and they have today—usefully highlight the dangers, and you can also raise those points yourselves with magazines promoting it and, indeed, in terms of social media. But, GoSafe—the Cabinet Secretary was out there in the spring with GoSafe, and it’s very clearly high on his agenda.

Leader of the chamber, this is just a quick statement on something that came up today in the Petitions Committee. A very courageous Beth Baldwin gave a really moving testimony about diabetes 1 and her family’s campaign to improve early detection through policy. Fourteen hundred children in Wales have the condition, and parents need to look out for the four Ts: thirst, tiredness, going to the toilet often, and getting thinner or losing weight. The Baldwin family lost their son, Peter, through the condition, and his mother was very, very brave today.

The Petitions Committee wrote to the Cabinet Secretary for health back in February asking for a meeting with the family—they were here today. The Cabinet Secretary for health replied that he was unable—unable—to meet the family. So, that’s from February until today that he’s been unable to meet this family with something so important to discuss. Could you provide a statement on the availability of Vaughan Gething to possibly, maybe, fit the family into his busy schedule?

I thank Neil McEvoy for drawing attention to what clearly is a very important petition that’s come before the Petitions Committee about diabetes 1. Indeed, of course, the Welsh Government—and I recall when I was health Minister, being very engaged in particular how children are affected, and, indeed, early intervention and diagnosis and all the important points that have been made by this family who gave evidence. Clearly, the Cabinet Secretary will be aware now of that particular need and of that family’s request.

I’d like to raise with the leader of the house, the possibility of having a statement. Although not in my constituency, I’ve been approached by workers who are deeply distressed by the news about Coilcolor today and the potential that 50 jobs could be lost by the end of the week in Newport. There does seem to be a dispute between the Welsh Government and this particular company. I don’t particularly want to prejudice any discussions and negotiations that are ongoing, but the crux of the matter seems to be a claim against the Welsh Government that now is putting a question mark over the long-term viability of the business and, in particular, the 50 jobs that are within this business. It does seem to have got a strong order book from what I can deduce from talking to some of the employees this morning. To bring clarity to the picture that has emerged over the last couple of hours, could I encourage the Cabinet Secretary sitting next to you to make a statement and put as much information as possible in the public domain, as I say, without prejudicing any claims that might be before the Government, so that employees and, indeed, the owner of this company can have clarity as to exactly where any dispute resolution might be and the financial implications for this company, because the last thing I think any of us want to wake up to on Saturday morning—i.e. the end of this week—is 50 people out of work in Newport because of a dispute that seems to have been going on for some months.

I thank Andrew R.T. Davies for that question. I think it is most appropriate if the Cabinet Secretary writes to all Members, given the issues that you raise in terms of not pre-judging the outcome. I think the Cabinet Secretary will ensure that he writes to fully update Members on the situation as soon as possible—I’m sure over the next 24 hours.

And finally, Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Llywydd. May I ask for two statements from the Government before the end of term, because there’s no time for discussions or debates now? First of all, what assessment has the Government made of the importance of Euratom in terms of works in Wales? In particular, of course, we have two nuclear sites, but there’s also nuclear waste being stored in sites in Wales, and, of course, the use of nuclear material within the health service is also related to the regulations discussed and agreed at a European level through the Euratom mechanisms. The letter to withdraw from the European Union, that famous letter on article 50, mentioned withdrawal from Euratom too, although that agreement goes back much further than the agreement to take us into the European Union. I think it is now important that the Welsh Government should set out its position clearly in terms of the assessment that they have made in relation to the relationship with Euratom and our work in Wales and how we can continue in that process as we exit the European Union.

And the second statement I’d like to hear, particularly with the Royal Welsh Show about to take place—well with lots of agricultural shows taking place, but the Sioe Fawr specifically in the next fortnight or so—is a statement from the Government as to when we are likely to see the rural development plan opening for organic farming and transition to organic farming. We, now, in Wales are the only country within the UK who do not have an organic conversion programme. The increase in organic farming and purchasing of organic produce is 7 per cent per year. Every pound spent produces £21 in trade in organics, and it seems very strange to me that we still need to spend that European funding before we exit the European Union while the Government has been sitting on its hands as far as opening an organic conversion scheme is concerned. I don’t want that to continue over the summer without some sort of answer and particular guidance from the Cabinet Secretary as to when this programme will be open here in Wales.

Thank you, Simon Thomas. Certainly, we will look at the most appropriate response on the assessment of our relationship with Euratom in terms of impact on Wales. As you say—and I think it’s been in the news that radiologists are concerned—it’s medical as well as environmental, and we will certainly look to the most appropriate statement to be made and at what point on this assessment.

On your second point, yes, indeed, and, with the Royal Welsh forthcoming, I know the Cabinet Secretary will be expecting questions on this and she will want to know—and we will make sure that she knows—that the question’s been put today about any transition to organic conversion schemes in Wales through the RDP.

Thank you, leader of the house.

The next item is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on student support in 2018-19 and the publication of the summary of results from the consultation on implementing the Welsh Government’s response to the Diamond report, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary to make her statement—Kirsty Williams.

It is indeed a long title, Presiding Officer, and it’s going to be quite a long statement as well. Presiding Officer, I’m very pleased that, today, we can confirm that we in Wales are able to convert the principles of equity and excellence into radical and rational reforms of student support and higher education funding.

Last November, I published the Government’s response to the final Diamond report and launched a consultation on the implementation of our approach. I am now able to publish a summary report of those consultation responses and confirm the Welsh Government’s position; confirm the package of support that is available for full-time undergraduate, part-time undergraduate and postgraduate students from the start of the 2018-19 academic year; confirm the maximum tuition fee levels that Welsh institutions can charge for full-time undergraduate courses; and highlight the efforts of Welsh universities as our sector confirms it will be the first in the UK to be a living wage sector.

The responses to the consultation were positive about our intention to deliver, with only minor modification, the full Diamond package. I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who took the time to respond to the consultation, and to our stakeholders who have been keen to contribute to the development of policies that I believe will be a benchmark for other nations and systems. However, it is clear that there is a job of work to do in communicating the new system. In particular we must reassure parents that the fundamental shift to supporting students with day-to-day costs, rather than post-graduation fee repayment, addresses the very concerns that they often raise. We will need to work closely with the universities, student finance authorities and key advocates on this issue. I will launch a communication campaign to promote the new system of support in the autumn and I would also hope that Members here will take up that challenge. A copy of the summary report of the consultation responses, which also includes confirmation of our final proposals, has been placed in the National Assembly Library.

Having considered the responses to the consultation, and having discussed our proposals with the Student Loans Company and Her Majesty’s Treasury, I am pleased to confirm that, subject to regulations being made, we will be introducing the following packages of support for students who start the first year of their course in the 2018-19 academic year. For full-time and part-time undergraduate students, a new fairer and sustainable system of support will be introduced. Additional support will be available to ensure that students have enough money to meet their day-to-day living costs. Every student will be entitled to support equivalent to the national living wage whilst they study. This will mean that eligible full-time students will receive maintenance support of £11,250 if they study in London and £9,100 per year in the rest of the UK.

Grant support will be targeted at those most in need, although every student will receive a minimum grant of £1,000 regardless of household income. Students from the lowest household income will receive the highest grant: up to £10,250 in London and £8,100 in the rest of the UK. Initial estimates suggest that one third of full-time students will be eligible for this full grant. The average household income for a student in the current system is around £25,000. Under the new system such a student will receive around £7,000 a year in non-repayable grant. For the first time, part-time undergraduate students will receive parity of support for maintenance costs on a pro rata basis to their full-time counterparts.

I would like to thank the Student Loans Company for their hard work, diligence and imagination in getting us to the point where we have been able to deliver this significant programme of reform. I am confident that we have established a strong relationship that delivers for Wales and our citizens.

As I announced previously, we have also accepted the Diamond review's recommendations on support for postgraduate students. This new system of support, which will bring parity of support for postgraduate students, will be introduced in the 2019-20 academic year. However, in recognition that the postgraduate changes will be introduced later than for undergraduate students, I will provide enhanced support in 2018-19, subject to the necessary regulations being made. This will be made up of an enhanced loan of £13,000, which will be available to students wherever they choose to study in the UK. In addition, the Welsh Government will provide funding to Welsh institutions, through HEFCW, to provide additional support for postgraduate students who choose to study in Wales, and it is expected that this will be equivalent to around £4,000 per student.

NUS Wales are to be congratulated for making the case for part-time and postgraduate students, and not just the traditional 18-year-old. It is clear to me that progression into postgraduate study is the contemporary challenge of our seriousness in widening access. It is unfortunate that there has been a 14 per cent drop in Welsh postgraduate taught student numbers over the last decade. As we head with such speed into a future shaped by innovation and high-tech industry, it is our duty to enhance part-time and postgraduate opportunities.

Therefore, and in line with the announcement contained in the UK Government’s budget, we also intend to introduce a postgraduate doctoral loans scheme from 2018-19. Eligible students who are ordinarily resident in Wales will be able to borrow up to £25,000 as a non-means-tested loan. But, just as I’m pragmatic enough to seek advantages of English initiatives when it makes sense to do so, I also know that developments across the border bring other consequences for our operating environment. Wales needs a stable, sustainable and progressive higher education funding settlement that supports students when they need it most, and enables our universities to compete domestically and internationally.

I can therefore confirm that because of the reduction in real terms value of tuition fees, the outlook for Welsh Government budgets, and the financial pressures and relative competitiveness of our universities, we will return to the pre-2012 policy of an inflation-linked maximum tuition fee level for the next three academic years. This, of course, will continue to be paid for via a publicly supported loan system with income-contingent repayments made only after graduation.

Members will know that I have previously set a challenge to universities on the living wage and their sense of civic responsibility. So, having now confirmed that students will receive support equivalent to the national living wage, I am pleased to recognise Universities Wales’s announcement that all Welsh universities will become living wage employers, and they have also confirmed that they will sign up to the Government’s code of practice on ethical procurement and employment. This is a clear demonstration that our education system is based on values of equity, excellence and civic responsibility, and I expect to see further developments in the sector’s commitment to a civic mission over the coming weeks and months.

Presiding Officer, our new progressive and fair system represents a fundamental shift in the way we support students and our institutions. By investing in the success of full-time, part-time and postgraduate students, Wales can and will be the only country in Europe to have taken this huge step forward. Together we can ensure we capture and maximise the potential of all our citizens, and of all corners of our nation.

Can I say thank you to the Cabinet Secretary for giving advance notice of her statement, and for publishing the summary of the responses, as well, to the consultation on the Welsh Government’s position? It’s very timely that this should be made, particularly before the summer recess, because, of course, young people will be wanting to prepare for future academic years, and thinking very much about their future, and I’m grateful that there’s been some clarity provided today over the Welsh Government’s position on a number of issues, particularly around the start of the new regime in 2018. I think it’s fair to say that the Student Loans Company have been working very hard with the Welsh Government to achieve the ambition of being able to introduce the new system of support by that particular date.

Can I welcome, also, the continued recognition that there needs to be absolute parity of support for part-time students with full-time students as well? That is something that, of course, there hasn’t been previously, and I know that many people, including the NUS and other organisations, including HE providers like the Open University, have been calling for that clarity and parity. So, I’m very pleased to see that also.

I also want to welcome very much the support that is going to be in place for postgraduate students. We know that the Welsh Government was very late clarifying its arrangements for this coming academic year in September. It was only February of this year, I think, when you clarified those arrangements, which was completely unacceptable, frankly, for people wanting to make plans about postgraduate study, so it is pleasing to know that there’s been a little bit more clarity, certainly about the 2018-19 situation, and that people can begin to make their plans in respect of that. But I do wonder why it is that the new system of support for postgraduate students is going to be implemented later than that for other students. Why is it 12 months on? You don’t explain that within your statement, and I think it is important to get on the record precisely why that is the case.

I think it should come as no surprise to us that we’ve seen a 14 per cent fall in the number of postgraduates taught in Wales. That is because there has not been any support for them up until this academic year. And, of course, we’ve had that lack of clarity, as I’ve just indicated to you. I know that that’s not all on your watch, Cabinet Secretary, but it is a fact, and therefore it doesn’t surprise me that we’re losing postgraduates—or we have been in recent years. I’m hoping that your announcement today will enable that situation to turn around, although I do believe that it may take some time.

I’m also very much pleased that you’re not just rejecting things that are taking place over the border, but when sensible things happen you are also seeking to emulate them. So, I was very pleased to see that too.

I think it is important to get some stability into the tuition fees situation. I note that you have said that you want to go back to this pre-2012 policy of linking the fees to inflation, but I just wonder, Cabinet Secretary, whether you’ve thought about the potential implications of that, should there be a significant change in fees elsewhere in the UK, either up or down—and I suspect the previous is more likely. But if that is going to be your position for three years, are you still going to be committed to that if there is a significant shift elsewhere, which may, of course, end up disadvantaging Welsh universities?

I noted in the consultation comments that there was a suggestion that the new regime could look at pegging the system of maintenance support, not to the national living wage but potentially to the Living Wage Foundation figure in terms of support. I wonder whether you could clarify whether that was something that you have considered as part of your position; and if you have, why are you not seeking to move towards that over a period of time?

In addition, Cabinet Secretary, I think there are some things that you haven’t referred to, which I think it’s important to get some clarity on. There were many respondents to the consultation that referred to the squeezed middle—these individuals who may be at the margins in terms of the level of income that they have, just over the income threshold perhaps, or those individuals who may have more than one child going through the university system at the same time, and the difficulties and challenges that that might pose for them in terms of supporting their dependants. I wonder if you could say anything as to what your consideration of people in that position might have been, and whether there may be an opportunity to look again at the system of support, so that it recognises the difficulties that those families might be in.

In addition to that, of course, many people have referred to those individuals who might be estranged from their parents and families, and therefore it would be inappropriate to take into account their familial income in order to determine what level of support those individuals might get. You haven’t referred to that at all in your statement today. You haven’t clarified your position on how you intend to ensure that individuals who are estranged from their families might be able to access higher education through this new regime, and it would be helpful if you could give us some clarity on that.

In addition, there was a call from the Children, Young People and Education Committee for you to consider what support you might be able to give to people from underachieving ethnic minorities with low representation and proportion of individuals going to university, and the Gypsy/Traveller community. I wonder whether you might be able to comment on whether there might be specific ring-fenced support that you might be able to make available as a Government to individuals in those situations.

Another group that is disadvantaged under the current system, of course, are the over 60s, who face discrimination in terms of their ability to access support. If they are going to be completing their courses after their sixtieth birthday, there’s no support available for them at all, and I wonder whether you can say whether you are going to do anything to address that discrimination against older people. And, finally, if I may, is a question about bursaries. Again, there were many, many comments in the consultation responses about the availability of bursaries, particularly nursing bursaries, but, of course, I know that you’ve been working with Cabinet colleagues looking at other bursaries that you might be able to extend. I wonder whether you can give any clarity on the longevity of nursing bursaries and what other bursaries you might be considering introducing into the new regime. Thank you.

That is a long list of questions, Presiding Officer, so I’ll try to get through them as quickly as I can. I think the parity between modes of study is what makes this package of support so important and unique, and I believe it will be the subject of other nations looking to see what Wales has done. Indeed, Scotland are already committed to a review of their own system and are looking very closely at what is being done here in Wales. With regard to why the postgraduate programme comes in a year later, that is because, despite the very hard and very genuine work that’s been undertaken in conjunction with Welsh Government and the Student Loans Company, they have not been able to make all the necessary changes in time. So, postgraduate support comes online into the formal system a year later. But you will see from my statement that I was not prepared to leave those postgraduate students dangling. There will be loans available from this new academic year, 2017, addressing the issue that there’s been no support previously and that that has put Welsh students at a disadvantage. I’ve used the earliest opportunity that I could, taking on this job, to address that. But, for postgraduate students in 2018-19, there will be money directed through HEFCW to the Welsh universities to support postgraduate study. Importantly, that’ll be for students who choose to study at a Welsh institution, and I will be looking very closely at the impact that that policy has on what else we might like to do to incentivise students studying at Welsh institutions.

That comes back to the point that you rightly closed on with regard to bursaries. You will be aware that I and the Cabinet Secretary for health have worked very hard to create a bursary system for nurses that rewards those people who study in Wales but also commit to working in the public sector in Wales. We’ll be looking to build on that example. For instance, I’m very keen to look at the issue of ALN pathways into teaching, if there is a commitment to train in Wales and then to stay and work in Wales. We’ll be using this interim year of postgraduate support to look at the evidence and to build on what we might do in that regard.

It is true, Darren, to say that we cannot operate in isolation from decisions that are taken across the border, because of the student flow back and fore. I wish it was different, but I have to deal with the realities that I am in. If there are significant changes to systems of student support and higher education finance across the border, then, obviously, I will take that into consideration when making decisions about situations here. But it would be foolhardy to think that we are not operating in the HE sector across the England and Wales border, and, in fact, competing internationally, because of the nature of the sector.

The living wage—the type of living wage that we are supporting students with is in line with the Diamond recommendations. That’s where we are moving forward in that regard. Independent students—if they are genuinely independent from their families, they will be judged on their own income. They will just need to demonstrate that they are genuinely independent of that. There will be no specific support for aspects of the BME community or Gypsy/Travellers at this stage. Let’s be absolutely clear: this is a system that is universal, based on household incomes. As I said in my statement, we anticipate that one-third of Welsh students, regardless of where they come from in Wales, will be entitled to the full grant payment. Indeed, because of the relatively low wages in Wales, the average Welsh student will be in receipt of a grant of £7,000 per year to assist with their living costs, which they will not have to repay. With regard to the over-60s, the policy’s in line with that pursued in England.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement. I don’t think it takes us in an unexpected direction. Much of it confirms what you’ve outlined in the past, but it is good to have that confirmation, particularly as universities and students, of course, have been seeking that clarity in order to make decisions in the ensuing months.

Now, the most significant announcement here is the fact that the maximum for tuition fees is going to go up in line with inflation, and you make that announcement even though it’s something that you’ve rejected in the past, and I’d like to ask you to explain what’s changed, because, only a few months ago, you were saying that that was the policy in the Chamber, and I would like to know what has changed your mind. Because the result of this is that student debt will increase from the appallingly high levels that we’re already seeing, and we know, of course, that the interest paid on these loans is higher than what some of us pay on mortgages at the moment.

This decision is made at a time when the discussion on the whole future of these tuition fees is a very live topic, with Lord Adonis, of all people, saying that tuition fees are ‘politically dead ’, to use his own words—well, clearly not in Wales. Although we had a Labour Party manifesto some weeks ago saying that they would scrap fees, we now have a Labour Government in Wales who are consenting to see an increase in the level of fees year on year. To think that you’re happy to place that additional burden on students is disappointing to say the least. I note and share the disappointment of NUS Wales in that regard, particularly bearing in mind that the IFS have told us that debts are now so high that three quarters of graduates will never fully repay the debt. So, there are broader questions that need to be taken into account here.

So, can I ask you what consideration you gave to alternative options to placing this additional burden on students themselves? Wasn’t there some possibility that it would have been possible to use HEFCW to meet the cost of the more expensive courses instead of placing the burden on the students themselves? And can we have some clarity on when and who will have to pay these additional fees? Is it an increase that will commence as students commence their courses from 2018 onwards, or will this be payable by students who are already in the system and already engaged in their studies? So, some clarity there would be of assistance.

I welcome the commitment to a living wage in our universities, but there is some irony here, because this is one of the sectors with the highest pay gap, and, whilst it is right that we look at the level of those at the bottom of the scale, I also think that we should consider the other end of the scale, too, and that we need to do more to close that gap. I would like to hear your view on that.

You’ve previously mentioned some sort of pilot in terms of financial support to students to ensure that it’s portable and transferable within the UK, but also outwith, in the European Union and beyond. I’d be thankful for an update on that.

There is no reference to the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol here. I know that there are recommendations contained within Diamond, and I know that there is work happening on that front, but I would like some clarity on when we will hear more about any possible changes in terms of the financial sustainability of ColegauCymru—sorry, ‘Coleg Cymraeg’, I should have said, not ColegauCymru.

And, of course, no statement on Diamond would be complete without me asking about the recommendation to bring plans forward to encourage graduates to remain or to return to Wales, having graduated, to ensure that we get the best value for the Welsh economy from the taxpayers’ investment. Can you give us an update on what further consideration you’ve given to this and when we will have more detail in response to the recommendation contained within Diamond on this issue?

Thank you very much, Llyr, for those questions. With regard to setting fee levels, what I've always said consistently in this Chamber is that I will take a number of factors into consideration when addressing that point. Those factors have included the state of the Welsh Government's own finances, the impact on students, and, indeed, the state of the finances of the sector as a whole. Only earlier today, in First Minister’s questions, we had one of your colleagues talk about the challenges in Bangor, and potential job losses in Bangor. Your colleague sitting next to you, Simon Thomas, is often concerned—rightly so—about job losses in the higher education sector in his own area, and I’ve had to take a number of factors, including decisions taken across the border in England, with regard to fee levels. But what is important, I think, to remember is that fee loans are only payable after graduation, and only once graduates are earning £21,000, and they are indeed written off after 30 years. So, those people who benefit the most economically from going on to a higher education course pay the most back. Welsh students are also unique in the sense that they are eligible for up to £1,500 to be written off the balance of their loans once they start a repayment programme. That is unique to Wales, and it’s my intention to continue to do that.

But let’s be absolutely clear about the work of the NUS with regard to ‘The Pound in Your Pocket’, and the concerns that students have expressed, families have expressed, that it is the day-to-day living costs that are the largest barrier for people going on to study at higher education level and, crucially, staying in higher education. If you look at the situation across the border in England, where there are no grants available—regardless of what your background is, there is no financial help for the day-to-day living costs—it is students from a poorer background who disproportionately drop out after their first year at university. I never—I never—want to see a Welsh student who is capable of sustaining themselves academically on a HE course have to drop out because of day-to-day living costs. We are unique—unique—in the system that we are delivering for Welsh students today.

As regards the Labour manifesto, it’s not for me to defend the manifesto of the Labour Party, but the Welsh Labour manifesto in the Assembly elections last year said that Welsh students would not be put at a disadvantage and they would be better off than English students, and that manifesto commitment, along with our party’s manifesto commitment, is honoured here today. Welsh fees will still be lower at Welsh universities than those Welsh students are paying in English institutions and Welsh students are paying to attend Scottish universities. Let’s be absolutely clear about that.

Llyr, you quoted the IFS. Well, let me be clear about what the IFS has said about student finance, and I quote:

‘bringing back maintenance grants would have the advantage of allowing government to target specific students or courses that have wider benefits to society…the government’—

they were referring to Westminster—

‘should put more weight on the latter rather than the former’,

i.e., reducing fees. That’s the approach they should take to making policy. We are doing exactly what independent experts say we need to do in this country.

Incidentally, with regard to inflation linking fees, that’s exactly what your party did when you were in Government here in this National Assembly for Wales. That’s exactly what you did. [Interruption.] It’s exactly what—[Interruption.] It’s exactly what you did. [Interruption.] True, Simon. True. Very true, Simon. It’s very, very true. The fee level—[Interruption.] And I’m sure, Simon, when you were the special adviser in the Government, you did it for the very same reasons that I’m doing it today, to support the sector.

The fees—[Interruption.] The fees—[Interruption.] If I could go on to answer the rest of Llyr’s questions, the fees will apply to the entire cohort from 2018-19. With regard to the living wage, can I say that I am delighted by the announcement of Universities Wales yesterday that Wales will become the first HE sector to move to being a living-wage employer? This is really important, because, up until now, with the exception of Cardiff University and the Open University, that was not the case. This is good news for the lowest-paid workers in the sector working in institutions the length and breadth of Wales, and it is only right that we do so. We cannot advocate for a living wage for students when the people who are cleaning the lecture theatres, the halls of residence and the toilets are not treated in the same way. I am delighted—I am delighted, absolutely delighted—that Universities Wales has made progress in this area when they have not been willing to do so. But there is more to be done—there is absolutely more to be done—with regard to transparency with the higher levels of pay within the institutions, and I continue to have a very productive dialogue with Universities Wales about the importance of this issue, transparency around this issue, and I hope that I will be back in the Chamber before too long to make another positive announcement in that regard. I’ll continue to have those discussions with them.

The Member talks about the future of the coleg. As the Member will know, I removed the budget for the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol out of the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales this year to protect funding for the very important work that the college does, because I was concerned that because of the strains on HE finance, the work of the coleg might be undermined. So, we’ve taken specific steps to protect that funding in this year, and I await with interest the report of Delyth Evans that will give this Government some independent advice on the future of the coleg, and how the coleg’s role should be developed going forward.

With regard to this issue of getting people to come back to Wales, there are things outside my portfolio that we need to do. We need job opportunities for those people to come back to Wales. We need affordable housing in parts of Wales, so that people can come back and afford to buy houses and raise their families there. But our commitment to this is absolutely clear in the establishment of our interim postgraduate loan measures. Those postgraduate—. Not loans, sorry; everybody can get a loan. Those postgraduate grant measures will only be available to those people who come back to study in Wales. And that’s a commitment and an indication of how I want to be able to use public resources to incentivise those who will come back and contribute. As I said in answer to Darren Millar, we’re already working with Vaughan Gething with regard to nurses in that regard. I’m looking to explore it with regards to additional learning needs and other opportunities.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. I welcome the parity that you’ve announced between part-time and full-time students, and between undergraduates and postgraduate students. I’d like to add my own thanks to those of the Cabinet Secretary to the National Union of Students for fighting the good fight for part-time and postgrad students for so long. I also welcome the proposal that doctoral studies should be supported. However, I fail to see how offering £1,000 per student, regardless of income, is a positive step forward. The Cabinet Secretary may say that we may be taking about a relatively small amount of money here, but that money could be spent elsewhere in the education system, such as making essential repairs to a rural school. The Welsh Government is constantly complaining that they’re not given sufficient funds, yet you can find the cash to give this handout to students from families on higher incomes. Whilst I’m not necessarily against the principle of a student loan system, I’m wary of saddling Welsh students with debt at the beginning of their careers. Graduates are now facing debts at the same level as my first mortgage. Is this really what we want for Welsh students?

I’d welcome the Cabinet Secretary’s explanation of how she is ensuring that students and graduates achieve a quality career service that will help them make the best decisions about which course to study and how much debt to incur. At the end of the day, these people are going to be saddled with an amount of debt. We need to make sure that they understand the level of debt, how long that’s going to take them to pay off, and that that’s actually a proper and worthy investment in their future before they actually incur the debt. Without quality careers advice, we risk Welsh students incurring debt for no good reason, as I said. I do believe the Cabinet Secretary has missed the opportunity to incentivise students to study those subjects such as science and engineering, which are desperately needed in our economy, by providing free tuition and means-tested grants for those subjects.

I’m also concerned about the potential inflation of student costs, which could be caused in terms of rent et cetera, as landlords and others cotton on to the fact that students have access to loans and potentially more money. We saw it happen when student loans were introduced in the 1990s. Rent for student accommodation rocketed for a start. And, so, what is the Cabinet Secretary’s assessment on inflation of costs for students, due to the measures announced today? Thank you.

Presiding Officer, can I thank Michelle for her question? I believe higher education is a joint endeavour, one where the individual benefits, but also we as a society benefit too. And that’s why the universal grant of £1,000, which was recommended by Diamond in his independent review, will be taken forward. This Government believes in the principle of universalism within that progressive system, and that’s why we will fulfil the recommendation by Diamond. It’s incongruous for the Member to argue on one hand that the £1,000 should not be paid, but on the other hand then talk about the issue around student debt and tuition loans. What we do know is that abolishing tuition loans, and not supporting individual student upfront costs, benefits the middle classes and the better-off more. You can’t have it both ways.

The Member is correct, though—and I should have addressed this in answer to Llyr Gruffydd, and I apologise for not doing so, Llyr—about the issue around the interest rates. I am concerned about interest rates, and how they are applied to student loans. And, as a result of that concern, I have written to the UK Government on that issue, expressed my support for a review of the interest rates, and to keep rates as low as possible. And I have made it clear to Jo Johnson, the Minister in the Westminster Government, that we need to work collectively together on this particular issue. So, I’m not forgetting about this point; this is an important point, and we are taking action to try and address this at the UK level.

The Member is also right to talk about careers advice, and I would urge everybody thinking about applying to university to look at the latest longitudinal education outcomes survey. The LEO survey will tell you what the likelihood is of what you studied leading to a job, and the rates of pay that you would get. It makes very interesting reading. And if you do so, I suspect that we will see a rush of students applying for the computer science course in Swansea, because that course leads to high levels of employment, with very good levels of wage. So, you’re right; we do need to make sure that students are getting proper careers advice before they make an application to a university. And teachers who are advising them need to be aware of the plethora of information that there is out there for students, to help them make those choices. Because undertaking a degree course is not to be taken lightly. It’s something that really does need some proper consideration, and looking at the prospects at the end is an important factor to consider.

With regard to subject-specific support, I understand that is UKIP policy. Diamond looked at subject-specific support, rather than a universal system, and he came down on the side of a universal system, and rejected the proposals for subject-specific support.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for health on the interim report of the parliamentary review of health and social care. I call on the Cabinet Secretary to make his statement—Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. The establishment of the parliamentary review into the long-term future of health and social care in Wales was a key commitment in ‘Taking Wales Forward’. I announced the setting up of an independent panel of experts in November 2016, and today sees the publication of its interim report. The review will conclude this December, with the publication of a final report.

The independent review panel is chaired by Dr Ruth Hussey, the former Chief Medical Officer for Wales, and consists of national and international experts in the field of health and social care. At the outset, I want to thank Ruth and her fellow panel members, and, indeed, everyone who has engaged with the panel, for their commitment to this important work. I also welcome the cross-party support for the review, and the nature with which opposition spokespersons, and the chair of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, have engaged in it. This of course comes from an initial agreement between my party and Plaid Cymru at the start of this Assembly term.

The agreed terms of reference set for the review are challenging. The panel are tasked with assessing and making recommendations on: how the health and care system might deliver improved health and well-being outcomes for people across Wales; reduce existing inequalities between certain population groups; and how best to enable the whole health and social care system to be sustainable over the next five to 10 years.

Change in the system is essential for future financial sustainability. Without effective action to reduce cost pressures, increase efficiency, or reduce the demand for services, the Health Foundation has shown that NHS spending in Wales will need to rise by an average of 3.2 per cent a year in real terms to 2030-31, just to keep pace. Cost pressures for adult social care are projected to rise even faster than for the NHS, by an average of 4.1 per cent per year.

I am pleased that the panel has responded at this still early stage of their work with an insightful interim report. Over the next few months, the review will be holding discussions across Wales, engaging with key groups, and working with stakeholders on integrated models of care. They will also look in more depth at some key issues and make clear recommendations on key issues for the final report.

The panel rightly recognises the tremendous commitment of the health and care workforce and its significant achievements. However, the case for change in how health and social care services should be organised in future could not be clearer. As the report shows, the changing make-up of the population presents a particular challenge. Wales has the largest and fastest growing proportion of older people in the UK. Whilst that is of course a source of celebration, an increasing older population with more complex health conditions and needs will also lead to a greater need for care. At the same time, the proportion of working age people will shrink, providing a smaller pool of taxpayers, informal carers and potential employees in health and care.

Despite our recent successes in recruitment, Wales—in common with many other countries—sees shortages in certain professional fields. In common with many post-industrial societies, Wales is already experiencing inequalities in health and well-being outcomes. The panel has shared the view expressed by professionals and the public alike, that healthcare is not always provided effectively based on the needs of service users. However, there are positive opportunities to be seized through the faster uptake of technologies and a more systematic approach to innovation, which could help deliver more effective care.

Many people will of course recognise this picture. What comes across clearly in this interim report is the pace at which rapidly changing social and technological factors are impacting on service provision. The report is clear that health and care will not be sustainable if traditional service configurations and ways of working are perpetuated. The report makes clear that new models of delivering health and social care are needed.

But the panel did find significant consensus amongst health and care stakeholders about what the characteristics of a future integrated health and care system should be. These are: a universal primary health service, which promotes well-being of the population; a greater emphasis on preventative care; individuals to be supported to self-manage where possible and safe; greater access to online support; wherever possible, services provided at home first or in the community, with access to hospital care only for services a hospital facility can provide; a more flexible model of home-based care and support that enables the individual to have control over when, and for how long, they use a service; a seamless co-ordination between different types of care; orientation of a care culture to focus on the outcomes the citizen wants and can achieve; and a relentless focus on quality and efficiency, with staff having a supportive and engaged working environment.

All of those above issues can be enhanced by new technology and informed by shared data and analytics. However, whilst there is of course a broad consensus on the vision, the panel reports that health and care organisations are searching for advice and practical support on how this is to be delivered consistently across our system. To address this, the panel suggests that the next steps for Wales are to identify the most promising, broad models of whole-system health and social care, drawing on international evidence, and that new models should then be used at scale to deliver whole-system transformational change.

These new models of care should include a combination of hospital, primary care, community health and social care providers. They should work in different settings, such as urban and rural, and of course take account of Welsh language needs. The panel envisages that a limited number of models could be widely trialled, developed and evaluated. The panel will set up a stakeholder forum to work with them to develop these new models and the principles that should be used to plan future service development.

Doing this work now will create momentum and an environment for progress after the review has concluded. Alongside this, the panel’s view is that new models alone will not be enough to ensure sustainable services without parallel action on a number of enablers. These are outlined in the report as areas where the panel will look to develop recommendations. They are: public dialogue; the workforce; digital and infrastructure; innovation; and, crucially, making change happen faster.

This is a strong interim report and I welcome the practical approach that the review panel intend to take to their work. I look to health and care organisations and members of the public to respond with equal vigour and work constructively with the parliamentary review over the coming months.

I’m delighted to be able to speak to this statement and like you, Cabinet Secretary, I would like to add my thanks to Dr Ruth Hussey and to the members of the panel for their work on this. I’ve appreciated very much the open and transparent way in which the chair and the panel have engaged with me and, I know, with other Assembly Member colleagues and with the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee.

I think that this is a seminal moment for Welsh Government—for every politician, actually—for the NHS and for the care sector, and I think that the report that they have produced—the interim report—is very, very clear and lays out not just the scale of the challenge that we face, but some of the possible routes with which we might go down to solve some of those challenges. I think that there's not much in this report that none of us knew about, but sometimes you have to ask somebody on the outside to tell you the obvious, because you know it, but you've got to hear it again. I think they very carefully stated again a lot of the problems, a lot of the issues, a lot of the challenges that we all know so well. But they've done it in a very cool and dispassionate way and they’ve laid it out very clearly. So, it's the sounding board that we needed and we've had that.

I think that the report is very clear, again, on a number of things. One is that the pace of change must accelerate—that doing nothing is not an option we can afford to take, nor should we take. I was very struck by how very clearly they lay out that there are a lot of green shoots already showing within the NHS landscape—great models of innovation out there, but that somehow there is a barrier to those innovative models taking root and flourishing and being able to be transplanted to other areas and being able to gain credence throughout the whole of the NHS. So, for me, this report very clearly identified that we all know the direction of travel, but that the road map isn't clear for an awful lot of organisations with which we need to work. So, as ever, the question is: what are those barriers to improvement? I look forward to the second stage of the report. I met with Ruth Hussey this morning and she was very clear that in the second stage of the report that they want to bring out some of that detail.

Having said that, though, I think that there are some clear lessons we can start learning from now. So, Cabinet Secretary, I'd like to ask you just a few of those questions, because there's so much you could speak about on this report—it's very hard to actually discern the best bits to talk about in the time given. I think the report shows that Welsh Government has struggled to drive some good policies through. So, my first question to you is: how will you skill up your department and your officials, so they are better able to lead and persuade for change? My second question is, given the first: how will you see managing the tensions created by these decisions for Wales that the report talks about, and I can totally buy into that need? And what type of decisions do you foresee that they might be—macro, minor—and what kind of scale? And given those tensions from the first and second question: how will you engage, and take with you, local communities? Because I do note in your statement the one thing you do not mention is public engagement at any great level, and that is something that this report is really, really, really strong on, and I'm concerned that you don't mention it in your statement. I would like your assurance that public engagement and the voice of the patient, the user, and those who have yet to use the NHS will be heard in all of this.

The report identifies areas that already need work and I don't think we need to wait for a second report for the conclusion to know that we need to look at how we bring co-production into health and social care; how we transform and transfer information. I wonder if you can outline what steps you think you might be able to take already; how you might be able to support the highly fragile care sector; how you might be able to support—and I love this word—the care force: the people who give the voluntary care to all of those families at home and all of those loved ones, and what can we do now to support them? I’d be very interested to know what we might be able to do now to look at the training needs and the pay and conditions of our care force, the paid care sector, because I think that they are being left behind in the race towards trying to improve our NHS at the moment.

I was delighted to see that this report talked a lot about housing and about how our homes are going to become the place where we will receive health and social care in the future. I would like to understand, Cabinet Secretary, if you have plans to talk to your colleagues about how we can start to address some of their housing needs. For example, I know in my own constituency that of all of the houses being built, whether they’re being built privately, by the county council or by housing associations, it’s a tiny percentage that are being built to house people with disabilities, or house people with dementia, the elderly, to put in stairlifts—whatever it might take—and yet it seems to me, having read this report, we must ensure that more of our public and private housing stock is able to take care of us. I think the report is very clear about how many people are going to be able to need more and more support in their homes.

I have picked up your very, very gracious comment or nod there, Deputy Presiding Officer; I shall gabble through the last little bit, and, actually, just to ask one more thing. The leader of the opposition asked the First Minister today whether or not this would be the direction of travel. Now, I think that this is a really great cornerstone to start building a future for our NHS. I think the workforce of the NHS, I think the politicians and I think the patients are all exhausted by where we’re at, and that we need to have a clearer, brighter future. And I would like to really understand where your commitment is to taking forward this report. I’m sure that over the years we will argue about the delivery of some of it, and about whether one thing should be a priority or another. But the skeleton that has been drawn up here I think is very, very strong, and I would like to know and be reassured by you—because I don’t think we got that right answer from the First Minister—that this actually is going to be taken and used and not just left on a shelf to gather dust, as so many other reports have been in the past.

Thank you. Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you for the comments and questions. And I welcome your recognition at the start that the panel have been open and transparent, but also that this has, as I said in my opening statement, come from a genuine cross-party engagement. It started as being an agreement between Welsh Labour and Plaid Cymru, but there’s been, not just from those two parties but everyone in this Chamber, the willingness to sit down and agree on the terms of reference, and the panel to undertake this particular report. So, there was a challenge that each of us accepted in starting this process, and I hope that you found the way in which the Government has engaged with each of those parties to be genuinely open as well, because this is a concern for all of us and not just for one particular party to confront. I think it really has been useful to have a genuinely independent group of national and international experts to validate the concerns, the challenges and the imperative for change that we have often debated and discussed in previous Assembly terms, and I do wonder if the Chair of the committee may tell us about his previous incarnation as an Assembly Member where similar issues have been floated.

But the challenge we now have is that the challenge is more acute. We have even more demand coming into our system. We have even more demand based on the age of the population, public health challenges, demand that is driven by the behaviour of healthcare professionals and social care professionals, but also about the reality that the money is getting tighter and tighter and tighter. So, pretending we can run the same system now in five and 10 years’ time will see all of our constituents and their interests compromised. And I welcome the recognition about the change and innovation that is already in progress.

I think the point that you started to make about the balance between having local and regional leadership and innovation that comes bottom-up, and the responsibilities of local groups, whether they’re primary care clusters, whether they’re health boards or organisations in-between, but also the point about the central guiding hand that is made in the report, but also in the previous OECD report—. And Members of this Chamber regularly ask about wanting the Government to intervene and provide a central guiding hand and direction on a whole range of issues, from what happens in a particular ward, a particular GP surgery to health board-wide challenges. We need to find a balance on making sure that central direction is provided to help unblock some of the challenges that have prevented change from taking place previously, without simply then saying that, centrally, the Government will decide everything about health and social care. And that’s the challenge that we recognised before, and, equally, it’s set out for us very clearly in the interim report. I look forward to the next stage with the models of care that should provide more answers about how we do that. But whilst we wait another five to six months for that to happen, we’ve still got business to do now about trying to improve our system. What the interim report does do, as you recognise, is that it allows us to make some of that progress now to validate the direction of travel, and to think about how we provide the additional steps, the initial progress, that we want to make, and empowering people locally as well as nationally as well.

And I do take seriously your point about public engagement. When we talk about the interim report now being used now being used to talk to stakeholders. Well, the public are the biggest group of stakeholders, and I hope now having a report that sets out again the interim nature of this report to engage on and around, not just the big ‘What do you think about health and social care?’, but here’s a report that says, ‘Here are big challenges we face; here are the drivers for change; here’s the need and imperative for change; here’s what’s working already; here’s what we still need to improve on’, and that should lead to a more informed conversation, not just incidentally as our public events take place, but a deliberate and planned way to engage with citizens as well, and that’s important, as much as it is important to talk to staff groups and to the third sector directly as well. So, I’m very clear, and I think the panel are also clear that that’s part of their mission over the summer.

But what this also has, and I turn to your reference of prudent healthcare, well, we see that already in both the social service and well-being Act, the scheme in that, but also in prudent healthcare, involving and engaging the public as citizens who make their own choices, not having choices made for them. That’s very clear and is set out in the report, but also in the work that we’re trying to do to drive it across our whole system. That also goes into your point about the care sector, where Rebecca Evans is already leading on the work we’ve regularly said we want to see in the paid care sector—to have the status of the profession raised, and that includes the training and investment we make in the workplace. I recognise what you say about housing as a key determinant in health outcomes as well as places where health and social care is delivered.

I will finish on this point, Deputy Presiding Officer, but your point about the future direction of travel—. I’m happy to confirm that the mature conversation that led to this review being started in the first place is where I want to take on from today and when the report is provided to us. Because if we think the challenges are too important to ignore, there’s a challenge for everyone in this room and beyond about how we then talk about, discuss and agree on what we’ll do next. I expect this review and the Government’s response to it to form the direction of travel for another decade or so, and to do that we should absolutely engage across party about how we want to find the greatest areas for consensus and agreement on moving forward. What I can’t do, though, what no-one in this room can do, is to say that they will accept everything and anything the report says. We have to have a sense test on what comes back about that, and we have to respond openly about what we can do and how quickly we think we can do that together. But this absolutely will be a key part of setting the direction for the future, and how each of us respond in this Chamber, including, of course, the Government.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for this statement? I, too, will take this opportunity to thank Ruth Hussey and her team for the work that they have done to date, and I’m very pleased that we are in a situation now where we can hear this statement, and I’m pleased to see the coverage in the press today for this report. But the Cabinet Secretary, I think, is right in reminding us that we are at an early stage, if truth be told, in the work that this panel is undertaking, and that this is an interim report.

I welcome many of the findings that have been brought to our attention—many of them, as the Conservative spokesperson said, are relatively obvious, but what’s important now is what is done with these findings as the work of the panel continues, and what kind of recommendations will be made based on these findings and what kind of models will be developed. I look forward to seeing that happening over the next few months.

Although it is an interim report, I do think that some of the questions that I’d like to ask refer to the steps that could be taken now by Government, if truth be told, given what we heard from the Cabinet Secretary himself, stating that the case for change in how health and social care is arranged for the future is entirely clear now. Well, if it is clear, then, surely, there are some steps that the Government could be taking now, without awaiting the final report.

The interim report, again, emphasises the value of integrating health and social care. I would also add to that that integrating local government housing services is also important. And we know that there is a realisation of the value of integration, but that doesn’t happen. So, although the final report will put more meat on the bones, as it were, I wonder whether the Cabinet Secretary would agree that we perhaps don’t have to wait to start to see how guidance and protocols and action points for organisations and institutions, to enable them to work together, could be tightened up so that the work can happen now.

Related to this is the problem of individual institutions and organisations taking decisions on their budgets, which are sensible from their own perspective, but sometimes lead to additional pressures on the budgets of other services. So, how can the Welsh Government start to encourage that culture change within public services so that this ceases, because that will be an important step towards delivering this concept of integration?

The interim report also supports far more investment in primary care. We agree entirely with that, so what changes can the Cabinet Secretary make now in order to ensure that we start to think more about putting primary care first?

And finally, the report also recognises the value of technology. On occasion, technology and particularly the pace of change that we see in technology, and the new possibilities provided for by technologies, are not sufficiently understood by managers and commissioners within the health system, and that may have meant that the appropriate attention hasn’t been given to this area in the past. Given that, does the Cabinet Secretary believe that we should now think about professionals in IT and professionals in other technologies—that we should start to consider them as professional health workers who play a central role in delivering services and ensuring that services work and ensuring that technology is included as much as possible in care pathways for patients in Wales?

I’ll leave the questions there. It is an interim report, yes. It’s an important step, but I do think that there are certain steps that the Government could be taking at this point in the process.

Thank you for the comments and questions. I too look forward to the models of care—the new models of integrated care—that the review team will bring forward to us with their final report, and I’m sure they’ll be challenging for us in a number of different ways. That’s part of the point of setting up the process. It is supposed to be challenging and difficult. It’s supposed to ask us awkward questions.

A number have come back to the points that both you and Andrew have made about delivering change and the difficulties in doing that, partly because it’s a big and complex system. Even in the private sector—I used to work in a firm that had 20-odd offices around the country—delivering change within a system where everyone was employed by the same organisation, you found that the culture was different in different offices. Delivering a single system, say for case management, was actually more difficult than you thought it would be. So, to deliver something across our health and social care sector—not just health, but health and social care—is going to be understandably difficult, but our challenge is to recognise, as I said earlier, that imperative for change and the fact that we haven’t done as much as we would have wanted to previously.

We should be honest about the fact that, even on a real evidence base, all of us are pulled in different directions by local pressures. Every time there is a significant service proposal for change, understandably, Members in every party will be put under pressure to fight local and to say that there is a different reason why change could not or should not happen. Now, we have to be prepared to recognise that, and when those new models of care are provided to us to consider, and with the suggestion and recommendation from the review panel that they are then trialled and then scaled up significantly and quickly across the country, that will be difficult for every party, not just for one in this Chamber, and for people locally in a range of different areas. But the challenge otherwise is that we go back to, ‘Well, actually, we slow the pace of change and we allow change to happen to us rather than making an informed choice about what we want to do differently’. That goes back to some of the points you then made.

I think it’s interesting your point about how we incentivise or require integration within the health system—actually, between different parts of secondary and other acute services, as well as primary care and secondary care, but also between health and social care and other partners too. Some of that is already happening. We’ve got pooled budgets coming in in the scheme in the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 from April next year in a number of services. We’ve got public services boards and regional boards already working together as partnerships and making decisions together. Some of that is about, if you like, the more genuine bottom-up approach where people are sitting together and realising that they could and should do more together, and that there’s more value to be gained by those different public sector budgets working together with decision making.

What the review also sets out for us is that, on its own, that is unlikely to be enough. So, the outcomes framework, the competencies and the key performance indicators we set for people have enough in common across different sectors to enable and require people to work together at the same time. We also have the challenge of working with the police—the most obvious non-devolved group that have a real interest in and an impact upon health and care outcomes. So, that also goes into some of the steps we’ve already taken in, for example, incentivising primary care to work differently together. We’ve required people to work together in clusters. We had points that were dependent on the quality and outcomes framework taking part, but also money that went with that. So, there was an incentive as well to say, ‘Here’s money. You get to choose how you spend it locally to meet the needs of your collective local population.’ So, some of that is already happening and the review team are positive about the work of clusters. The challenge again is: how do you then understand what local innovation looks like, and then how do you get to the point of evaluating that and deciding what to do, what to do more of, and then what to disinvest in, as well? That’s the more difficult choice that we often have to make.

Finally, just on this particular area, I’ve already required and am expecting some things to happen. We know we’ve had a challenge on working across health board boundaries. That’s why Hywel Dda and ABM are working together. They’ve had a joint planning meeting already and they’ve very sensibly and wisely agreed to my invitation to meet on a regular basis to plan services together—and the same in south-east Wales as well, with Cwm Taf, Aneurin Bevan and Cardiff and Vale. Because, actually, there are services, not just in specialist services, but in the way in which we deliver normal elective services as well, where there could and should be planning across those boundaries to make sure the services make sense. And if we can’t drive that sort of way of working into our service, then we’re unlikely to see the sort of significant change that we want to, and that you and I and everyone else in this room thinks is necessary for the future of the service.

That goes into how and why we invest in primary care, the choice that we’ve already made, but there needs to be more of that because the pressure is almost always to invest in staff and expensive services in a hospital-based setting. We need to do more to hold a line and to see that investment come into primary care and community care. I recognise the well-made points that you highlight on technology and the ability to have not just a ‘once for Wales’ approach in key systems, not just to have a system where you can transfer information between primary and secondary care and the social care sector, but also for the citizens themselves to have more control over their information and access to how to use the system. We can do that in so many different areas of our life already. You can bank online and have access to really sensitive information. Our challenge is: how do we enable a citizen to have access to their own healthcare information in a way that should help them to manage their own conditions and make more informed choices? There’s real potential there, but again, we need to be much better at meeting the expectations about how people already live their lives and I want to enable that to happen on a consistent basis across the country as well.

Cabinet Secretary, I’d just like to follow up the point on public engagement. We haven’t lacked expert analysis over the last decade or so on the challenges facing the NHS in Wales, but one of the things the system has found extremely challenging to do is engaging with communities. Llanelli is a famous case study in how not to do it, in the reshaping of services at Prince Philip Hospital, and, with all credit to the team there, they’re a case study in how to do it, in the way they then picked themselves up, drew on the clinicians and the community in coming up with a new solution, which is now being seen as a model for elsewhere.

I’ve been disturbed in recent weeks by the changes we’re seeing in primary care, where doctors’ surgeries are having to close lists or having to hand back their contracts, and the way that’s being communicated with their patients leaves some room for improvement. I met recently with the chief exec of Hywel Dda to discuss, and he fairly points out that these are privately run contracted businesses—a point that is little understood, I think, amongst the general public—and there is a limited amount that the health board can do if these private businesses aren’t willing to co-operate. It’s these doctors’ surgeries who often communicate these difficult messages by imperfect means. So, for example, a poster on the door as a notice to people that the doctor’s surgery has been closed to new patients.

So, I just wonder if the Cabinet Secretary could tell us about the next stage of work, how public engagement is going to be hard-wired into the approach that’s needed, and also whether or not the models that we’re working with are going to be reviewed as part of that, because if we do have a primary care model that relies upon private businesses, who may or may not want to co-operate with this agenda, is it time to look again at that model?

Thank you for the question; it’s one that I’ve discussed previously with the Member for Llanelli, and not just, to be fair, in relation to his own constituency—not just with the Prince Philip Hospital where, as you recognised, there was a good example of what not to do, as well as then the way in which that was successfully achieved, and the same in Kidwelly as well, in some ways. There’s a really important message here, I think, for being able to talk to the public early enough, but in a way where they trust where the message comes from. I’ve got national responsibilities that I certainly don’t try to walk away from a contract out of. I’m quite happy to take on board those responsibilities; it’s the privilege of the job. But equally, if clinicians aren’t part of that, it makes it very difficult for people to trust the information and the imperatives for change, and we really do need a conversation that isn’t just between the health service in the shape of people who are chief executives and executive members of a board. They have a responsibility to do that, yes, but actually, local clinicians, people are used to seeing and trusting. Because otherwise I don’t think people trust the reason and the rationale.

It’s easy to understand why members of the public are instinctively suspicious and almost always think the first reason is, ‘This is about money, and you’re not prepared to spend money on the service,’ rather than it being about much, much more than money, and there are things even if we were in times of plenty in public service spending, there would be a need to change some of the ways in which we deliver care, and that’s part of the challenge that we will have. If we can’t engage our clinical communities and healthcare professionals and social care professionals in being part of that conversation, we’re unlikely to see the sort of pace and scale of the change that we are told, yet again, is absolutely critical to the future of our health and care system.

That’s why it is important, as I said in response to Angela Burns, that in the next stage, the biggest and most important group of stakeholders is the public—citizens themselves being engaged in the conversation as far as possible. I think the way this has been covered today has been helpful in that, but let’s not pretend that this will be the first item on the news agenda for the next six months. There will be a challenge about how we make sure that engagement is real and meaningful, even if we honestly accept that not every person in Wales who has an interest today will be engaged in the same way come, say, November, when the report is being written and prepared to come back to us, but that isn’t a debate that can stop then. It isn’t simply we get the report and say, ‘Right, that’s it. We’re not interested in anyone else.’ There’s got to be the constant process of engagement, and it goes back to your point about the way in which people engage in change at a local level, and often people are surprised to hear that change is required or necessary or proposed, and the first reaction is to fight against that change, and again, I understand that completely. It’s a reaction in every single community across the country.

If we don’t get clinicians engaging in a more open way to discuss and debate these issues with the public, we’re not going to see that change at all, and on your point about the primary care model, there is change already taking place. Some of you see this as a bit of a threat to the independent contractor model. Well, actually, the biggest change to that model comes from new entrants into the profession, many of whom don’t want to buy into that way of working, either because they don’t want to buy into a building and the potential liabilities of that for the future, or because they simply want to be more flexible about their career. Not every person who comes out of training to be a doctor, or any other form of healthcare profession, wants to say, ‘I’m committed to being in one community for pretty much the rest of my working life.’ We need to recognise that change and find a way to allow those different models of care to work. And to be fair, I actually think that both the Royal College of General Practitioners and the BMA are being very pragmatic about that discussion, in supporting their members who want to maintain the independent contractor model, and at the same time enabling those other members of their membership bodies to actually find different ways of working with health boards in that wider multidisciplinary team. So, I think there is genuine cause for some optimism, but that doesn’t mean to say that that makes it easy.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. I would also like to place on record my thanks to Dr Ruth Hussey and the panel for keeping me and my team regularly updated on the review’s progress. The interim report starkly lays out the challenges facing health and social care in Wales.

We are at an evolutionary moment with our health and care systems: we adapt or we perish. This is not a problem that can be solved by simply throwing money at it. As Dr Hussey correctly identifies, we have to make urgent systemic changes to the way we deliver care. We have to work smarter. We have to spend smarter. Cabinet Secretary, I welcome this interim report and the findings set out by Dr Hussey and her team. We now have a much clearer view of the challenge facing us as a nation and the challenge facing us as politicians.

I am convinced that we have to change the way we deliver health and social care in the future. It is now up to us here, in this Chamber, to convince the public of the need for change and to engage with them in designing our future health and care system. Cabinet Secretary, how do you plan to encourage as many members of the public as possible to engage with the parliamentary review?

The panel suggests that a new number of models of care could be trialled and evaluated.Cabinet Secretary, if you can answer at this stage, how long will the trials run, and how do you plan to run such trials concurrently?

Whichever new models of care we adopt, they will all rely on new technology and shared data. Cabinet Secretary, can you outline the steps your Government is taking to improve the NHS Wales Informatics Service to ensure it can adapt to future needs?

However care is delivered, we need a workforce to deliver it. We need to encourage more young people to become doctors, nurses, physios, occupational therapists and pharmacists. We also need experts in machine learning and big data, computer network specialists and programmers. Cabinet Secretary, what is the Welsh Government doing to encourage more young people to study STEM subjects to ensure we have the workforce we need in future?

It is vital we deliver the necessary changes as quickly as possible if we are to ensure that future generations will have a health and social care system that meets their needs. Regarding our infrastructure, as has previously been mentioned, if people are to be encouraged to stay in their homes, we must make sure that, with an ageing population, new housing is built to recognise the changing needs in building regulations to accommodate disabled needs. Our infrastructure regarding public transport is, in future, also going to have to change.

I look forward to working with the parliamentary review over the coming months, to receiving the final report, and working with you, Cabinet Secretary, to deliver the recommendations made by Dr Hussey and the panel. Diolch yn fawr. Thank you.

Thank you for the comments and questions. I’ll do this in reverse order. Again, I recognise the points about housing, but, again, you make a point about transport and transport needs, both to specialists in hospital centres, but also physical access to local care as well and how that will be delivered, and how much will be delivered in the centres that people travel to, and how much will be in someone’s home. That is intrinsic and, I would say, also linked to the way in which we deliver telehealth and make that much more accessible and commonplace. We already have good examples of that and, again, this will add to the comments that Rhun ap Iorwerth made earlier on things we could do now. And, actually, delivering a more demanding but evidence-led approach on telehealth is one of the things I think we could do, and I’d be surprised if that doesn’t form part of the final discussion in the report and recommendations.

On your point then about education and encouraging people to study different subjects, well, of course, that is a cross-Government perspective, not just through the pre-16 curriculum and early years, which both Alun Davies and Kirsty Williams have a direct interest in, but about how we equip and encourage people, and our childcare offer and what that does to improve people’s attainment and other aspects of the future all the way through school education and beyond, where, actually, people then make different choices about what they want to do. There is something again about the curriculum for healthcare professionals. They undertake their own training. If we want people to work in a different way as part of a multidisciplinary team, they need to be trained to work in that way whilst undertaking their qualifications too. So, I recognise the points there that are being made.

On NWIS, or the NHS Wales Informatics Service, there is a challenge there, which is set out in the report, about how they adapt to future needs, and it’s more than just the points that were made by both Angela Burns and Rhun ap Iorwerth. It is also about the ability to actually think about how we actually gear that up, not just about delivering ‘once for Wales’ methods and making sure that health boards and trusts buy into that, but how it actually manages to maintain the work that is already done. Because the report recognises that much of what NWIS does is maintaining what already exists, and the space for it to develop and deliver new systems is not always easy—the ability and, if you like, the capacity and the power to do that. It poses some questions in the report about how much it’s about developing either in-house capacity or actually about working in partnership with other software developers working to a commission provided by NWIS. I think that that’s a very sensible conversation to engage in and take forward.

On your point about how long the trials will run on the new models for care, I’m not in a position to answer that. I don’t even know what the new models of care are yet. I definitely haven’t seen an advance copy of the report for five or six months’ time, I assure you of that, but, when that is provided, we’ll then have a sense from the panel itself about at what point in time they might advise us that we would need to wait to then have enough evidence to look for system-wide change in the way in which we deliver services. So, we’ll all have to wait a few more months to see what the trials will look like, let alone how long they will then run for.

On the point about engaging the public, again, this has been mentioned by previous speakers too, and I certainly recognise that we need to consider how we do that deliberately and specifically. I think calling for the public and encouraging the public to engage is one thing, not just about what we’ve done today, but in future engagement as well. I don’t think anyone seriously expects me to knock every door in the country, asking people to respond to the parliamentary review. Some people might not want to see me on their doorstep, frankly. But there is that broader point about all the different actors around our health and social care system, and how they are part of wanting people to engage as well. The third sector have a large reach, potentially, into their own support and engagement networks in ways that other organisations don’t, and they could be really important in getting the public to genuinely engage, debate, and discuss these ideas. The final thing I’ll say is that, whilst I don’t quite agree with your analogy to Darwinism and whether change will just happen to us or we’ll wither away, the point about this is that we have a choice to make. Unlike people where change happens to you in that evolutionary process, we have a real choice to make about how we choose to change our system or whether we sit back and allow change to happen to us. I absolutely believe that we should choose what to do with our future whilst we have the ability to do so, and not wait for someone else to make that change for us.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement and thank Dr Ruth Hussey for her hard work—her and her team—so far? Would the Cabinet Secretary agree, however, that some matters need urgent action now? We’ve heard some of them from Rhun and others, but, in particular, the recruitment and retention of junior medical staff in our hospitals. Now, once qualified, you stop being a medical student and you end up being a junior hospital doctor—everybody’s a junior hospital doctor, in other words—before you carry on further training to become a consultant surgeon, a GP, a consultant physician, or whatever. So, that’s where our doctor pool comes from. But our junior doctors are feeling unloved at the moment, and their tremendous commitment to their vocation is going unrecognised by managers in hospitals at all levels, as they cope with huge workloads, rota gaps, high-risk life-and-death decisions, and having to battle for time off for study leave and exams and even time off to get married. Now, it wasn’t like that in my day as a junior hospital doctor, admittedly some time ago now. But, Cabinet Secretary, how do we address these matters today?

Thank you. To be fair, it’s an issue that is regularly raised with me by both the royal college and the BMA as well. What I think is helpful and, again, different, and partly what gives us an opportunity, is that we do have a different relationship compared to other parts of the UK. It’s a much more adversarial relationship across our border. That is a point that is regularly raised by junior doctors themselves. The challenge is how we capitalise on that and actually take proper advantage of it and encourage people to come here to work and to stay, and, equally, they don’t simply say that, because I’m not Jeremy Hunt, that means everything is fine, because there are very real challenges. The report again recognises some of the opportunities that exist about e-rostering, about giving people different choices about how to manage their own life, where people often have other responsibilities, and not just their work, as well. Again, you talked about ‘in your day’. I hesitate to say how long ago that might have been. But, in the past, people expected to work very long hours, and they accepted that that was what you had to do. Whereas, actually, now, whether there are men or women in the workforce, lots of people who acquire different responsibilities outside work—with families, in particular—make different choices. So, you don’t find doctors who are prepared to say, ‘Someone else will bring up my child while I’m in work for 80 hours a week’.

So, we do need to think properly about how we manage that, and the numbers of people we need in our workforce to make the whole system run. I recognise the point you make about the differing way in which health boards engage their junior doctors. That’s an issue that’s brought to me by stakeholders, and an issue that’s recognised within the service about improvements that they need to make as well—but also the point about study leave and how we think creatively about how we could do something around that that could make a real difference to whether people choose to stay in the profession and in this country, too, as well.

Thank you. Finally, Eluned Morgan.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I think the way we deal with our elderly population in future will be the way that we are judged as a nation, so it’s critical that we get this right. I think there are some very eminent professionals on this review board, and I’m looking forward to hearing their final recommendations. But I think one thing’s come across very clearly in this report, and in others, and that is that the current situation is unsustainable because of the demographic challenges that we are facing. So, what we need is some radical thinking. I’ve always been of the view that elderly care should form a part of an economic development strategy, as well as being a social and health strategy. Some of the ideas that we’ve been proposing in pilots in the economic development plan for rural Wales actually do that. It brings together this idea of economic development and care being part of the same thing. And I would encourage the Minister really to speak to his colleagues about how we really, comprehensively, have an all-Government approach to this; it cannot be simply in the silos of health and care. We have to extend it beyond that.

Now, over the past few months, I've also brought a group of experts to do some blue-skies thinking together on how we tackle this issue of care in Wales in the long term. And I think we're very aware that you’re firefighting, that, actually, there’s a problem now. We're trying to do some broader thinking in an atmosphere where we are able to say things that are difficult to say. And what we've done, following a discussion with the chair of the parliamentary review team, is that we’ve focused on areas where the review is not concentrating. So, despite the suggestion in the interim report that there’s a need for capital planning, it doesn't really focus on the issue of buildings and housing relating to care, although there’s an appreciation that more care will have to be done at home. And, crucially, this review doesn't look at the issue of financing care, either.

So, I think, in Wales, we should be leading, and, to do that, we need to find some answers to these difficult questions. But we will only do that if we work together on these issues, and it's got to be beyond Plaid and Labour. I'm really glad that already we’re extending beyond that, but we have to answer this cross-party or we simply won't find a solution, because these are really, really difficult conversations to have with the public.

And just finally on that point of communication, we have to appreciate that communication with the public—. You know, there are so many people who don't understand that actually you have to pay for your own care home now. They don't appreciate that. So, if we’re suggesting something different then we've got to be aware, people have got to be aware, of the current situation before we suggest other things in future.

And just finally—

Can you come to a question, please?

Just finally, on my question, there was a report this week that 32 per cent of long-term carers had not had a day off in five years. Is this something that also should be addressed?

Thank you. Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you for the comments and questions. Again, in the report, one of the drivers that’s recognised is the significant expansion in our older population—we both import older people who want to retire to Wales, as well as more people who've been here for a longer period of time actually just living longer. And, as I said, it's a cause for celebration, but it does come with a challenge for us. And I think it's fair to say that, in discussions, not just with the Minister, Rebecca Evans, but also with Ken Skates, there's a recognition about the economic value of the care sector, in recognising it's a big employer already, and, if we improve the working conditions and the pay of people in that sector, there’s an economic impact as well, and often for, broadly, poorer people. People who go into the care sector tend not to be people from significantly economically advantaged backgrounds—certainly into the paid care sector—and there is something about raising the status of the profession, as I said earlier in response to Angela Burns, and also what we do about how we actually help the sector in actually understanding in the future what that looks like. That's why things like market position statements are important in taking forward the scheme of the social services and well-being Act, so people can make choices and decisions about the future, whether they are small independents within the sector or larger operators as well.

The point about capital planning—this is about the health and care estate. And, by that, I don't mean people's homes—you know, where people are constructing areas to provide health and care in primary care, secondary care, and, of course, in residential care as well. But there will be a need to think about, again, about our housing quality standards, because our housing associations are not just people who provide, if you like, standard social housing that people live in. Lots of the housing they provide are care homes, and they provide lots of extra care now as well. It's a developing feature, and the challenge will be: is what's being created really what we think is going to match the needs of the population we have now and in five and 10 years, and longer as well? And that's a challenge about how people do work across, not just the Government, but partners outside Government, too, as well.

And, on your point about funding, we specifically ruled out and didn't go into the funding of the future for the health and care system. The review’s remit is significant already. To add that in again would be even more of a problem, and, actually, general taxation funds a large part of what we’re talking about. To try and then say we’ll have a different view here—actually, there are wider, UK-wide questions about the funding of public services, not just in Wales, but across the UK.

Your final point, on carers—the Minister will have something positive to say, I believe, about how we actually provide more support for carers in the here and now to make sure they do have the opportunity for respite and a proper break, because that isn't something that we should put off until five or 10 years’ time.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language on the Welsh language strategy. I call on Alun Davies as Minister to make that statement. Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Welsh Government’s vision is to reach 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050: a clear vision that brings us together as a nation, and that is what drives this new strategy.

The Welsh language is an important part of who we are, whether we speak the language or not, and we need to be proud of our bilingualism. But the time is right to take the next step in our journey as a bilingual nation. If we want to realise our vision, and reach a million, we need to take action and lay the foundations now. There are challenges ahead, but I have no doubt that we can approach them in the knowledge that a firm foundation is already in place.

The new strategy identifies 10 transformational changes we will need to drive forward. These are: creating new speakers through the education system; use of the language, in the workplace and socially, and through services; and, finally, creating favourable conditions to ensure that we have an infrastructure and context for the Welsh language, such as supporting Welsh-speaking communities and supporting the language through digital technology. And may I be clear? We don’t just want to reach a million people who can speak Welsh. We want to see a million people who can and can choose to use their Welsh language skills.

The strategy focuses, naturally, on plans to significantly increase the number of new Welsh speakers, and a focus is placed on the transition phases between the early years to statutory education in the first instance, but also on supporting a single Welsh language continuum, so that our young people have the best possible opportunity to become confident Welsh speakers.

This will require ambition, support and leadership from local authorities, governors and school headteachers to reach our target of 40 per cent of learners in Welsh-medium education by 2050. Effective delivery of the Welsh in education strategic plans will be essential to drive this work forward, and I will make a further statement regarding the review of the WESPs during the coming weeks. We are, of course, aware that this will be a challenge, but we must face such challenges to achieve our vision. Another obvious challenge will be to ensure that we have a sufficient number in the education workforce to achieve such an expansion. Purposeful action will be needed to ensure that sufficient numbers of young people wish to teach, and to teach through the medium of Welsh.

The Cabinet Secretary for Education announced last week her intention to invest £4.2 million from the education budget to further develop the teaching workforce able to teach Welsh and to introduce teaching through the medium of Welsh. This will include extending the sabbatical scheme and extending the role of the education consortia. We will also need to support our young people on their language journey after they leave school, as they move on to further and higher education, and as they join the workforce. I look forward to reading the report of the review of the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol on the next steps that need to be taken in order to make progress in this area.

Similar attention will be given to increasing the use of the Welsh language. For the language to flourish, there need to be more Welsh speakers and those who are able to speak the language need to do so regularly. The traditional Welsh networks have enabled generations of people to use the language socially. They’ve also had success in creating a context for the language beyond the school or work environment, and we have reason to be thankful to them for their valuable contribution. According to 2015 figures, approximately 10 per cent of the population use Welsh regularly at present, and I want to see that increasing to 20 per cent by 2050.

I look forward to publishing a White Paper in August of this year outlining proposals for a new Welsh language Bill, to ensure that we are operating in the most effective way possible for the benefit of the people of Wales. To support efforts to increase the number of Welsh speakers and their use of the language, we need to create favourable conditions for them to do so. The new regional focus on economic development will be key to ensure that all parts of Wales, including Welsh-speaking communities, benefit from an economic perspective. That is key for the future of those communities.

To support that, before the end of this month, technical advice note 20 will be published, along with guidelines and a risk assessment framework for the Welsh language for large developments, to reflect the need to consider the Welsh language in planning policy. And, as the nature of society changes, and as developments continue in digital technology in the future, we will need to transform the Welsh language digital landscape, with particular emphasis on language technologies.

This strategy comes at an important time for the Welsh language. We either roll up our sleeves and respond to this challenge, or we give in. This strategy provides commitment to respond to this long-term and ambitious challenge. I am very clear in my mind that the Welsh Government needs to lead by example and provide leadership if we are to reach our goal. Presiding Officer, this is only the beginning of the journey. We each have a contribution to make—as supporters, learners, and regular Welsh speakers. We can all be one of the million.

Llywydd, nid yw fy natganiad heddiw ar strategaeth y Gymraeg a gyflwynir gan y Llywodraeth, yn ddatganiad i'r rhai hynny ohonom sy'n siarad Cymraeg yn unig. Mae'n ddatganiad ac yn bolisi ar gyfer y wlad gyfan. Rwy’n gobeithio hefyd bod hwn yn bolisi a fydd yn uno'r genedl, ac yn un a fydd hefyd yn ein herio fel cenedl, ac, os byddwn ni’n llwyddo i gyflawni’r her hon, bydd yn newid yn sylfaenol pwy yr ydym ni fel cenedl.

Rwy’n gofyn i ni heddiw gofleidio gweledigaeth a fydd rhoi taw ar ddadleuon y gorffennol. Heddiw, rwyf eisiau symud y tu hwnt i'r gwrthdaro a’r anghytuno a welsom ni yn rhy aml dros ddyfodol yr iaith. Mae'r Gymraeg yn eiddo i bob un ohonom. Ein hetifeddiaeth ni yw hi. Mae hi’n rhan o bob un ohonom ni. Mae hon yn weledigaeth lle mae pob un ohonom ni yn rhannu ein gwlad ac yn rhannu ein diwylliannau gyda’n gilydd. Rwyf eisiau i bob un o'n plant adael yr ysgol yn hyderus o ran nid yn unig deall Cymraeg sylfaenol, ond hefyd y diwylliant y mae hi’n sail iddo a’r hanes a’n gwnaeth ni y bobl yr ydym ni heddiw.

Rwy'n benderfynol, ac mae'r Llywodraeth hon yn benderfynol, y byddwn ni’n llwyddo yn yr ymdrech hon. Mae'n ymrwymiad hanesyddol ac yn un a fydd yn helpu i ddiffinio dyfodol pob un ohonom ni. Byddwn ni’n darparu'r weledigaeth a'r arweinyddiaeth, ond rydym ni hefyd yn gwybod na all yr un Llywodraeth, yr un Gweinidog na’r un Senedd gyflawni'r strategaeth hon a sicrhau ein llwyddiant neu fel arall. Bydd hynny'n cael ei benderfynu gan ein gwlad a'n pobl—y bobl hynny sy'n defnyddio ac yn siarad yr iaith, ac yn dysgu'r iaith, ac yn sicrhau bod eu plant yn hyderus yn yr iaith.

Wrth newid Cymru, byddwn hefyd yn newid y Deyrnas Unedig. Os gallwn ni greu cenedl wirioneddol ddwyieithog yn y teulu hwn o genhedloedd, byddwn yn helpu i wneud y DU yn gyffredinol yn lle gwahanol—yn fan lle mae cydnabyddiaeth i’n hiaith yn rhan hanfodol o’r etifeddiaeth Brydeinig a’r profiad Prydeinig. Yn hynny o beth, mae hefyd yn her i'r DU yn ogystal, ac yn enwedig y cyfryngau Prydeinig sy’n rhy aml yn ceisio naill ai anwybyddu neu wawdio ein diwylliant, a sefydliad Prydeinig nad yw’n dangos unrhyw ddiddordeb mewn realiti hunaniaeth Brydeinig nad yw’n cydymffurfio â'u rhagfarnau.

Llywydd, wrth gloi, rwy’n gobeithio y bydd hyn yn ddatganiad a fydd yn atseinio ar draws yr holl wlad ac yn ddatganiad a fydd yn dechrau taith y byddwn yn cyd-gerdded arni. Dwy iaith, dau ddiwylliant, ond un genedl. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you, Minister, for today’s statement, the first, I assume, in a long series, because the lifespan of the strategy is very lengthy. I have to say, I do like the fundamental message that this strategy is to unite us rather than divide us, because we all know how the language has been used by various people over the past decades, and hopefully we will see an end to that. This is something of an experiment here, Minister. I’ve written my notes in English, and I’m translating them as I speak.

I would like to start with the education workforce. This is important because we have seen a decline in the number of people teaching through the medium of Welsh recently. I note the sabbatical programme, and I appreciate, of course, the Mudiad Meithrin training programme which is also set out in the strategy itself. Perhaps it's too early to ask this question, but I would like to know, how the ideal of having a training programme provided by Mudiad Meithrin is going to work in non-Welsh placements during this current period, because we all look forward to generations of bilingual children who can speak English or Welsh without even thinking about it, but I'm still concerned about this current phase and how that training is going to be provided during this phase because it is important for very young children, particularly in that transition phase, to hear the language as part of their daily lives, even if the main language of the placement is not Welsh. So, if you could tell us something about your short-term commitment in that regard I would be very grateful.

Also, in terms of the sabbatical scheme: that is going to work for those who have an opportunity to take advantage of it, but I'm still concerned about those who can't be released from their schools—or the workplace, if it applies there—in this current phase. How do people currently working in our schools who do want to take advantage of any opportunity to enhance their Welsh language skills—how can they benefit? Because I don't see that this is going to be easy. We all know of the problems with supply teaching, and the question extends to them too, of course.

I agree 100 per cent that, post-16, we don't want to see young people losing those skills that children coming into the system will attain at an early age. We don't want to see the language going back to being just a social thing, or something that is lost entirely in that post-16 sector. So, can you tell us again, in detail, what's going to happen in the FE system, or in apprenticeships, in order to reinforce the value and the purpose of being bilingual? Because you have said at the opening and closing of your address that we are building one nation, but there are a number of ways to approach that and, in this current phase we still have this problem of people who have, perhaps, had a terrible experience of the language if they have come through the English medium sector. So, can you tell us what has been provided in looking at the Welsh language as a core communication skill and an integral part of the vocational courses, particularly in courses such as social care, child care and hospitality? These aren't new questions, I know that, but I would like to know if there hasn't been any progress. I would like to hear about that. Will we hear more of that as we proceed with the strategy?

As I said, I would like to hear more about the workplace. When you talk about creating favourable conditions so that people can choose to use the Welsh language, not only that they have those skills, but they can choose to use them, well, there's a question in terms of standards. They do have a role in the workplace, but, for me, there is a way of creating supply rather than generating demand, and this strategy can only succeed if it actually creates that demand.

I have just mentioned the poor experience of people coming through the English medium sector, and, of course, I am looking here on the new generation of bilingual people. If this works well, they will get to the workplace, but those in the higher positions will have come through a different education system and they have come through with attitudes that aren’t, perhaps, positive towards the language. I would like to hear how the strategy is going to avoid a situation where we have people who enter the workplace being fully bilingual, but then they come across people who are perhaps older than them and have very different attitudes towards the language, and perhaps don’t appreciate the skills that they have developed from the very early stages, if this strategy works well. I would just like to know if there are ways and means of avoiding any culture clashes here. So, could you tell us how you’re going to monitor the success of the Welsh for adults centres that we currently have? I know it’s very early days, but how can we learn lessons from that experience in order to ensure that people can enter the workplace without the tensions for either the employee or the employer, because there is still that disconnect between those starting in that system and those who have been through previous systems, and have taken those old attitudes with them into the workplace. Thank you very much.

I’d like to thank Suzy Davies for her general welcome for the words and the statement and the strategy itself. May I say this in responding to you, Suzy? We are starting on a journey here—a journey over two generations to reach 2050, a journey where we have to make investment very early on, and that’s what I’ve tried to do today, by showing some sort of picture of what I hope to do over the current Assembly and this Government, because I think it is important to set targets not just for 2050, and whoever is Minister at that point, but also targets for the Government here whilst I’m Minister. And we have to create a network or a structure where it’s possible to ensure accountability for this Government—this current Government—too. So, we do hope to do that today and over the coming weeks and months.

Mudiad Meithrin will be one of the most important partners that we have as we move ahead, ensuring that we do have the framework and structure of the ‘meithrin’ groups across Wales. We will continue to collaborate with them.

You’ve asked many questions about developing the workforce. Kirsty Williams has commissioned work by Delyth Evans, and the report of that taskforce will be published over the next few weeks. And that report will start to put together that picture of how we can develop further education through the medium of Welsh by ensuring that we have post-16 courses through the medium of Welsh for those people who want to work with the Mudiad Meithrin, for example, but also to develop skills and new services through the medium of Welsh. Kirsty Williams will have a statement to make on that over the coming weeks.

But we are seeing that the Welsh language—. It is important to see the Welsh language as a communication skill, as you described, but also the Welsh language has to be more than that—more than just a communication skill that you use when you need to in the workplace. The Welsh language is more than that. It’s a vital part of our culture and history as a nation, and we also have to acknowledge the value of the Welsh language because of what it is, and not just because it’s a skill in the workplace. I do want to emphasise the importance of that.

As part of the journey, I will be publishing a White Paper in the Eisteddfod, and we will be starting a process of discussing what kind of legislative structure we need over the coming years. I was clear in my mind—and I hope that Members will agree—that we need to set out the vision first of all, we need the set out the strategy first of all, and then discuss how we implement the strategy and how we achieve that vision. And so, I was clear that I wanted to set out the strategy here, and then have the discussion about the legislation and the new Bill for the Welsh language. We will be starting that process of discussion with regard to the Bill in the Eisteddfod. That will then continue into the autumn, and then when we’ve had that national debate about that, I hope that we will be able to bring forward legislative proposals to this Assembly so that Members can discuss and debate those proposals that we have, and I hope to do that very early in the new year.

When I talk about favourable conditions for the Welsh language, then I’m talking about what kind of rights we need as Welsh speakers, how we demand our rights as Welsh speakers, and how the public services and other services work within a statutory system that will ensure and guarantee our rights as Welsh speakers. We do have to have that discussion, and I look forward to that. But more than that—and I will conclude with this response—I want to shift the emphasis from regulation to promotion and facilitation, and I want to shift the emphasis from discussion to a national debate about the Welsh language that’s positive with regard to how we expand the use of the Welsh language, how we increase achievement with regard to the Welsh language, if you like—we need to move away from these things with regard to conflict, as you’ve suggested, and talk about how we can expand the Welsh language, and do that by including all of us. Very often we discuss strategies with regard to the Welsh language only in Welsh, but this is a strategy for Wales, Welsh speakers and those who don’t speak Welsh, together.

You have published a very important document today, and it is a positive initial step on the journey to reach that target of 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050. The Government has identified key themes that will need to be prioritised in terms of increasing the number of Welsh speakers. Of course, the minutiae, the work programme and the action points, are what will be important as we move forward. We will also need determination to overcome any barriers that may appear, and determination and firm political will over a lengthy period of time.

I start by discussing community and economy, and I am pleased to see that there is an understanding of the relationship between the Welsh language and the economy and our communities in this document. You note that we need more than jobs to keep people in these areas and to attract them back, and you are talking here about those communities with a high percentage of Welsh speakers. You go on to say that we also need high-quality careers to allow people to move from one job to another. In your statement this afternoon, you have said that the Government needs to lead by example and show leadership if we are to achieve the ambition.

Now, seeing clear leadership in terms of jobs and the kinds of quality jobs that we want to see in Welsh-speaking areas would be a clear sign from your Government of your desire to show the way and to set an example. The Welsh Revenue Authority could have been established in west Wales, but that wasn’t done. I suggested at the time, when we had that discussion, that we needed to look again at the Government’s criteria when it comes to decisions on the location of new bodies, if the Government is serious about strengthening those communities where the Welsh language is the language of daily communication. So, my question is: will you take deliberate steps as a Government to create new governmental posts in those areas with a high percentage of Welsh speakers? And will you take action to relocate from the prosperous south-eastern corridors when opportunities arise?

In turning to education, the minutiae here, again, are very important indeed, and you do have certain targets in the work programme—and I’m not talking here of the strategy, but the work programme, which is crucial—for example, an increase in the number of primary schoolteachers who teach through the medium of Welsh from 2,900 to 3,100 by 2021, which is an additional 200; an increase in the number of secondary teachers teaching Welsh from 500 to 600, which is 100 more; and the numbers teaching through the medium of Welsh from 1,800 to 2,200 by 2021, and that’s an increase of 400. Now, to me, that doesn’t sound like a huge increase. Is it sufficient, or am I perhaps not seeing where that fits into the rest of the strategy?

I have a specific question also on education, and that is on the Welsh in education strategic plans. We do need to see these becoming far more ambitious if we’re to reach this target, and at the moment, we haven’t seen a huge amount of progress. I know that you would agree with that. So, how will the twenty-first century schools budget be used in order to support the WESPs and to support the development of new educational facilities?

I note that your work programme runs over four years and that the strategy is to be implemented over a far longer period, but in order to maintain that momentum, you will need to establish an arm’s-length body in order to ensure consistency, have an overview and to maintain direction post 2021. The sector certainly agrees with that, and, as part of the current budget, the agreement was made to establish an arm’s-length body. My final question is: what is the purpose of the planning board that’s been meeting recently? Will that develop into an arm’s-length body—this body that is required—and if that is the case, when will that happen? Thank you.

Again, I’d like to thank the Plaid Cymru spokesperson for her general welcome for the strategy and the work programme. I’m pleased that you focused on the work programme in your questions. You’re right that, when I look around me in this place in Cardiff Bay, when I travel around Wales and when I’m at home in Blaenau Gwent, I see goodwill towards the Welsh language in all places. It’s one thing that does unite us as a nation, and I see goodwill from communities where the Welsh language is an important part of community life, and also goodwill in those communities where the Welsh language isn’t part of the community’s everyday life. I see that as something that I want to see continue and to promote over the coming years.

But you’re right—we are making a clear commitment to ensure that we have an economic plan for all parts of Wales, including those communities where the Welsh language is the community language. The Government needs to ensure that we invest also in those communities. You’ve seen a clear policy from this Government to move jobs outside of Cardiff and to move jobs into different parts of Wales, and that has been an emphasis that this Government has made and it’s been a continuous policy of the current Government. Perhaps the jobs aren’t all going to the places that you would have chosen—that’s probably true—but the development bank has gone to the north, of course, transport has gone to the Valleys, and the Welsh Revenue Authority has also moved. So, we have seen that policy of moving jobs outside of Cardiff—investing in Wales as a nation and not just in the capital city—and I think that that is vitally important. That policy will continue over the period of this current Assembly. I’m sure that that policy will include the west and the north of Wales in their entirety, of course, and you will see that happening over the coming months and coming years.

When it comes to education, are the targets sufficient? I do think that the targets are ambitious and sufficient for now. This is a journey. It’s not a four-year strategy. We’ve published a work programme for four years, for the period of this Assembly, to enable people, and to enable this Government to commit to specific targets whilst we’re in power during this Assembly. It’s the work of the Assembly, the Welsh Parliament indeed, to ensure the accountability of this Government over the coming period.

You’ve asked a specific question about the WESPs, and I spoke about the WESPs in the statement. I will be making a statement over the coming weeks. You’re right. I agree with you with regard to your analysis that we need robust WESPs that reflect the Government’s ambition. You’ll also know that Aled Roberts has been working on this for six months, and I expect to see Aled’s report over the coming weeks. I will be publishing his report and I will be writing to all local authorities over the coming period to ask them to take action in order for us to be able to achieve the targets that we have set out in the different WESPs.

But when you ask about the budget for the twenty-first century schools programme, may I say this? We’ve seen many questions being asked about the budget for the Welsh language and where the funding is. I want to be clear in my mind, and I want Members to be clear too, that we’re not isolating the Welsh language in one department of this Government. The Welsh language is going to be integrated in all departments of Government, and all Government activities, and all of the Government’s programmes. So our ambition for the Welsh language is that it will be a central part of the twenty-first century schools programme. There’s no one budget for English-medium schools and one budget for Welsh-medium schools. There’s one education budget for a system that is implemented in both languages, and we will be taking action in that vein.

You talk about an arm’s-length body, and you say that there’s support for that. I don’t see as much support for the establishment of new public bodies, I have to say, but we do have the current agreement, and I’m going to be setting out clear proposals in the White Paper that will move that policy forward. I look forward to having that kind of discussion and debate on that over the coming weeks and months.

I would like to give a warm welcome to this report as well, and the general approach that the Minister has brought to this. This is a series of measured and practical steps, I think, to go towards achieving the ultimate ambition of 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050, but I’d also like to commend him on the eloquence with which he concluded his statement about the reasons for supporting the Welsh language and embedding it in the culture of the people of Wales, even in those areas where it has long since disappeared as the everyday language of the people. I think that’s exactly the right approach to bring to this, and it’s useful, I think, to have somebody doing this job who didn’t grow up to speak Welsh at home and has learnt the language. It will be the great challenge of the future to convince the English monoglot section of the population, which is by far the greater at the moment, that this is an adventure in which we must all take part.

So, I agree with what the document says, in particular that the Government strategy can’t force individuals to use the language, and for the language to truly flourish, we’re counting on each and every one of us to embrace the idea of a bilingual Wales. So, we have to carry the people with us and go with the grain of public opinion, but also to lead it as well. I would, in this context, also like to commend Plaid Cymru’s contribution, which we debated last week, in this document, ‘Reaching the Million’, and the importance, initially at any rate, of ensuring that we retain a robust social heartland for the Welsh language in the west and in the north. But it is important for us also to have a strategy for breaking out of the traditional areas that are still largely Welsh speaking, because we don’t want to see the Welsh language largely confined to what we might call a ‘laager’ within our own country.

If we are to succeed in our ultimate objective, then we do have to convince people who don’t hear the Welsh language spoken on a daily basis at home or in their communities that this is worth making an effort to engage in. The great challenge now will come of course in WESPs, in areas that pose these greater challenges, and we must certainly do our best to avoid the kind of confrontation that we saw, sadly, in Llangennech in the last year. We must work harder in those circumstances to convince people that it’s not going to set children back to learn through the medium of Welsh.

What Simon Thomas said the other day about the value of learning another language, whether it be Welsh or any other language, is absolutely true. At school, I learned three languages—German, French and Russian—as well as Welsh, although I had to give up Welsh in order to do one of the others. We don’t do that today. I don’t know whether that has made me a more intelligent person as a result, or a more eloquent person, but it has certainly added several dimensions to my life, which I’m pleased to have. And so, there is a value in this beyond the nuts-and-bolts arguments of economics we’ve heard about, which are important, but to be honest, given that English is the lingua franca of the world generally, it’s going to be a problem for all other languages, in a sense, to compete with it in international commerce and the world of the internet. We’ve got to bring reassurance to parents that this is something that is of value to children.

We’ve seen a collapse in the teaching of modern languages generally in the United Kingdom, not just in Wales, in recent years. The British Council did a survey only two years ago that found that only 22 per cent of pupils take GCSEs in languages other than English or Welsh. That, I think, is deplorable, because languages are seen to be difficult. Well, amongst the languages that I’ve studied, Welsh is a rather less complex language to learn. Vocabulary is smaller; words are made to do more things in Welsh than in other languages; we don’t have problems of cases and conjugations and so on; and it should, with a bit of effort, be an easier language to absorb and learn than, say, a language like Russian, which I mentioned earlier on.

So, this is an important step, but what has also been said about the importance of the earliest years can’t be overestimated, and I would like to commend the work done by Mudiad Meithrin in this respect, and the ambition to see 150 new ‘cylchoedd’ for three to four-year-olds is the beacon of hope, I think, for the language, because the other interesting thing that I discovered from the Plaid Cymru report was that 18.8 per cent of three to four-year-olds were Welsh speaking in 2001. That had risen by 5 per cent to 23.3 per cent in 2011. It would be interesting to know, if we could, what the figure is now, and to what extent we’re making progress along this road. The ambition in this document of having 35 per cent is an important intermediate step, I think, and so I commend the approach that the Minister has to that.

If we are to succeed in this objective, it is in embedding the language in the earliest years when we are the most absorbent. I can tell you from my own experience that at the age of 68 it’s much more difficult to recover vocabulary, let alone learn new words, than it used to be. I think it’s important for us to realise that there is an overwhelming consensus in the Assembly behind this approach, but that consensus is not reflected to the same extent outside, and therefore we all have to play our part in bringing people on board this exercise. Certainly on behalf of my own party, I’ll say we will hope to play our part in this as well, because I think we can be useful to the Government in this respect, representing part of the community that isn’t normally associated with the adventure on which we are all now embarked.

I’m grateful to you for your kind remarks and for the welcome you’ve given the statement, and both the approach and the tone that we have used in moving this policy forward. You describe the strategy as an adventure. It’s certainly a journey, and it’s an exciting journey. It’s exciting because it isn’t going to be those of us in this Chamber here who will determine its success. It’s going to be the parents who take individual decisions, it’s going to be the parent who decides to use Welsh with their child to transmit the language through the generations, the parent who decides to send their child through the Welsh-medium system, the parent who helps their children doing their Welsh homework in an English-medium school, the people who change the language that they use when they’re in a rugby club, a pub or whatever it happens to be, or the people who actually make an effort to use the language on a daily basis and to ensure that future generations use the language. I hope that, in doing so, the country itself, which has been on one journey with the language, will go on another journey in a different direction with the language.

My own family moved to Tredegar at the turn of the last century, and they were entirely Welsh speaking when they moved from Aberystwyth to work in the collieries of south Wales. They lost the language and the language died like a fault line in the family before the second world war. Now, we are seeing my children—my parents’ grandchildren—learning and speaking Welsh as a first language and regaining the language. The language is reborn in the family. I hope, in the same way, we’ll be able to see that in many families and in many different parts of Wales. I know that the education Secretary shares a very similar family journey herself. I hope that, in that way, we will not simply see the language as acquiring only a skill, but that we will also win the hearts and minds of people across the country, and that we will move away from the sense of, ‘If you win, I lose’—a zero sum game that we’ve seen all too often in the past—where if we speak Welsh, then we exclude people who speak English, and a bilingual policy is Welsh speakers being forced to speak English. So, we need to move away from those sorts of contradictions, and we need to move away from that approach and that tone of debate.

In doing so, it is a journey that we will embark upon as a country. I have already been speaking, through our officials, to the local authorities across Wales on their own strategic plans for Welsh. As I said in an answer to a previous question, I will be making a statement on that, and making an announcement on that in the next few weeks, but I hope that we will reassure parents, but also inspire parents and inspire people to learn the Welsh language, to enjoy using Welsh, not to worry about getting every mutation right and every issue of grammar correct, but to enjoy using the Welsh language, to feel comfortable using the Welsh language, and to feel comfortable doing it socially as well as professionally. We start that in the early years, and I hope that the experience that parents will have, or the good experience of their child learning two languages early in life, is something that will stay with them and enrich them in their lives in a way that it has enriched me and my family in our lives.

Minister, can I commend you for today’s statement and the ambition behind the policy? We should be in no doubt that this is a radical cultural policy that goes against the grain of language use for a century or more, and this is not going to be an easy task, but I think it’s absolutely right that we’re aspiring to do this.

I want to focus, if I might, on the education system. You set a target of having 70 per cent of learners being able to use the language with confidence in all aspects of their lives by 2050, and you’ve set out a clear ambition for the Welsh-medium sector to be a significant part of achieving that, but it seems to me that the Welsh-medium sector alone is never going to be able to achieve growth of that scale. I also do think it’s morally wrong, if I can use such strong language, that children who are educated in the English-medium sector are denied effective use of the language. My own nine-year-old daughter is a bright kid and can’t speak a word of Welsh. Her teachers don’t speak Welsh, and there are many, many schoolchildren across Wales—. In fact, 68 per cent of seven-year-olds are in English-medium schools, and we are denying them the language of our nation, and I think that is wrong. I think this strategy must address that, not simply address the expansion of the Welsh-medium sector, which is the relatively easy bit to do, but address the much more challenging bit of having the vast majority of schools teach Welsh in a way where they are able to meet that target of using the language with confidence in all aspects of their lives. You say, rightly, in the strategy that success is dependent on developing the skills of the workforce. That is a mammoth task. So, perhaps you can tell us how, in practical terms, you intend to do that, and if you could also tell us a little bit about what the Welsh Government itself intends to do to achieve the objectives of this strategy within the Government. Diolch.

Can I say how much I absolutely agree with the points that have been made by Lee Waters? As a Minister, you tend to visit a number of different schools and institutions. I visited a school in your constituency about six months ago. I visited my old infants school with the education Secretary. It’s always a curious experience to go back to your own school. When I started in Glanhowy infants, I think it was about 1968, 1969, something like that, the only Welsh I heard was once a year on St David’s Day, when we had an eisteddfod, where we were taught how to sing a particular song, and we sang that and then we went back to our daily lives. It was a real joy for me to spend time talking to teachers and talking to people there, where children in the foundation phase were having Welsh words introduced to them. So, they were introducing colours and numbers and introducing the concept of the language to them, in a way that would have been unthinkable when I was growing up in Tredegar. So, I hope that we’ll be able introduce more Welsh into—and the continuum of language acquisition that we’ve debated and discussed as part of the new curriculum in—the English language sector in a way that isn’t confrontational, which doesn’t create the cliff edge, which doesn’t force and compel people to get everything right in every aspect of grammar and of the language, but to be able to feel comfortable listening and learning and speaking the language, and to do so in a way that encourages language use, not discourages people by being overly aggressive on different aspects of it. So, I hope we will be able to do that.

You mentioned the workforce. It’s absolutely critical that we’re able to do that. Something like a third of teachers in Wales at the moment are able to speak Welsh, and not all of them are able to teach through the medium of Welsh or to teach Welsh as a subject. So, we do need to invest in training for teachers, to make teachers feel comfortable and able to both introduce aspects of our language as well as teach the language. But, overall, my concern is absolutely the same as yours. I do not want to create an education system where some people learn and speak and are able to use Welsh fluently and easily, and then the other half of the system is unable to understand even the basics. That tends to be what we have today, and that’s what we have got to move away from. I hope that children and young people, when they leave school at 16, will be able to speak and to use Welsh—some to a greater degree than others—but will be at least able to feel comfortable with the language, and hearing the language around them, and understanding the basics. Some will choose, of course, to go on and study at greater length, and the best of luck to them. Others will chose not to do so, and the best of luck to those as well. But, certainly, what I’m anxious to do is ensure that we have a bilingual education system where everybody is able to have the same opportunity to acquire the language and to understand the culture that underpins as well. So, the English language sector is as important and, as you say, perhaps a bit more difficult than perhaps the Welsh language sector.

The Welsh Government itself has to recognise that you can’t change the world without changing yourself. I hope that the Welsh Government itself recognises this isn’t a policy for Wales, but a policy for us, as well, as a Government. We will need to look again at how we operate as an administration to ensure that we operate bilingually as well, and not simply send missives out from Cardiff Bay or Cathays Park telling the world how they should operate. We need to do that ourselves, and that is something I’m confident that we will do.

We are out of time on this item, but, if I can get some very brief questions, and brief responses, I will extend the session slightly because of its importance. Dai Lloyd.

Thank you, Llywydd. May I thank the Minister for his statement, and congratulate him on his vision? I just wanted to focus on one point in terms of the promotion of the Welsh language as part of this strategy—promoting the language and promoting information about Wales to those who may be new to the concept. You say that, as well as emphasising that the Welsh language is an important inheritance to the 3 million Welsh population, whether they speak it or not, as you say—. But bearing in mind, going back to the seventh century, before everyone else came here, that the indigenous language of the British isles was Old Welsh, it’s an inheritance not just for the people of Wales, but for everyone in England and in parts of Scotland, from Edinburgh down. So, in addition to the need to promote the Welsh language and information about Wales within Wales, may I also emphasise the importance of taking that information about our history as a nation and our language over the border, too? Thank you.

I agree with you, Dai, and I wanted to make that exact same point in my oral statement, when I was talking about the Welsh language as a British language, and our Welsh experience as a British experience. It’s vitally important that we don’t just reach out over the border, but that we understand each other as people of Britain. I think that’s something that’s vital and something that we’ll continue to emphasise.

Well, here we are starting out on our journey with the first piece of the map in our hands. I appreciate the Minister’s tone in talking about the language as a means of uniting our communities, and that we need a national effort, not just Government policy, in order to deliver that. You’ve emphasised in your responses how inherently important the early years are in creating Welsh speakers and Welsh pupils, and enhancing demand for Welsh-medium education. In the Welsh language committee, we had evidence from Mudiad Meithrin that we need to create over 600 ‘cylchoedd meithrin’ over this period to meet the demand for early years Welsh-medium education. In the Government strategy, it mentions 150, so can you explain that disparity, first of all?

And then, generally speaking, we are very fortunate that you are also the Minister responsible for the Valleys taskforce. Can you just explain how the Welsh language strategy will impact upon those discussions?

I saw the evidence from Mudiad Meithrin to the committee, and it was excellent evidence. They, of course, were talking about the target of 2050, and that we’d need 600 ‘cylchoedd meithrin’ by that time. The number that we have is an additional 150 by 2031. So, we have around 450 at present, and that takes us up to 500 by 2031. So, I don’t think that we’re far apart on this, because some ‘cylchoedd’ will merge, some will grow, and so it’s a fluid situation with regard to how it’s developed. The important thing, and I agree with the Mudiad Meithrin on this, is that children have, at the very early stage of their lives, the same opportunity to attend Welsh-medium ‘cylchoedd’ and bilingual ‘cylchoedd’ nationwide, so that they have the opportunity to start learning Welsh as early as possible in their education.

When it comes to the Valleys taskforce, I want to ensure that the Welsh language is part of the daily life of the Valleys once again. It was excellent for me personally to visit a school in my constituency and listen to children speaking Welsh with Tredegar, Brynmawr, and Ebbw Vale accents, and starting to regenerate the Welsh language in areas where it’s been lost for a century. And that’s where we want to see—. I remember meeting you in Tŷ’r Gwrhyd in Pontardawe, where we have another opportunity to revive the Welsh language in communities where it’s lost ground. I very much hope, in the work that we do with the Valleys taskforce—we’re focusing on the economic side at present, but, as we move forward over the coming years, I very much hope that there will be a new emphasis on the Welsh language in the Valleys to ensure that the Valleys are an area where the Welsh language is strong once again.

Finally, Adam Price.

The strategy does emphasise the regional dimension in terms of economic development, and it’s important to the traditional Welsh-speaking heartlands because of economic and demographic similarities. But, again, the Welsh Government is suggesting a map of economic regions that places those Welsh-speaking areas in with majority non-Welsh-speaking areas. Is the Government in favour of the creation of an economic region for Welsh-speaking west Wales so that we can deliver the potential that exists, as highlighted in the strategy?

I think that we do have to invest in the economy of areas where the Welsh language is the community language, but what I don’t want to do is create a Gaeltacht, as it were—create a community or region where it is established that that is the area where it’s spoken. As I mentioned in response to the Member for Neath with regard to promoting the Welsh language in the Valleys, we need to ensure that the Welsh language belongs to all communities in our nation. I do acknowledge that we do have to invest, and I said in response to Sian Gwenllian that we do have to ensure that the Government is responsible to the communities where Welsh is the community language, and to ensure the economic future of those communities. That’s something I’m working on with the Cabinet Secretary for the economy, and, when he makes his statement on the regional economic policy, there will be an integral part for the Welsh language.

Thank you, Minister.

The next item is the statement by the same Minister, the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh language—an update on the ministerial taskforce for the south Wales Valleys. Once again, I call on Alun Davies.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m pleased that you have the opportunity to listen to me again, and I’m very pleased to have this opportunity to discuss the work of the ministerial taskforce for the south Wales Valleys. Members will be aware that we set up the taskforce a year ago to work with communities and local businesses across the south Wales Valleys to ensure that we can deliver lasting economic change in the region and create good-quality jobs closer to people’s homes, improve skill levels, and bring prosperity to all in the Valleys.

Hoffwn roi ar y cofnod, Dirprwy Lywydd, fy niolch i'r tasglu am ei waith dros y 12 mis diwethaf. Rwyf eisiau diolch i’m cyd-Aelodau yn y llywodraeth—Ken Skates, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros yr Economi a’r Seilwaith, a Julie James, y Gweinidog Sgiliau a Gwyddoniaeth. Mae aelodaeth y tasglu wedi ei ehangu yn ystod y flwyddyn, ac mae’r aelodau newydd yn cynnwys Fiona Jones, o'r Adran Gwaith a Phensiynau, a Gaynor Richards, o Gyngor Gwasanaeth Gwrifoddol Castell-nedd Port Talbot.

Mae'r flwyddyn gyntaf wedi bod yn brysur iawn. Rydym wedi cyfarfod â phobl sy'n byw ac yn gweithio yn y Cymoedd, ac wedi siarad â nhw, a gwrando arnynt. Mae'r sgyrsiau hyn wedi bod yn fywiog, craff a heriol. Maent, ynghyd â'r dystiolaeth y mae’r tasglu wedi ei chasglu yn ystod y flwyddyn ddiwethaf, wedi helpu i lunio ein blaenoriaethau ar gyfer y dyfodol. Dirprwy Lywydd, nid dim ond creu cynllun ar gyfer y Cymoedd ydym ni; mae’n gynllun gan y Cymoedd. Rydym ni’n gwybod bod angen i ni weithio'n wahanol i fentrau a rhaglenni blaenorol sydd wedi canolbwyntio ar y Cymoedd, a dysgu oddi wrthyn nhw. Ni all hyn ac ni fydd hyn yn ffordd arall o weithio o’r brig i lawr ar adfywio ac adnewyddu economaidd. Byddwn yn parhau i weithio gyda chymunedau ledled Cymoedd y de. Bydd y tasglu yn sicrhau ei fod yn defnyddio adnoddau presennol mewn ffordd gydlynol a bydd yn canolbwyntio ar y blaenoriaethau sydd wedi eu nodi gan y cymunedau hynny. Caiff y blaenoriaethau hyn eu nodi yn 'Ein Cymoedd, Ein Dyfodol', ein cynllun gweithredu blaengar, a fydd yn cael ei gyhoeddi ar 20 Gorffennaf yng Nglynrhedynog.

Dirprwy Lywydd, o ganlyniad i'r sylwadau a gafwyd gan bobl sy'n byw ac yn gweithio yn y Cymoedd, rydym ni wedi seilio’r cynllun a'r camau y byddwn yn eu cymryd dros y blynyddoedd nesaf ar dair thema: swyddi o ansawdd da a’r sgiliau i’w gwneud nhw, gwell gwasanaethau cyhoeddus, a'r gymuned a’r amgylchedd lleol. Ar yr un pryd, roedd cludiant yn rhywbeth y soniodd pobl ar draws y rhanbarth cyfan amdano, ac mae hyn yn rhywbeth y byddwn ni hefyd yn mynd i'r afael ag ef yn y misoedd nesaf. Roedd yr angen am swyddi o ansawdd da a mynediad at hyfforddiant sgiliau yn flaenoriaeth glir i'r bobl a busnesau yr ydym wedi siarad â nhw. Dywedodd pobl wrthym ni nad oedd digon o gyfleoedd gwaith o fewn cyrraedd i’w cymunedau ac yn rhy aml mae'r swyddi sydd ar gael ar gontractau dim oriau neu yn waith dros dro neu drwy asiantaeth. Uchelgais y tasglu erbyn 2021 yw y byddwn wedi cau'r bwlch cyflogaeth rhwng Cymoedd y de a gweddill Cymru. Mae hyn yn golygu helpu 7,000 o bobl ychwanegol i gael gwaith a chreu miloedd o swyddi newydd, teg, diogel a chynaliadwy yn y Cymoedd. Mae'n amserol bod y Gweinidog Sgiliau a Gwyddoniaeth heddiw yn gosod agenda newydd Llywodraeth Cymru ar gyfer cyflogadwyedd. Bydd y gwaith hwn yn helpu i ehangu ein hymdrechion i gefnogi pobl sy'n ddi-waith i gael swyddi a chreu gwell amodau gwaith. Bydd y tasglu yn helpu i sicrhau bod yr agenda cyflogadwyedd newydd yn sicrhau’r manteision mwyaf posib ar gyfer ein cymunedau yn y Cymoedd.

Dirprwy Lywydd, bydd y tasglu hefyd yn targedu buddsoddiad i sicrhau canolfannau strategol newydd mewn chwe ardal yn y Cymoedd. Bydd y rhain yn ardaloedd lle’r ydym ni’n ceisio canolbwyntio buddsoddiad cyhoeddus er mwyn creu swyddi newydd a chyfleoedd pellach i ddenu buddsoddiad gan y sector preifat. Byddwn yn gweithio’n lleol gyda chymunedau, awdurdodau lleol a busnesau i sicrhau y bydd pob canolfan yn canolbwyntio ar gyfleoedd a gofynion pob ardal a'u dyheadau ar gyfer y dyfodol. Un o'r canolfannau hyn fydd y parc busnes technoleg modurol newydd ar gyfer Glynebwy, a gyhoeddwyd gan Ysgrifennydd yr economi y mis diwethaf. Caiff hyn ei gefnogi drwy roi £100 miliwn dros 10 mlynedd a bydd yn cefnogi swyddi a buddsoddiad ledled Blaenau'r Cymoedd.

Ein bwriad yw gwneud y mwyaf o gyfleoedd am swyddi yn yr economi leol—yr economi sylfaenol—busnesau yr ydym ni’n eu defnyddio bob dydd ac yn eu gweld yn mhob man o'n cwmpas, fel busnesau manwerthu, gofal a'r diwydiant bwyd. Byddwn hefyd yn annog ac yn darparu cymorth ar gyfer darpar entrepreneuriaid ac entrepreneuriaid presennol. Rwyf wedi gweld sut y gall hyn weithio yn fy etholaeth i ac rwyf yn awyddus i weld hyn yn digwydd ym mhob rhan o'r Cymoedd. Mae pob ardal yn y Cymoedd yn unigryw, ond mae gan bob cymuned dreftadaeth a diwylliant cyfoethog. Yn y Cymoedd hefyd mae peth o’r tirwedd naturiol mwyaf syfrdanol yng Nghymru, ond a gaiff ei ddefnyddio a’i werthfawrogi leiaf. Clywsom yn aml mewn cyfarfodydd cyhoeddus a grwpiau trafod bod angen i ni wneud mwy i glodfori a manteisio ar amgylchedd naturiol y Cymoedd .

Bydd y tasglu felly'n archwilio'r cysyniad o greu parc tirlun y Cymoedd i helpu cymunedau’r ardal i adeiladu ar yr asedau naturiol niferus sydd ganddyn nhw, gan gynnwys y potensial ar gyfer cynhyrchu ynni cymunedol a thwristiaeth. Rydym ni hefyd wedi clywed gan lawer o bobl am wead ein trefi a’n cymunedau a sut y mae angen i ni fuddsoddi yn nyfodol ein trefi yn y Cymoedd. Ar yr un pryd, roedd pobl yn sôn gydag angerdd am y sbwriel a’r tipio anghyfreithlon sy'n anharddu llawer gormod o'n hamgylchedd lleol. Mae'r rhain i gyd yn faterion y byddwn yn rhoi sylw iddynt yn ystod y misoedd nesaf.

Rydym yn lansio 'Ein Cymoedd, Ein Dyfodol' ar adeg o fuddsoddi mewn seilwaith yn y de na welwyd ei debyg o’r blaen. Mae metro de Cymru, y ddwy fargen ddinesig, ymrwymiad Llywodraeth Cymru i fuddsoddi mewn tai fforddiadwy, a ffordd liniaru'r M4, i gyd yn cynnig cyfleoedd i’r bobl sy'n byw yn y Cymoedd. Mae'r rhain yn gyfleoedd y mae'n rhaid i ni, ac y byddwn ni, yn gwneud y mwyaf ohonynt.

Rwy'n benderfynol y bydd y tasglu yn gwneud gwahaniaeth gwirioneddol i gymunedau’r Cymoedd yn ystod y tymor Cynulliad hwn. Dechrau taith fwy hirdymor yw hyn, sy'n cael ei llunio gan bobl sy'n byw ac yn gweithio yn y Cymoedd. Mae’n rhaid i ni yn awr weithio gyda'n gilydd i wireddu’r weledigaeth hon ar lawr gwlad. Ar ôl lansio’r cynllun, byddwn yn parhau i siarad â phobl i wneud yn siŵr bod y camau hyn yn cael eu llunio gan bobl sy'n byw yn y Cymoedd. Byddwn yn ystyried y safbwyntiau hynny, a hefyd yn datblygu cynllun cyflawni gyda thargedau a dulliau o fesur canlyniadau. Caiff y cynllun hwn ei gyhoeddi yn yr hydref a bydd ganddo amserlen glir o ran ei gyflawni.

Bydd gennym ni strwythur ar waith i sicrhau bod atebolrwydd am y gwaith hwn. Mae gennym ni fwrdd traws-Lywodraeth a fydd yn sicrhau a darparu goruchwyliaeth ac yn ein dwyn i gyfrif o ran y cynnydd a wnawn yn erbyn ein hymrwymiadau. Caiff hyn ei gefnogi gan nifer o wahanol ffrydiau gwaith a byddaf yn gofyn i aelodau o'r tasglu i arwain y gwaith ar y gwahanol ffrydiau gwaith hyn.

Dirprwy Lywydd, rwy’n edrych ymlaen i fod yn rhan o'r gwaith hwn yn y Cymoedd. Mae hon yn rhan o Gymru sy'n agos at fy nghalon. Dyma lle cefais fy ngeni a’m magu, a dyma lle’r wyf yn ei gynrychioli heddiw. Bydd y tasglu yn adeiladu ar y gwersi a ddysgwyd o gynlluniau adfywio blaenorol, gan eu cyfuno â’r sylwadau a gawsom ni gan gymunedau ar draws Cymoedd y de. Mae 'Ein Cymoedd, Ein Dyfodol' yn cynnig gobaith am ddyfodol gwell. Nid yw pobl sy'n byw ac yn gweithio yn y Cymoedd yn haeddu dim llai.

Minister, thank you for your statement this afternoon. It does remind me of a predecessor of yours, Leighton Andrews, who was up and down on his feet on the same afternoon serving us several statements at once. I hope you don’t have the same political future as, obviously, that particular Minister had.

But I do welcome your statement. Obviously, you have put a huge amount of personal energy into this, and Government energy into it—and rightly so, in fairness. Also, your cross-Government approach—rather than looking at it from a silo point of view, thinking, ‘This is mine, and I’m just going to lead it’. Taking Cabinet Secretaries with you to many of the public meetings does give confidence that Government is looking at this in the collective.

Because I think it is fair to say that many of the Valleys communities can say that, in some instances, they might well have heard all this before, but actually, if you look at economic activity, if you look at education standards, and many of the key indicators, sadly, we haven’t seen the improvements we would all wish to see. Above all, it’s about—in the next five, 10, 15 years—building that economic activity within the Valleys, so that they do become sustainable, they do become generators of their own futures and, above all, they do become places that people generally want to live and work in as well.

I do note from your statement, Minister, that you say that next week you will be launching the high-level plan ‘Our Valleys, Our Future’, but then we have to wait until the autumn until we get the performance indicators, or how you will measure yourself, which you have touched on in the latter part of your statement. I'm just wondering: why the disconnect? Because, surely, to make it a coherent plan, you already understand what indicators you're aiming for. So, why aren't the two linked in? Because for us to have confidence that this plan is more than words on paper, we do need to be able to see the progress and measure the progress, not just as politicians, but as communities from the Valleys, as I said, so they can have confidence that you're moving in the right direction.

You've touched on, in your opening remarks, how you've been led by the communities themselves, and rightly so. I'd be keen to understand where you believe a job is local enough to be determined as being a job within a local community. You touched on that in your statement here:

‘within reach of their local communities’

are the are words that you talk of. Yet, much of the economic levers that the Welsh Government has used over the last couple of years certainly have generated levels of employment along the coastal belt here—in particular in south Wales—that have seen, obviously, many people moving out of the Valleys for those employment opportunities. So, I'd like to understand: do you see the employment window as the entire south Wales area, or are you focused very much on generating local employment within the communities themselves? And how do you succeed in doing that? Because you do touch on creating an additional 7,000 jobs in this period up to 2021, I believe you're talking of. Are those genuinely new jobs that you're looking to create—so they’re over and above what’s already in the Valleys—or are they just merely jobs that would be filling jobs that already exist, either in the public sector, the private sector or the voluntary sector? Can we genuinely be looking forward to 7,000 new job opportunities over and above what already exists within the Valleys?

You touch also on the six strategic hubs that you’re looking to develop in the Valleys. I’d be interested to understand how you’re developing that concept, what exactly they stand for—are they merely mini enterprise zones? Because you identify the one that you’ve got in Blaenau Gwent, for example, that came out of the Circuit of Wales announcement as being a model. Well, that is a themed model in that it is around the automotive sector. So, with the roll-out of the five remaining hubs that you would have left in this concept, what do you actually mean? Geographically, how will they be spread around the Valleys area? In particular, what budget lines will be allocated to create the opportunities? Obviously, in Blaenau Gwent, you’ve identified £100 million over 10 years for that particular hub. Can the other five hubs look forward to the same level of funding? Because, again, I think it’s important to understand what resource Welsh Government are putting forward into this concept. I do caution the ‘build it and they will come’ philosophy, because, actually, we’ve seen that philosophy does not work. And so, if that’s going to be the mainstay of your economic activity, please give us some meat on the bones so we can understand what we can deem a success and what the concept will deliver.

In closing, I do welcome the reference to the natural environment—[Interruption.] I hope the leader of the house is all right. I was a little concerned then that I’d have to come over and give you the kiss of life. [Interruption.] I can see the colour has come to the leader of the house’s face. Is that a hot flush?

In closing, I would congratulate the Minister for identifying the natural environment within the Valleys. As someone with a farming background, I do think this has been a massively underused resource that exists within the Valleys. I have dealt, recently, on a cross-party basis, with Hefin from Caerphilly, and the Member for Cynon Valley as well, and other Members across the Chamber, around the commons that sit on top of the Valleys—there are huge open spaces that do form an important economic facility for agriculture. But also they do play an important role in the natural environment within the Valleys, and I’d be grateful for an explanation as to how the Minister sees that natural environment playing a genuine role in the renaissance of the Valleys that we all want to see, in particular across all the Valleys.

I’m grateful to the leader of the Welsh Conservatives for his kind words and welcome for the statement this afternoon. Can I say to him—? When the First Minister asked me to take on this responsibility of co-ordinating and leading this work, I was very, very clear in my own mind that in creating a Valleys taskforce, we don’t want to create another quango or we don’t want to create another sort of delivery machinery in its own right, but that what we needed to do was to bring together the existing functions of Government and to ensure that all parts of Government take on a responsibility for delivering in the Valleys of south Wales. The taskforce itself then brings a focus and is a catalyst for action to enable those things to happen. We certainly don’t want any further complex delivery structures, and we don’t want duplication. What we want is a clear focus on the Valleys of south Wales. So, it was very, very clear what the First Minister—and he clearly agreed that we needed a taskforce in order to drive this work, rather than delivering it itself. And so the cross-governmental working and the ambitions and objectives that we have will be delivered by Cabinet Secretaries and Ministers, and will be delivered by Welsh Government acting in order to deliver on its existing programmes, but also acting as a catalyst to enable others to deliver and bringing others together. So, I’m very, very clear—and I welcome his recognition of that—that this is something for the whole Government to deliver upon.

There have, of course, been a number of different Valleys initiatives. I remember sitting next to Robin Walker at an event before Christmas, and he was discussing the work that his father had done in the Valleys some years ago. He mentioned how much his father had enjoyed that work, and how he felt he’d needed and wanted to contribute to the economic future of the Valleys. So, we do need to learn from what we’ve done in the past, and recognise that we do need a much wider focus on the Valleys than we’ve had perhaps before.

I also agree that people who live in Valleys communities absolutely need the confidence to know that this is more than simply words, and that we will deliver on the promises and the undertakings that we are making. I want to ensure that we do have a delivery plan—a delivery plan with clear targets, with clear actions and clear timescales. For me, it is absolutely essential as a Minister that I’m held to account for the undertakings I give, both to this place and elsewhere, that people are able to hold me to account by ensuring that there’s information made publicly available to enable others to hold us to account, and that we have clear targets and clear timescales. That means that we can have a much richer debate about what we’re seeking to do, both within this Assembly term and subsequent to that. So, we will have a delivery plan published in the autumn. I will ensure that there is Government time made available for a further statement or debate to ensure that Members have the opportunity to question us on that, and I will ensure that we have all the information made public to enable that accountability to be a rich debate about how we take this area of policy forward, and not simply a more antagonistic, perhaps, sort of accountability that we see all too often.

In terms of local jobs and what that means, clearly, the south Wales metro will be a means of ensuring that we are able to enable people to move to find work where necessary, to have different opportunities for work and skills, and to receive education and services. But also, we need to ensure that we have those jobs available to them where they live as well. One of the great opportunities that I see with the development of the A465 dualling project is that we’re not simply building a bypass for the towns of the Heads of the Valleys, but we’re actually investing in a northern corridor, if you like, where we will have and we need to have an economic development plan to create and to stimulate economic development at the Heads of the Valleys, which are the areas that have benefited least, if you like, from other economic investment programmes, so that we will be able to create and stimulate local work and local economies there in the Heads of the Valleys, as well as further south.

In terms of local jobs, one of the debates that’s been taking place in this place, and that has been led by a number of different Members on many sides of the Chamber, has been the place and the role of a foundational economy in the future, and this is something that I hope we will see greater investment in over the coming years. The deep place study of Tredegar, which was published some years ago now, outlined how the foundational economy can, of course, help sustain work—it can sustain jobs—but also ensure that wealth remains within a particular community as well, and I hope that we’ll be able to learn the lessons of that and apply that approach in some of the things that we’re doing in the future. But I also hope that, through investment in transport, we will be able to reconnect the Valleys and Cardiff to ensure that we do have a single economic area where people can move for work, should they choose to do so, but where work is also available much closer to home where needed and necessary. So, it is a choice whether we travel to work, not a compulsion and not something that people are forced to do. We will create new opportunities and we will say in this programme that part of those opportunities will be public sector jobs that we want to create in the Valleys, and we’ve already started that process.

The strategic hubs themselves will be different in different places; what might work in Ebbw Vale might not work elsewhere. And so you will see a construction of a strategic hub, which reflects the ambitions of that place and reflects the needs of that area and that region. It might well be different in different places—in fact, it will be different in different places. The investment that we will generate from Welsh Government into those different strategic hubs will be different investment in different places and will take a different form. What is clear is that we will need to make that investment in a timely fashion in order to ensure that we do meet the targets and the ambitions that we set ourselves.

I know I’m testing your patience, Deputy Presiding Officer—

Yes, you are, actually. [Laughter.]

Even without my glasses I can see—

Yes. [Laughter.] So, if you put your glasses on you can see how much my patience is being tested. So—.

Can I just answer the final question on the Valleys park? I agree very much with what’s been said about the potential of the commons and the tops of the Valleys, particularly. I’ve spoken many times with Rhianon Passmore about Cwmcarn scenic drive, I know that Dai Rees has spoken about the Afan valley at the same time and I’ve bored Dawn Bowden a number of times about the times I take my own children to Garwnant to enjoy the facilities there. The Valleys have a fantastic opportunity for us to enjoy the scenery and the landscape of the Valleys again, and to do that in a sustainable way. I hope that we will be able to use in the future programmes to sustain the commons, a Glastir sort of programme, that will enable us to work with landowners and others to support and sustain, not just biodiversity, but access to all of the landscapes of the Valleys, and to do that in a way, which, again, involves the whole of our communities.

I’m encouraged to hear that this work will be different from previous initiatives and programmes that are focused on the Valleys, and it has to be different, because what has happened in the past hasn’t worked. So, it’s positive to see a commitment to doing things differently, and it’s also positive that you’ve recognised Ferndale, a community that feels very neglected.

So, I’ve started with a positive, now I will turn to the ambition to close the employment gap between the south Wales Valleys and the rest of the country. First of all, I welcome the recognition that you just stated that there are different challenges to the southern most parts of the Valleys to the northernmost reaches. It’s a fact that the further away from Cardiff you are, the greater the challenges there are. So, we need to have a clear commitment from you that the ‘closer to home’ part of your job offer will be fulfilled. We need jobs in the Valleys, not just jobs within the reach of the Valleys. So, I’d like to know how many jobs will be in the Valleys. The location of jobs is crucial, as are the skills and wage levels. There are many of us, I’m sure, in this Chamber who started off our careers working in the retail sector, so I welcome the acknowledgement of the importance of the foundational economy, but where are those additional job opportunities coming from? Care and retail jobs are already very well represented in our Valleys communities. What about other jobs? What about careers for people?

Minister, I’d also like to ask about some of the projects that you’ve listed, because, again, I’m not filled with confidence. Why? Because pre-existing schemes are mentioned as relating to this taskforce, but these are schemes that are already in the pipeline. The automotive park in Ebbw Vale has already been mentioned. It’s new, but it seems to have been created purely because the Circuit of Wales plan was rejected. Now, of course, Plaid Cymru will welcome that development in Ebbw Vale, but are there other similar solutions for other Valley locations? Where’s the big project for the Rhondda, for example? The employment rates for the Rhondda are similar to Blaenau Gwent. The claimant count is similar as well. But when Rhondda Cynon Taf is considered as a whole, the most affluent southernmost communities mask the poverty and deprivation faced by people in my constituency, and I really think you need to take account of that. Are you talking to big employers in Cardiff and elsewhere to see if they will consider the larger Valleys towns for their next expansion?

I note there is a mention of the M4 relief road. Can you outline how the new M4, and in particular your favoured black route, will help the Valleys? The Sustainable Places Research Institute at Cardiff University commissioned a report that said that the new M4 would offer very little to the Valleys, and that report focused on those Valleys closest to Newport. Minister, Plaid Cymru will not accept a situation where existing Welsh Government initiatives like the M4, which have very little to do with the Valleys, are pulled into this work. Can we instead have new projects that are for the sole purpose of giving a fair deal to the former south Wales coalfield? I and Plaid Cymru will champion any new projects that the taskforce proposes, but we want to see the proof that this is new and innovative work that will deliver results and turn around the poverty and deprivation that is still our hangover from the pit closure programme.

The leader of the Tories asked about money. Now, I’ve noticed that no budget has been talked about—no specific budget—for this work. You’ve talked about catalysts, but I very much hope that the ambition that you’ve outlined will be backed up by resources.

You’ve mentioned the metro. How much money is going to be allocated to the metro? When will we see the plan for the metro? Are you going to start the work in those points furthest away from the city? These are the questions people in the Valleys want to know. People in the Valleys will not put up with a repetition of previous initiatives that have either failed or made things worse, and neither will Plaid Cymru.

I’m grateful to Leanne Wood for her few kind words. I get the impression that I’ve just watched a video being made. Can I say very, very gently to the leader of Plaid Cymru that she’s the only Valleys Member here who hasn’t met me to discuss this work in detail about how it affects their individual constituencies? A number of Members have come and spoken to me about these matters, and it is possible for all Members to continue these conversations about their individual constituencies on any other occasion.

Can I say that the conversation that I had with people in Ferndale two weeks ago was very instructive? They were talking about how they saw their lives. I was talking to a group of young people about how they saw their lives and how they saw their futures, and what they wanted was politicians with answers and politicians who had a commitment to spend time talking with them and listening to what they had to say, and—

What about jobs?

Jobs were a part of it but not the whole of it, and more time listening and less time talking would actually probably be a good lesson for the leader of Plaid Cymru. Can I say that we understand—? We understand—and it’s a good time to discuss this at the moment with Matthew Taylor’s report published today, which exposes some of the real inequalities in today’s labour market and in today’s economy. We know that a statistical overview of the Valleys won’t tell you the whole story of people’s lives in the Valleys. It won’t tell you about the difficulties faced with zero-hours contracts; they won’t talk to you about the issues of a casualised economy; they won’t talk to you about the issues of agency work, of insecurity, of being unable to plan ahead, unable to plan a family’s week or working life. People won’t talk to you about that, but the work that Mattew Taylor’s undertaken and published today I think tells us a lot about the lives of many people in the Valleys and people who I speak to on a daily and weekly basis.

Can I say this in answer to your questions? We will be ensuring that the closer to home project comes to fruition and that pilots are published and are under way in the coming weeks and months. My colleague the Minister for skills has been leading on this and she will be making an announcement of that in the coming months. We will be ensuring that these jobs are also within the Valleys region. The reason that I campaigned for the dualling of the A465, when the former Deputy First Minister was resisting it, was because what I wanted to see was an economic investment in the Valleys of south Wales. I wanted to see the dualling of that road to ensure that we were able to create a northern corridor and use that northern corridor to stimulate economic activity, to create jobs, to create work and to create careers. That is why I campaigned to ensure that we had that dualling, and when every time the then Deputy First Minister told us it wasn’t a priority for him, we made sure it was a priority, and it was a Labour Government that started to deliver on that. Let’s make that absolutely clear.

I’m surprised, also, that the Member asks questions about the metro. These announcements have already been made, of course. The Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure has already made an announcement on the £750 million on the metro scheme, and has already published a timescale for that, and has already published plans for that. That’s been done on a number of occasions, and is already in the public domain. Let me say this, in terms of existing projects: clearly, we are going to maximise the benefits of those projects that exist at the moment. I was very clear, in my answer to the leader of the opposition, that we want to ensure that we act as a catalyst, yes, and that we ensure that the Valleys are the responsibility of all departments, in the same way as, as I spoke earlier about the future of the Welsh language, it isn’t simply a matter for one department and one budget line. It is integrated in and is the responsibility of all aspects of Government and all ministries and all departments. That is exactly the way in which we will progress with the Valleys, and I’ll say this, in closing: you can either come with us on this journey or not. That is a matter for you.

Thanks, Minister, for your statement this afternoon. It’s good that there is a Welsh Government plan for the Valleys, but, of course, we do need to ensure that it is an effective one. There does seem to be a measure of scepticism in various sectors of the Chamber so far, and we do have a lack of detail. Of course, you are hampered by the historic problem of the relative failure, or the perceived relative failure, of previous Valleys initiatives. So, I wish you luck with this one and, of course, I think we all hope that it can yield some success, but we need to have some more detail about what you’re trying to do, and, of course, we await the delivery plan in the autumn.

Jobs are going to be crucial, as has become clear from what we’ve been debating today. Now, you’ve hinted at the creation of possibly thousands of jobs, which is a tantalising prospect, but we don’t know much about how these jobs are going to be created, so I’d be interested if you could tell us a little bit more about what tools you’ll be using in this job creation scheme. If there is going to be more relocation of public sector jobs to the Valleys, could you give us any more information about that?

One of the previous speakers also asked about interaction with the private sector. Yes, we do need to make sure that there are jobs located in the Valleys themselves, not just in the city region as a whole, so have you any more to say about that? Specifically, what tools could you use? Will there be recruitment or training grants on offer for firms employing local people? Will there be anything relating to sector-specific training? That’s another possibility. You talked about the issue of promoting tourism by promoting the natural beauty of the Valleys, which is an aspect that’s often overlooked. You’ve talked about the landscape park, for instance, so is there any more you can tell us about that, specifically, this afternoon? Thank you.

We do want to ensure that we have a number of different tools available to us to stimulate economic activity and to create work and to create jobs, and, as I said in answer to an earlier question, to create not just jobs but careers in the Valleys. We’ve outlined an approach, which is to ensure that we use not only the metro, but other travel routes as well, as spines, if you like, within the Valleys, and to ensure that we have locations along those different transport links where we can focus in on individual sites and individual places, and to create strategic hubs that can lead, in themselves, to the potential for growth and for jobs to be created in those locations in the Valleys region.

At the same time, we will be continuing to invest in the foundational economy and in local economies to ensure that we do have investment in local entrepreneurs, local businesses, local jobs and local companies. So, we will be using tools such as those in order to stimulate and create economic activity within the Valleys. Our objective is to close the gap between the Valleys and the rest of Wales over the coming years, and we will put forward a plan and a timescale as to how we see that happening.

In terms of the landscape park, this is what I believe to be a really exciting opportunity for us to appreciate and value the Valleys in a way that perhaps we haven’t always done in the past. I want it to be a regional park concept that will stretch from the British in my friend’s constituency in Torfaen across to the west and to Carmarthenshire in the west—somewhere where we can appreciate and value all the different landscapes and places within the Valleys. I spent time with my colleague, Dai Rees, at different times in the Afan valley. I know there are plans to maximise the value of that landscape there, but I also know from my own personal experience of living in the Valleys that we do want to get up on the tops in the commons to explore and to understand the history, and not just the history of industrialisation, but the history before industrialisation that we have in the Valleys and the heritage that we have available to us, and to not only ensure that we have a tourism offer, if you like, for people from elsewhere, but also for ourselves, and we can value and appreciate the places in which we live, and learn again the history of industrialisation in the Valleys.

I spent some time as a young man, and even today, up in Trefil, the quarries there—the limestone quarries above Tredegar—and also then following the tramway down Brinore into Talybont and elsewhere: the linkages that were created before we had the M4s and the railways of this world. So, I hope that we would be able to do that. I hope that that would be an exciting and transformational project and one that will not simply transform the Valleys, but the lives of people who live there.

I’d like to thank the Minister for his statement today, and also to place on record my thanks to the Minister and other members of the Valleys taskforce for visiting my own constituency and carrying out a consultation exercise there.

This morning, I chaired the cross-party group on industrial communities, where our guest speaker was Dr Victoria Winckler of the Bevan Foundation. Many of the ideas that we discussed there have actually been mentioned in your statement today—for example, the importance of strategic hubs. Also, within the economy committee, we’ve taken evidence and looked at the importance of growth poles or strategic hubs to make sure that wealth and prosperity is spread across the area, particularly in light of the city deals. I would like to ask the Minister when he would be in a position to provide us with further information about the location of the other strategic hubs that have been referred to in the statement today.

I also welcome the reference to the importance of transport and infrastructure. Of course, the south Wales metro has the potential to be transformational in its impact on the south Wales Valleys, but we mustn’t forget the importance of road links as well. So many of the northern Valleys have already benefited from the dualling of the Heads of the Valleys road, with my constituency and that of my colleague Dawn Bowden being next on the list to benefit from that improvement.

I’d like to ask the Minister how he sees that tying in with the provision of public transport to link up the northern Valleys, and also to link up the different city regions as well. For example, if you take the Cynon Valley and its neighbouring constituency, Neath, with my colleague Jeremy Miles, we have tremendous links there in terms of local economies, but, by being in two separate city regions, there could be a danger that the need for that infrastructure could be overlooked. So, will that be something that the Valleys taskforce will be looking at?

Finally, I welcomed the reference to the importance of the foundational economy within your statement today as well, but I’d like to flag up the fact that social care and childcare are two areas where I feel that we could really make significant inroads in lifting up the living standards of many of our working-age population. For example, we know that Karel Williams, in his work on what Wales can be, has done a lot of work there around how social care could be used to deliver economic benefits to regions. And I think, particularly with our childcare offer that we have on the table here now in Wales, that is something else that we could look at to roll out and offer more sustainable, good-quality jobs.

I’m grateful, again, to my friend, the Member for Cynon Valley, for her remarks. I met with the Bevan Foundation yesterday and discussed some of our ideas. I should say and put on record that I’m a former member of the board of trustees, of course, of the Bevan Foundation, and I’ve always found the Bevan Foundation a refreshing, intelligent and challenging contribution to all of our work in the Government. I always value the reports and the analysis that the Bevan Foundation provides. I also enjoy the challenge that they provide to us as well, and long may that continue.

I hope that, in terms of the strategic hubs, we’ll be able to make announcements on that next week. As part of our delivery plan, published in the autumn, we will outline then how we see each individual hub developing, and a timescale for that and how we will seek to invest in those hubs to bring life to our vision and our ambitions for those different hubs—different in different places, but we will ensure that each hub has a very clear understanding of what each hub can deliver and how we will help that hub to deliver those ambitions and over what timescale.

I agree very much with the points that have been made about transport. Transport came up time and time again during our conversations with people right across the whole of the Valleys region. That was one issue that was consistent everywhere we went, and I think sometimes we do see the metro as the answer to all of the issues around transport, and we do sometimes recognise that the need for local bus services not just connecting to metro services, but connecting to public services, is absolutely essential, and to ensure that we do have public services located in such a way as to make them accessible to people without the need for private transport and for using cars. That is absolutely essential, I think, as we go forward. I hope that we will be able to place a greater emphasis on that.

The points made about city regions and linkages are absolutely essential as well, and I would refer the Member back to my earlier answer when I spoke about not wishing to duplicate and to over-complexify the structures that we have for delivery, and that we use existing delivery structures and use the existing machinery of Government rather than creating anything new, but that we’re able to co-ordinate and understand how we better co-ordinate what we’re seeking to do.

In answer, quickly, to your final point about social care and childcare, I remember spending some time talking to parents and children at a group in Glynneath—a Flying Start group—and listening to what they were saying about the difficulties that they found, first of all in finding childcare, and then being able to work as well and wanting to return to work. It’s something that stays in my mind now. I think it’s one thing that we should be investing in, and, through the work that Carl Sargeant is leading on, I hope that we will invest in childcare and invest in training people, enabling people to work in the sector as well, to enable them both to find work but also to ensure that working parents in the Valleys are able to access high-quality childcare that’s also affordable.

Thank you very much, Minister. We have overrun on this statement, so I intend to move on to the next statement.

This is a statement by the Minister for Skills and Science on employability. I call on that Minister, Julie James, to introduce the statement.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Today I want to set out my agenda for employability. I’m delighted that this follows our discussion on the ministerial taskforce for the south Wales Valleys as supporting people into work will be a key feature of the taskforce’s work over the coming years.

Engagement with communities, which the Valleys taskforce has started, will continue. We also recognise that there is a sense of urgency to bring jobs and growth to communities across Wales that need more of both. Access to good-quality employment and employability skills is essential and I am pleased to be able to move immediately to address this. We have seen significant improvements in the employment rate in Wales over recent years. There are now over 1.4 million people in employment in Wales, an increase of 19.1 per cent since devolution. But, we also know that the rate of unemployment does still remain high in some communities across Wales. Whilst Welsh Government’s contribution to the positive overall rate of employment, supported with EU funding, should not be underestimated, we know the story is not a wholly positive one and we must do more to support the economically inactive, those who would like to work longer hours and those in insecure employment.

The theme of employability runs throughout all four developing cross-cutting strategies. Put simply, employability is not just about jobs and skills; it is about getting every aspect of Government—education, health, housing, communities, transport, rurality, childcare, regional development—working together to support people into sustainable employment. In April, Cabinet endorsed my cross-Welsh Government approach to employability, setting out our joint goal of sustaining a high rate of employment in Wales, reducing economic inactivity and increasing the number of people in good-quality employment. The challenge Cabinet has set me, and will support me to deliver, is to drive this work forward, collaboratively, to deliver a step change in our approach.

Since April I have put in place a governance structure to direct this work. I have extended the ministerial employability working group, to ensure an integrated cross-Cabinet response. I am grateful to my ministerial colleagues on the working group—the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children, the Minister for Social Services and Public Health and the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language—for their input to this statement today. I will use the refreshed Wales employment and skills board, which has already endorsed our employability agenda, to provide strategic direction and challenge from employers and regional skills partnerships and trade unions. To ensure a far more integrated approach, I have established a cross-Welsh Government employability board, made up of senior officials across the Government. This board has been tasked with drawing up an employability delivery plan to be published before Christmas. The plan will look closely at existing services and infrastructure, assess how well they help people to find and stay in work, and consider whether they provide value for money. As we are all aware, this will become all the more important in the years following our exit from the European Union. I will ensure we work in close partnership with our key stakeholders. We will draw up a detailed external stakeholder communications plan that will guide a period of external engagement in order to inform the employability delivery plan.

In the meantime, we are not standing still. Our new employability offer is expected to begin delivery in April 2019. This will be positioned as a single offer under the name, ‘Working Wales’, and will be underpinned by a new programme for adults, along with two new programmes that will deliver employability support to young people. Between now and then, we will reconfigure our existing programmes to enable a smooth transition, using the Valleys as a test bed to inform the new delivery approach. We will make amendments to some of our existing employability programmes, including the EU-funded ReAct, Jobs Growth Wales and Employability Skills Programme, and ensure that these are effectively aligned to enhance support for unemployed people and those who churn in and out of temporary, poorly paid employment.

We recognise that this cannot just be about support for individuals. We want to support employers to recruit and develop talent within their business, boost productivity and give local people the opportunity of better jobs closer to home. We will deliver integrated business and skills support through Business Wales by enhancing our flexible skills and employability programmes. We aim to support 100 Valleys businesses with the greatest growth potential through what we hope will be one-to-one support to create jobs, support for recruitment, delivery of tailored pre-work and in-work training, and the upskilling and development of existing staff. We are keen to promote prosperity for all so that the benefits of economic growth are shared by all those in work. We support improvements in pay and conditions for those in low-paid and insecure employment. To this end, work has begun on a Fair Work Commission, which I chair. Preliminary findings will be reported in the autumn.

We must provide individuals with clear advice and guidance. To achieve this, we want to develop a common approach to identifying the employment needs of individuals, and support a seamless referral and support process. We want to work across Government to design and trial the use of a profiling tool and management information system, so that, in future, advisers across Wales, including Careers Wales, will use the same system. Our ambition is to ensure that we reach those furthest from the labour market and provide them with a holistic package of personalised, bespoke and intensive support and mentoring, to reduce complex barriers to employment, tackle levels of economic inactivity, and deliver on our ambition of developing prosperity for all. We can only truly achieve this through better-aligned support, brought about by working effectively across Government. I therefore wish to acknowledge the commitment from the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children to provide community-based outreach, as outlined in his statement on developing a new approach to resilient communities. I also acknowledge the work being undertaken by the Minister for Social Services and Public Health in providing specialist employment support for people recovering from substance misuse and mental ill-health conditions.

Our work on employability must take full account of the balance that exists between devolved and non-devolved responsibilities for employability. We want to work in partnership with the Department for Work and Pensions to influence future DWP programmes and shape how DWP works within Wales in terms of joint planning of employment services and integration within our forthcoming employability delivery plan. If we are to shape a new employability agenda, we need to drive a coherent approach across Welsh Government and with our partners to address the many barriers preventing people from entering and progressing in good-quality, fair employment. This approach will benefit individuals across Wales and deliver the prosperous and secure future that we need to take Wales forward. Diolch.

I thank the Minister for her statement. The Minister says that the Welsh Government wants to support employers to recruit and develop talents within their businesses, boost productivity, and give local people the opportunity of better jobs closer to home. According to a Lloyds Bank report in December last year, 28 per cent of Welsh firms have experienced difficulties when taking on new skilled staff over the last six months. So, can I ask the Minister how she plans to strengthen ties with business communities to ensure that the right skills required by the employers are delivered in Wales? Can she also confirm that Working Wales will address the gender imbalance in our workforce where there's a lot of imbalance already?

The Minister said she wishes to develop a common approach in identifying the employment needs of individuals. Estyn recently said that learning disability students need more help from colleges to identify their needs for employability. They recommended that colleges set individual learning plans and design programmes that challenge pupils more. How will her strategy address the needs and improve the prospects of students with learning disabilities and abilities?

The statement mentioned Careers Wales. The Minister will be aware that secondary school pupils in parts of Wales are being told that there’ll be no work experience for them, because Careers Wales is unable to carry out health and safety checks for work placements. How will the Minister address this issue of work placements, which is vital in preparing young people for the world of work? The Cardiff School of Education recently said that it was a national disgrace that children were not given the chance to get out of poverty due to a lack of careers advice. How will these proposals increase careers advice capacity in Wales?

Since Brexit, it is vital for each Welsh child to be equipped with more than one skill to serve, prosper, and contribute to our nation, and it's only the Conservatives—look at their ideas and how they going to do it. Deputy Presiding Officer, I welcome the Minister’s statement and look forward to her reply now.

Well, thank you for that series of questions. In terms of developing skills appropriate for business and business delivery, the Member will be aware that we've established the three regional skills partnerships across Wales. They’re in their third year now. This year, they will produce their annual reports detailing labour market information and intelligence in their area, and outlining the skills needed by the employers in that area. And, this year, we will fund skills development in those areas according to the regional development plans. So, it's very much driven by businesses in those areas, and it's very much something that we take very seriously. So, we've addressed that by establishing and strengthening the regional skills partnerships. And, as I mentioned in the statement, we've also reconfigured the Wales employment and skills board in order to have better representation from those regional skills partnerships to take an all-Wales overview, and that's very much driven by the employers and trade unions working together in that board with a delivery agent. So, we're working very hard to address that agenda, and we certainly acknowledge it.

Similarly, with gender issues, the Member will know that it's been a soapbox of mine for quite some time. We are looking to make sure that we get the right information out to young women and young men about non-traditional industries for them—so, in particular, care for young men, and engineering and STEM for young women, because, if you look at the gender distribution, they're the other way around. And we’re making sure that we get the right careers advice out there to both the young people themselves and also to the parents and grandparents—the opinion formers, in other words—of those young children, and we’ll be working very hard with people already in the industry to provide role models and guidance in that regard.

In terms of disability and diversity, we’ll be working very hard with our employers to make sure that they become disability-confident employers, and that actually they understand that it’s not all that difficult to employ somebody who has disabilities, and so on. We will be pushing this agenda as part of what I was talking about in terms of getting businesses ready for growth and opportunity, and that will be very much part of what we’re helping them to look at.

In terms of Careers Wales, if the Member has a specific school that’s having a problem with work experience issues, I’d be very grateful if he’d write to me about it. There’s a great deal of misinformation around about what health and safety checks are actually required to put young people into workplaces. Most workplaces taking work experience children already have the health and safety checks in place, so, if the Member has a specific issue with that, I’d be very grateful if he’d write to me.

In terms of capacity, Careers Wales has recently transferred from the education portfolio of my colleague the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language to myself. The reason for that is to more closely align it with business support and the needs of the economy. So, forthcoming announcements will be made about how we’re increasing capacity for growth in that sector.

Can I thank you for your statement this afternoon? Certainly, we welcome the move towards a much more streamlined support environment, and that’s something I’ve previously indicated to you after previous statements. Can I also welcome the continued emphasis on a truly cross-government approach, which I think is essential? We’ve heard these words being said in the past, but I am hoping—and I’m sure the proof will be in the pudding—that we will see that cultural shift happening in essence now as the new proposals are rolled out.

Now, of course it’s welcome that employment levels have risen in Wales, as you say. But, as you also acknowledge, in-work poverty, underemployment, zero-hours contracts and other factors, of course, remain a significant cause for concern. We’ve been clear that we want to see skills being aligned with skills shortages in the economy and provision being available to people of all ages across Wales so that everyone has the same opportunity to upskill and reskill as people’s working lives become longer, of course, and more uncertain in these uncertain times.

Speaking of which, funding is key. You tell us in your statement about the holistic package of personalised, bespoke, and intensive support and mentoring. That doesn’t come cheap, and a lot of this in the past has been funded through European funding. When I raised that with you a few months ago you were quite bullish in saying that promises were made and the money will come. I don’t detect the same level of confidence at the moment generally, as well as in this statement, and I’m just wondering whether you could tell us a little bit about how you intend to fund the new provision. Will it reflect current levels, or are you anticipating an increased investment from somewhere, given maybe, some would say, the increased ambition that’s reflected in your statement? Or how do you see that playing out?

Now, the new offer is expected now to begin in April 2019 rather than April 2018, and clearly some will be disappointed that we’re maybe not getting to where we would like to be as quickly as we would like to. I’m sure you share that to a degree, but maybe you could explain to us why you think that we need to wait until then, really, before we can see work in Wales being rolled out more broadly.

You mention that you want to use the Valleys as a test bed to inform the new delivery approach, and that makes perfect sense. It’s always good to pilot and trial, although I would say that, in contrast, the childcare offer is being piloted and trialled in a number of places in a number of different contexts. I’m just wondering whether you are considering or looking at potential pilots or similar in, let’s say, rural areas in comparison to Valleys areas, so that a broader number of lessons can be learned in terms of enacting much of this.

You tell us that the Welsh Government employability board will draw up the plan, and the Wales employment and skills board will provide strategic direction. Could you tell us who’s tasked with delivering this, then, at the end of the day, and also how you’ll be holding them accountable for the delivery? I have to say there are references in your statement to a number of boards, taskforces, working groups, commissions, and, for a sector that’s perceived to be quite complex and multi layered, I don’t know whether that maybe tells us something as well. But, generally, can I thank you for your statement? We’ll continue, I’m sure, to support the direction you’re moving in, but we need to be sure that it’s being done properly, in a timely manner, and in a sustainable way, particularly in the financial sense.

Thank you very much for that, Llyr. In terms of the governance issues, I’ll just address that first. I appreciate that I did mention a large number of boards and so on, but we’ll be providing Members with a sort of pictogram of what we’re talking about, and you’ll see that actually it’s a lot simpler. Because what we’re really talking about is a single board across Government for the employability programmes, with a ministerial board to match that, and the external Wales employment and skills board as the external reference, and then we’ll have an engagement plan for stakeholders. So, actually, it’s a simpler framework, really, although there’s a bewildering number of boards and so on, I quite agree. So, we’ll set that out. The statement doesn’t say this, but I’ll just say for clarity that the Wales employment and skills board will then report into the council for economic development, so that you complete the circle of responsibility.

In terms of the delivery, therefore, that’s the governance structure. That’s how we’ll hold it to account. We’ve deliberately made it cross-Government. It will be delivered as it’s delivered now, but with people reporting through a cross-Government structure. The purpose of the officials’ group is to look at impact, budget, structure, what programmes work, what don’t, and so on, and make recommendations accordingly to both the ministerial cross-Government board and to the external partners as appropriate.

The idea of that, obviously, is, if you think of it as a jigsaw, we think that some of the pieces are probably overlapping. We think that there are probably gaps. The picture is not as clear as we’d like it to be—if you follow my analogy that far. The idea is to actually make the jigsaw join together in a more coherent fashion. Then, just to mix my metaphors, for an individual, what we’re looking for is a clear and consistent pathway on their journey through. So, no matter where you start on that pathway, and people obviously will start in very different places—so, if you’re young, you will start at the end of compulsory schooling; if you’re older and retraining or you’ve been out of work for some time, you’ll start at different places, but, actually, the programmes make a coherent pathway. So, if, for example, colleagues in my colleague Rebecca Evans’s department are looking to help somebody with substance misuse or ill-health problems that are preventing their employment, once those problems are sorted or on the way to being sorted, they can be appropriately passed on to the next part of their journey, rather than completing that and then looking themselves for something else to go on to.

So that’s—. So, I’m building up to the reason why it’s taking so long, because these things are easy to say but actually very complex to deliver. We also deliver these programmes through a number of other partners like local authorities and third sector organisations and so on, and the idea is to corral them into a seamless organisation. We’re starting with the Welsh Government programmes directly funded first, and then moving on. Colleagues have been most helpful around the Cabinet table in assisting with that.

Then, what we’re looking at is also running the ESF-funded and the RDF-funded programmes to their end. We’ve worked very hard with WEFO to widen the edges of those programmes, but nevertheless there are strict lines within which you have to operate. So, the ultimate vision, if you like, is that an individual requiring help or a business requiring help will have a single portal to go to—the skills gateway for individuals or businesses—and that the wiring of the system behind there will not be visible to those people, they will simply get the support they need. However, we do want to make the most of our European funding, so we want to run those programmes to the end, and April 2019 is therefore the point at which that funding ceases. That’s not to say that we won’t start the integration of the programmes on the way, but the final end of those programmes will see the full launch of the new programme. However, there will be bridge funding in between to make sure that people don’t fall into the gaps. So, it’s a sort of staggered start, which is why I’m saying that in the autumn we’ll be bringing back an actual delivery plan for Members to actually see the timeline associated with that, because I do appreciate that that’s quite complex.

I think the last thing you talked about was just this aligning skills issue. As I said to Mohammad Asghar, that’s very much centred around our strategy for regional skills—that’s regional support to businesses and regional support to get the skills they need. So, we are expecting employers to contribute to that in terms of making it transparent what those needs are. Again, if you’re aware of specific instances where you think that isn’t happening, I’d be very grateful to know about it.

Two brief questions, Minister. Firstly, obviously, the focus of the programme is on getting people into work. One of the challenges we face is improving terms and conditions and promotion and progression through the workforce when you're in work. What level of focus will the programme be able to give to supporting progression in that sense?

Secondly, you indicate that you’ll be providing advice to employers on recruitment and skills through Business Wales. Obviously, most of our companies are small businesses and you'll be aware of reservations that small businesses have about the extent to which Business Wales serves their needs, which I know the Cabinet Secretary’s already working on. What reassurance can you give that that level of support will meet the particular needs of the small and medium-sized sector?

In terms of the fair work and progression programme, the First Minister has asked me to chair stage 1 of the fair work piece and that is around how we make sure that we use leverage from Welsh Government funding to its best advantage. So, what we’re looking to do is establish an agreed definition of ‘fair work’, including the progression elements of that, and then make sure that we leverage that with everybody that we support. So, my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Education, has only today announced that the quid pro quo for the tuition fee offer is that universities become fair-wage employers. That's very much part of the same piece, really—that we’re starting to use the leverage that Welsh Government funding brings to lever in some of those better working conditions. But the first piece of work will be to establish a common agreement across employers, trade unions, delivery partners and the Government in the Fair Work Commission to make sure that we all agree on that and then to take forward the delivery. So, that's the first piece of that.

In terms of the support—and actually I realise that I didn't quite answer Llyr Gruffydd’s question either about some of the pilots—we are looking to support SMEs, we are looking to do pilots outside of the Valleys area, where there are specific conditions that we want to see how it works. So the answer is ‘yes’; we will be doing that. And what we'll be looking to do is: I mentioned in my statement that we’ll be looking for the 100 businesses that show the most growth potential, and they can be any size. Indeed, we anticipate that many of them will be very small—under five employees. And, obviously, what we’re trying to do is lever the much-needed jobs in, but by using indigenous firms and assisting them with the business support they need to grow. Many of them will be foundational economy firms and some of them won't be. What we're hoping to do is get a good mix from those high-potential growth firms.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. I agree with you that there’s an urgency for jobs and growth to be brought to communities across Wales. However, I note that the Minister sets out the support that she’s giving to businesses in the Valleys, but other regions of Wales, such as north Wales, are conspicuous only by their absence from the Minister’s statement. True, the Valleys of Wales need help, but they're not the only community in Wales that needs it. I’m disappointed that focussed support for other regions of Wales, which have hitherto been neglected, such as my own, are not mentioned in the Minister’s statement.

I welcome the rise in employment in Wales. However, we must treat these statistics with caution. Simply because more people are employed does not mean that they are substantially better off than they were. Zero-hours contracts and low wages are prevalent across Wales, exacerbated by the seasonal nature of many of the economies across Wales, including in my own constituency. If workers aren't on zero hours, they may be on minimal hours only. It is vital that businesses are encouraged to bring higher-paid, secure work into Wales. The Minister’s efforts to support people getting into work will be futile if there’s no work for people to go to.

Your statement includes a number of objectives and ambitions, but no information about how, in a practical context, you will bring all this to fruition. Please explain how, in real terms, you will be using the Wales employment and skills Board, the ministerial working group and governmental departments to improve employability in Wales. In reality, the only way that Welsh Government could actually create jobs is to create some in the public sector, something that Labour Governments in Cardiff and London have become adept at doing over the years to cover their own failures. But it is private sector that delivers and creates jobs. Welsh Government can encourage the creation of those jobs by providing a tax, regulatory and economic environment that will enable businesses, preferably home-grown ones, to thrive in a community that can provide them with the workers they need to do so. So, I would ask whether the employability delivery plan created by the Welsh Government employability board will encompass plans to incentivise and encourage investment from businesses into Wales. You state that you will work with key stakeholders. Can you indicate who these stakeholders are, and whether you’ll be working with some of the SMEs that form the backbone of the job-providing businesses in Wales?

Turning to the Working Wales employability offer, please can the Minister tell us what forms of support will be offered in the new offer that aren’t already being offered? I note that there are a number of different employability programmes, including ReAct, Jobs Growth Wales et cetera. Has the Minister considered whether these programmes should be merged to provide a single authoritative and consolidated programme for Wales that is well understood by users? To what extent are you working with organisations such as the Recruitment and Employment Confederation, the Association of Chief Police Officers and their members to identify employability issues in Wales and investigate working in partnership with them to get more people in Wales into work?

You state that you want to work across Government to design and trial a profiling tool and management information system for advisers across Wales. So, please could you give us an idea of how much such a project will cost, what its specifications will be and what its scope will be and what advantages you see the system having that justify the outlay of the potentially high cost of the new system? Thank you.

Thank you for that series of questions. I think I have actually addressed almost all of them already, but I’ll just reiterate. The Valleys taskforce is just mentioned as being the pilot test bed for some of the pieces of work that we’re doing. As I already indicated to other Members, it’s not the only place that we’ll be doing it and we have to start somewhere. Obviously, the communities of north Wales also have similar problems, and we will of course be addressing employability across the whole of Wales.

In terms of zero hours and so on, I’ve very much addressed that in terms of what we’re doing on the Fair Work Commission. That has representation from the Confederation of British Industry, the Federation of Small Businesses, trade unions and a whole series of other people and the Government on it, and WESB is, for example, currently chaired by Scott Waddington, who is the chair of Brains. So, I don’t think that we can accept any criticism that we’re looking only at the public sector—far from it. In fact, the regional skills partnerships are all chaired by employers as well, and they all sit on it, and they have three seats each—the chair of the regional skills partnership and two of the primary employers that they bring with them. So, that’s just not the situation at all. And, actually, I wasn’t talking about creating jobs in the public sector. The Member will realise that, in my statement, we’re talking about supporting the firms, for example, that have the highest growth potential and also, of course, we are extending our business offer in terms of indigenous companies to help them with their supply chains in Wales and so on. So, I’m not too sure where that impression was created.

In terms of the wider group of stakeholders, of course, we have a whole series of stakeholders. We have business organisations and SMEs from all over Wales, we have big business from all over Wales, we also have a number of delivery partners and stakeholders in terms of third sector partners who deliver employability programmes on our behalf and support small businesses on our behalf, and we have a range of advisers in terms of businesses right across Wales.

I think the last point was about whether the programme is new or not. There are a number of new programmes, but what we’re really talking about is making sure, as I explained to Llyr Gruffydd earlier, that this jigsaw fits together, that we don’t have overlapping pieces, that there aren’t any gaps and that it makes a coherent picture that everybody can understand.

Finally, Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you, Minister, for this update today on what is not only a key aspect of Welsh Government policy but also something that is absolutely key if we’re going to achieve prosperity and security for our people, our communities and, ultimately, our economy. I welcome the across-Government approach that you outline in your statement and the recognition that the employability strategy needs to be cross-cutting because we know that work and access to work do not function in isolation, that there are a number of other factors that need to be in place, such as decent schools, housing and transport and support networks, which also play a pivotal part. Other colleagues have touched on the pilot of Better Jobs, Closer to Home. So, can I ask, in that vein, am I assuming that it will also align with the new economic strategy and the regional approach of that? Because a political and personal priority of mine is that young people in particular in my region, if they don’t wish to move away, should be able to access opportunity on their doorstep. In line with that, one of the things that’s been raised with me regularly on a local level is the number of young people, perhaps school leavers and college leavers, who perhaps aren’t that well equipped for the world of work, who don’t have the knowledge of what their responsibilities are, what their rights are. So, perhaps, if we are looking at an across-Government approach, is there an opportunity to see how that can be aligned with the new curriculum to make sure we are giving our young people the tools they need to succeed?

One very final quick point, because I know we’re pressed for time: I think transport is absolutely key in looking at services and infrastructure, as you say in the employability delivery plan. Because in a recent event I held earlier this year on looking at the economic challenges for the region, transport came up time and time again. Just to quote, ‘It’s very prohibitive for young people who can’t afford to drive to get to work.’ And also, ‘There needs to be an integrated transport system.’ So, I’d hope perhaps that could be something that could be considered as part of looking at things like big projects in the pipeline, such as the north-east Wales metro.

Thank you for that. I think the Member makes an enormous number of good points there. One of the things we’ll be looking to do is make sure that we can address individual requirements for particular support and make sure that people can access the jobs and skills they need in the area where they want them to do that. What we’re trying to do is basically get a programme that’s coherent all the way through. So, talking about the regional skills partnership and the North Wales Economic Ambition Board in north Wales, for example—they are tasked with sorting out what the labour market intelligence is telling them about the firms in that region, and what their skills requirements are. We will fund those skills requirements according to that information. The plans are due to come out in the autumn. Indeed, I think I’m coming up in the second week of September to launch that one for them. That will drive some of the investment that we make, both in our work-based learning practitioners and in our FE colleges in terms of the skills that they produce for that ecosystem.

The other flip side of that is to make sure that the businesses with growth potential get the support that they need and that we can make sure that careers advisers in schools—and, actually, for adults as well out in the community—understand the skills necessary to fit the needs of those employers with a growth potential. So, that’s very much part of the regionalisation agenda. The Cabinet Secretary for economy and myself have been working very hard to make sure that they align together, and indeed will align together with the local government reorganisation arrangements as well, so that we don’t have non-coherent overlaps and so on. So, that’s the plan.

Then, in terms of the rest of it, you’re absolutely right; we want to address that in a number of ways, sometimes with a big transport project, sometimes with just working hard with bus companies and so on to align timetables. My colleague David Rees here is often talking about the earliest and late buses to communities and what we can do about that. And sometimes, actually, with targeted programmes. So, for example, in some of the areas that I’ve gone on public consultation there’s a huge problem with people getting a driving licence. They simply can’t afford to buy the driving lessons and so on. Well, it may well be that we decide that that’s one of the things we need to address, either on an individual basis, if we’ve got somebody with high skills but transport problems, or actually on a community basis, if we identify a number of people who’ve got the same problem. It’s something we did last year, for example, where the haulage association came to us and said they had a big shortage of heavy goods vehicle drivers. So, we put on a special course, and I think 140-something people, as a result, got good paid employment.

So, it is about this wraparound and getting the right information to the right people, both on the business side and on the individual side and marrying them together, and also targeting business support at those high-growth firms so that we can get the growth to match up.

Then sometimes it is about stimulating growth in areas where there hasn’t been any or where perhaps there is a dearth of jobs, and that’s why the Valleys is one of the target areas. But as I said in response to a number of other Members, this certainly isn’t the only area, and I’m very grateful if any Members want to highlight any issues in their particular area or region too.

Thank you very much, Minister. Before we move to the Stage 3 debate on the Trade Union (Wales) Bill I will suspend proceedings for 10 minutes. The bell will be rung five minutes before we reconvene, but I would urge Members to return to the Chamber promptly please. We stand adjourned for 10 minutes.

That brings us to our Stage 3 proceedings on the Trade Union (Wales) Bill.

The first group of amendments relates to restriction on the deduction of union subscription from wages in the public sector. Amendment 1 is the lead amendment, and only amendment in this group, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move the amendment and speak to the amendment—Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move amendment 1. This amendment refers to restrictions on the deduction of union subscriptions from wages by employers. The UK Government has modernised the relationship between trade unions and their members. [Interruption.] Oh, yes, they have. [Interruption.] This amendment aims to give public sector workers the opportunity to make their payments through direct debit, and discourages the blanket use of check-off. By moving to reduce the use of check-off, the UK Government has brought greater transparency to employees. This makes it easier for them to choose whether or not to pay subscriptions and which union to join—it’s called choice.

As the UK legislation stands, nurses, teachers and civil servants are prevented from automatically paying trade union subscriptions from their wages. However, this Welsh Labour Government’s Bill seeks to encourage and retain this practice, which is now thoroughly outdated and quite unnecessary.

Llywydd, in the twenty-first century, public resources should not be used to support the collection of trade union subscriptions. The collection—[Interruption.] The collection of subscriptions should be undertaken by the trade unions directly and, indeed, many across the UK have switched already, with Unite, GMB, the Public and Commercial Services Union, Fire Brigades Union, and the University and College Union all urging their members to switch to direct debit. Further, many employees are routinely misled on the terms of joining a trade union when doing so via check-off. For example, the absence of information about the optional political levy. By ending this practice and encouraging payment through direct debit, employers are not only guaranteed easier transparency and ease in terms of choosing whether or not to pay subscriptions, but they are able to enjoy the full protection of the direct debit guarantee, which includes advance notification of any changes to the direct debit, and the ability to cancel it at any time. I move.

So, here we go again: same old Tories, fighting yesterday’s battles, with yesterday’s arguments, on yesterday’s issues, oblivious to the fact that the world has moved on from the anti-union rhetoric of the 1970s and the 1980s. It’s ironic, is it not, that on the day that Theresa May makes a desperate plea to other parties to help her out of the almighty mess that she’s made of Brexit through a monumental misjudgement in calling a general election, coupled with her gross overestimation of herself and her gross underestimation of Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party, the Welsh Tories are back here creating division and attacking workers’ representatives? It would appear that the general election result has done nothing to temper their in-built prejudice as they continue to support attacks on working people in Wales and those who support them.

Llywydd, as a trade union official, I spent most of my working life fighting attacks on workers’ rights and anti-trade union legislation. Being elected to this Assembly will not change that. I will continue to fight any attempts to try to turn the clock back on those rights. So, once again, I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of the progressive approach of Welsh Government in seeking to ensure that our public services here in Wales, and the dedicated, hard-working people who deliver those services, are not subjected to the vindictive and small-minded restrictions imposed by the UK Tory Government’s Trade Union Act 2016. I warmly congratulate the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford, in bringing forward the Trade Union (Wales) Bill, which I shall be supporting. I shall be opposing each of the amendments submitted in the name of Janet Finch-Saunders, including this first amendment, which would have the effect of imposing restrictions on employers’ DOCAS—deduction of contributions at source—arrangements. I’ll talk in more detail on that specific proposal in a while, but, for now, I have a few general observations that I want to make.

What the Tories really don’t like about the Trade Union (Wales) Bill is that it is a reflection of how successful social partnership working is here in Wales. It is a total anathema to them that Government and employers are able to both recognise and evidence the success of social partnership with trade unions in the delivery of key public services. If anything came out of the series of recent tragic events across the country, it is the amazing dedication of our public service staff in responding to those events, helping others, even when in doing so they exposed themselves to risk. With the possible exception of the Prime Minister, Conservative Ministers were actually quick in coming out to praise the work of those wonderful men and women, but they don’t see the irony of doing so at the same time as they’re seeking to undermine their rights at work.

Both the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee and the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee have given their support to this Bill, but it also has widespread support from outside the National Assembly. The Workforce Partnership Council and the council for economic development provide invaluable forums for Welsh Government and employers to engage with trade unions across a wide range of Government policies and wider social and economic issues. Employers’ representatives from a range of bodies, including the Confederation of British Industry, the Federation of Small Businesses, the Welsh Local Government Association and NHS Wales, come together as equal partners with trade unions and Welsh Government Ministers to work in social partnership.

The head of the WLGA, in giving evidence to the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee, said:

‘The WLGA has supported and embraced the concept of social partnership…we firmly recognise as employers that engaging with the workforce through the recognised trades unions played a significant part in ensuring that service continuity has been at the heart of some difficult decisions’.

So, all sides are able to recognise the benefit of a joint approach in negotiating agreements, addressing challenges, and resolving disagreements before they become disputes. So, everybody else gets it, but the Tories don’t.

It’s the approach of inclusivity and mutual respect involving trade unions that the Tories seem unwilling or unable to grasp. Or is it because they just don’t understand trade unions and they have an ingrained and ill-informed prejudice against them? Most likely, all of the above.

But let’s come back to the specifics of this first amendment. Its impact would be to make it more difficult for employers to provide DOCAS—deduction of contributions at source. I say that because the vast majority of employers in the public sector want to be able to have the ability to agree constructive check-off agreements with their recognised trade unions. But, of course, the real intention of the Tories is not to penalise employers, but to put barriers in the way of recruitment and retention of members by trade unions, making it more difficult for unions to collect their subscriptions. Necessary? No. Vindictive? Yes.

I’ve heard Tories argue that check-off operates in the public sector without the knowledge of individual trade union members. How ridiculous. That is absolute and total nonsense. Every individual member has to sign a membership form for the particular union that they are joining, so they are fully aware of which union they are joining. And as part of that application, they have to individually authorise any deduction from their pay, just as they would have to do for any other non-statutory deduction, such as, for example, a charity or a credit union.

But as I’ve said, it is often the employer who is supportive of such agreements. For instance, Flintshire County Council, again in evidence to the equality committee, said:

‘This is a beneficial business arrangement for all three parties. There is no practical reason to discontinue with the arrangement.’

And then the Tories say, as Janet Finch-Saunders said in her opening remarks, ‘What about the cost to the taxpayer of DOCAS arrangements?’ Well, in this day and age of modern automated pay systems, the cost of DOCAS arrangements is minimal, particularly when operated alongside similar deduction arrangements for things like childcare schemes, cycle-to-work schemes, credit union contributions, and charitable deductions. I don’t hear Tories clamouring for charges to apply to these. Well, let me tell the ill-informed that most unions in the public sector actually pay for the provision of this service. In NHS Wales, for example, this is around 2 per cent of all subscriptions collected—a significant amount of income generation for the employer.

Llywydd, this amendment serves no useful purpose, other than to attempt to frustrate union organisation, as a vindictive act against working people who choose to join a trade union, and I ask every Member to vote against it.

We had extensive scrutiny of the Welsh Government’s Trade Union (Wales) Bill on the equality and local government committee earlier this year. Janet is moving the amendments today. I was interested to hear Janet’s comments on the Bill at the time, and I think it is sometimes good when there is a dissenting voice at the committee stage, because it does test the Government’s arguments. However, after hearing all the evidence, I was broadly supportive of the principles of the Bill in retaining the status quo in industrial relations in the public sector in Wales, and we in UKIP are today supporting the Bill. The amendments, in our view, largely seek to derail the Bill, so we will be voting against this particular amendment and, indeed, all of the amendments. Thank you.

I’ll be very brief—just simply to say it’s interesting that UKIP is not convinced by the Conservatives’ arguments. I think simply peddling the arguments out for a third serving doesn’t improve on them. This is such a cheap and simple process—deducting wages from source—as my colleague, Dawn Bowden has already said. This is no different than deducting the charitable donation or repayment of a loan for a bicycle or whatever it might be, and it’s all done by machine—it doesn’t cost anything. So, clearly the trade unions are making a charitable contribution to their employers. We had no evidence from any of the witnesses who we received evidence from, as part of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee scrutiny of this, and, in fact, the NHS employers organisation pointed out that it enabled employers to understand the number of members in any one union and to gain an understanding of the relative trade union membership across the organisation.

So, it seems to me that it both provides transparency and ease of transfer of the money. There’s nothing wrong with direct debit, but the reason why the trade unions are urging members to transfer to direct debit is because, in other parts of the UK, all members will be obliged to do that. So, it’s very difficult to see how, in Wales, we need to do that in our public sector when everybody, including all the employers, seem to be perfectly content to deduct union subs from source.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, and thank you for the chance to contribute in this, the latest round in this Government’s determination, and the determination of other Members of this Assembly, to resist the unwarranted intrusion of the UK Government into devolved responsibilities and to prevent their determination to foist their views of industrial relations onto this Assembly and onto the social partnership model, which has been so carefully crafted here in the devolution era.

The evidence from social partners on this group of amendments is absolutely clear: that putting limitation on check-off is unnecessary, that the cost to the public purse is negligible and that it unjustifiably singles out trade union membership subscriptions from other forms of payroll deductions. As you’ve heard from Dawn Bowden and others, apparently there is no difficulty for the Conservative Party in using this form of paying for sport club membership, from making donations to charity, for taking advantage of cycle-to-work schemes or for making subscriptions to a credit union. Uniquely, apparently, trade union membership is to be singled out as not to be available for this form of activity.

Llywydd, I first joined a trade union when I was 17 years old, so it’s going to be nearly 50 years before too long. In that time, I have paid trade union subscriptions in cash; I have written a cheque; I have taken advantage of payroll deductions, and, these days, I pay by direct debit. There is no inhibition whatsoever on trade union members in taking other forms of making their subscriptions. What this would do would be to place limits on their ability to use payroll deduction and for no good reason at all. Employers are not compelled to make payroll deduction available, neither are they compelled to provide it at no cost, and neither are trade unionists compelled to pay their subscriptions by this method. The amendment sets out to solve a problem that simply doesn’t exist.

This afternoon, Llywydd, I will rely regularly on the report that this Assembly’s Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee provided at the end of Stage 1—a report supported by seven of the eight members of that committee and which was the result of very careful evidence-taking that the committee brought together to scrutinise the Government’s proposal. This is what the committee said in relation to the deduction of trade union subscriptions:

‘we believe that the provisions in the 2016 Act’—

the UK Act—

‘which seek to restrict check-off services are unnecessary and unwarranted. They also single out trade union subscriptions from other payments made by employers on behalf of employees. We see no valid reason to apply the provisions to devolved Welsh authorities in Wales. By destabilising the social partnership, the provisions may have an adverse impact on the effective delivery of public services in Wales.’

Members should reject this proposal.

I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to reply to the debate.

Thank you. I think it’s fair to say it will be obvious to many that Labour cannot support any changes to the Bill for fear of upsetting their union paymasters. The 2017 election campaign is clear evidence of this, with £4 million out of £4.5 million in campaign donations in May coming directly from the unions. That’s 91 per cent, and I would call on those Members here today to declare the same interests that you did at committee stage. Let the people out there know just how you’ve done well out of the Labour unions.

Llywydd, the Welsh Government’s explanatory memorandum suggests that the cost of check-off is minimal and is unhelpfully accompanied by an unrelated table detailing the cost savings for the 40 per cent threshold. In reality, however, the annual cost to the UK taxpayer to help fund union payment is not insignificant. In March, as part of the House of Lords secondary legislation scrutiny committee on the draft Trade Union (Deduction of Union Subscriptions from Wages in the Public Sector) Regulations 2017, the Cabinet Office stated that the current cost to the public sector for the provision of check-off services is in the region of £12.5 million per year. At present, trade unions only provide an estimated £2.74 million for this service, so there is an additional uncollected cost to the taxpayer of £9.7 million per year. Now, if we take 5 per cent of this cost as coming from Wales, this is a cost to the Welsh public purse of £485,000 per year—almost £0.5 million.

This is a significant amount of money, but, again, those who have had large donations during election time might not think so, and something not acknowledged by either the Cabinet Secretary or many of those who gave evidence on this matter. Further, the UK Government has accepted the principle of allowing check-off to continue where the union meets the cost and where there is an agreement with the employer to do so. This seeks to allow a public sector employer to make deductions from its workers’ wages in respect of trade union subscriptions only if those workers have the option to pay their trade union subscriptions by other means, or if arrangements have been made for the union to make reasonable payments to the employer in respect of the making of the deductions.

This Bill undermines modern, flexible working patterns and harks back to an age of trade union manipulation, cynically underpinned by their links to the Labour Party. So, in conclusion, Llywydd, this amendment seeks only to ensure full transparency for employees, flexibility and protection in terms of paying subscriptions, and to make savings in the region of £0.5 million to the public purse in Wales, and I encourage and urge all Members to support it.

The question is that amendment 1 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We will move to an electronic vote on amendment 1. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 43 against. And, therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

The next group of amendments, group 2, relates to publication requirements in relation to facility time. Amendment 2 is the lead and only amendment in this group, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the amendment. Janet Finch-Saunders.

I move amendment 2 in my name, but when I do so, I do it on behalf, actually, of the Welsh Conservative group here today. This amendment refers to the powers to require the publication of information on facility time and to impose requirements on public sector employers in relation to paid facility time. To clarify, this amendment does not seek to remove or stop facility time, or the benefits it is purported to bring. And I have real concerns in relation to how this has been misrepresented in the explanatory memorandum. Facility time may indeed result in a reduction in employment tribunals, a reduction in days lost to workplace injury and illness, and a reduction in dismissals and early exits, and we do not dispute that. And we're not stopping facility time or time spent by an organisation's staff on trade union duties and activities during working hours. What we are aiming to promote here is a culture of openness and transparency in relation to how much staff time is spent in this area. There are several reasons for doing so and a number of benefits.

During evidence sessions, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government noted his belief that successful use of facility time means that there are savings to the employer and to the Treasury, therefore, as a result of a reduction in employment tribunals. Yet, without further scrutiny, further evidence and transparency, we are unable to back this up in a quantifiable manner. Of course, there must also be a balance with the use of taxpayers’ money, and without knowing how many working hours are being spent on facility time, it is impossible to be able to assess the true value of it. What Government passes legislation when they cannot evidence their own argument?

Yes, this is an agreement entered into voluntarily between employers and unions, but the role is paid in so much as it is undertaken during paid working hours. So, questions to need answering as to why the Welsh Labour Government is so reluctant to ask public organisations to publish this information. Llywydd, this information is not private; any one of us could request it by freedom of information at any time, yet a Government—the Welsh Labour Government—fails to even do this. However, the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires every public authority to have a publication scheme and, crucially, to publish information proactively.

The key point here is openness, transparency and accountability to the public, our electorate, as to how public money is spent. Why, then, the reluctance with regard to facility time? Surely, this would be less of a burden to provide than multiple freedom of information requests. The indicative cost for such publication given in the regulatory impact assessment is £171,000—almost a third of the cost of check-off—yet here the Cabinet Secretary has decided the cost is simply not worth it, despite the inherent increase in transparency and openness it would bring. All we are asking for here is provisions for public sector bodies to publish this information clearly and to act quite clearly in the public interest and in line with the intentions of the Freedom of Information Act. I move.

I'm guessing the Tories will be happy that I'm not going to repeat all of the information I made in the last—[Interruption.] But there are some common themes, and, fundamentally, those are the opposition of employers to what is contained in the Tories' UK legislation and in this amendment and the complete lack of understanding by the Tories of what unions do and how they work. And the most important aspect of this amendment, I think, is to focus on the benefits of facility time and not get bogged down in the costly kind of reporting procedures that are being proposed.

Following publication of the UK Government's initial proposals for its Trade Union Bill in 2016, Warwick University's business school undertook research into facility time in the public services across the UK, and the conclusion of their research was that the presence of workplace representatives who rely on facility time to perform their duties is associated with higher workplace performance. Therefore, conversely, reducing facility time is likely to have detrimental effects.

And commenting on the Westminster Government's own data, the University's Professor of human resource management stated:

‘Overall, the evidence suggests that both full and part-time workplace…representatives help improve performance in the public sector and that managers widely recognise this to be the case.’

The proposed legislation to limit the amount of time that representatives can spend on their representative duties appears unnecessary and may reduce workplace performance in the public sector.

Now, I’ve already referred to the significant benefits of social partnership arrangements here in Wales. It should be recognised that, in addition to lay official involvement, a significant amount of work undertaken in partnership working comes from paid officials of the trade unions, at no cost to the public purse. These officials invest union resources in work that is integral to the official delivery of, and changes to, public services in Wales—something, again, the Welsh Conservatives are seemingly unable to grasp. But, of course, it goes well beyond that. At workplace level, the public service employers understand what, clearly, the Tories don’t. Former WLGA leader Bob Wellington commented:

‘Facility time enables councils to consult and negotiate with trade union officials representing the workforce, and therefore actually saves considerable time and resources’.

It is therefore

‘essential in our view, and very much in the interests of council tax payers to see it maintained.’

The Welsh NHS Confederation and NHS employers have said:

‘Trade union representatives provide a vital role in developing and working with NHS workplace policies and procedures. They support staff and their members with mediation and navigation through policies and workplace issues which supports the smooth running of the service.’

Will the Member give way? If all this is as positive as she describes, why not just publish the information so the public can see how much of this time is given?

It’s bureaucratic nonsense and unnecessary. The facility time itself, as research has shown, provides the public, the council tax payers, with benefits and savings through the work that they do.

If the Tories were able to set aside for a moment their anti-trade union prejudice and talk to public service trade unions, they might begin to get some understanding of what they do, and learn that most lay representatives will spend the majority of their time working with the employer to jointly tackle workplace issues as well as supporting health and safety, training, and management of change initiatives. A lot of this work they do in their own time, in addition to any facility time given by the employer.

The unwarranted reporting requirements that would result if this amendment is passed would carry with them another unnecessary cost, but would also be a distraction from the important work undertaken by accredited and trained trade union representatives working with their employer to address workplace challenges and build good industrial relations, which, in turn, reduces the likelihood of disputes and days lost through industrial action, again demonstrating that such arrangements are actually a cost benefit to most employers. For these reasons, Llywydd, I shall be voting against this amendment.

One reason that strike action in the public sector in Wales is comparatively rare—and I will make a very rare comparison with England here, because I don’t usually do that. But we have seen in the last few years high-profile disputes in England within the public sector, like the one the junior doctors staged, and it was bitter and it was vitriolic. We haven’t had that here in Wales, and we haven’t had that in Wales because we have the social partnership that has just been described. That works extremely well, and I for one am really proud that we do operate under a social partnership, and a partnership that is clearly understood between those working in the public sector and for the public bodies.

Both sides—the employers and the trade unions—understand that that actually is to the benefit of all. Facility time—that is, let’s be clear, the time permitted to employees for carrying out trade union duties—is crucial in the success of that partnership. I don’t know, actually, where Janet Finch-Saunders was, but she certainly didn’t hear the evidence in the same way that I heard it, and that others heard it, when it was given to us at committee stage. We heard time and time again both from the employee and the employer about the benefit of that facility time. We also heard, as she must have, that very often that time is actually given free of charge, and some of the reasons have already been alluded to by full-time trade union officers, but also by people who actually represent their colleagues in their own time, not in their work time. And I’d like to ask you how you think you might account for that under your freedom of information. We heard evidence from the Welsh NHS Confederation and NHS Wales employees. In their evidence to committee, and I’ll quote:

‘Facilities time provides significant benefits to industrial relations, as well as providing savings and benefits to the organisation and the service as a whole.’

And it would be extremely difficult, wouldn’t it, to quantify that. I think it’s a very odd situation for the Conservatives to propose that we add in more red tape. That’s what they usually call it, don’t they? Anything you have to account for is red tape. But facility time is actually used to keep people safe in work. It’s also used to make sure that the terms and conditions, on both sides, for the employee and the employer, are to the satisfaction of both. The only conclusion that I can reach is that Janet Finch-Saunders has put forward these amendments today driven on pure ideology, because it certainly wasn’t driven in any way at all by any of the evidence that we were given. And, when we talk about a cost, there is a cost that was put forward to actually reporting on facility time, and the Wales Trades Union Congress did point out that disapplying the 2016 Act provision requiring all Welsh public employers to report on facility time would save money. And they did put a cost of £170,700 in reporting costs. You all know, because you tell us very often from that side of the Chamber, that red tape costs money. This red tape will also cost money, and all it will do is destroy everything that we have built up over the years in Wales in those social partnerships. It is pure ideology, absolutely nothing else.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

Diolch, Llywydd. So, the Conservative party here tells us that they are all in favour of facility time—they’re just simple seekers after truth; it’s simply a matter of wanting to record how much facility time is being taken and the costs of it. But what they fail to tell you completely, Llywydd, is that they are not interested at all in reporting to the public what the benefits of facility time are. All they want is a one-sided account in which everything is articulated as a cost, and all the things that those employers who turned up to the committee set out as the advantages for employers from facility time, all of that goes unreported altogether. This is not just a simple wish to put information into the public domain. It is a deliberate attempt to provide a biased, one-sided account of what is a bargain, a bargain in which facility time is provided in order that employers are able to make sure that their businesses run effectively, and that trade unions are able to carry out their legitimate work. The committee of the Assembly said:

‘we are in no doubt that facility time is a prudent investment in public services and we believe it should be viewed as such.’

And if you make a prudent investment then not only will you want to account for the costs of that investment, but you will want to account for the return on that investment as well. This amendment entirely ignores that. UK Ministers, when they were putting their Trade Union Bill through, were at least candid enough to say that the reason for wanting to report on facility time was so that it could be borne down on in the future, and that it could be reduced. That’s what all this is about. It’s that attack on the work that trade unions do, disguised as simply a seeking for information. The amendment doesn’t deserve to be supported, and I hope Members here will vote against it this afternoon.

I call Janet Finch-Saunders to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Llywydd. Well, do you know what? We decided to do your work for you, Cabinet Secretary. And so, therefore, we put in a Welsh Conservative freedom of information request in order to bring some openness, transparency, and accountability to our argument and to proceedings here in the National Assembly for Wales. Out of the 28 public bodies able to respond in full, 63 officers were on full-time facility time, working a total of 2,459 hours per week. Out of the 26 public bodies able to respond, 272 officers are also employed part time, and 15 out of 22 authorities pay for their full-time officers on union facility time, equating to 33 officers. We have a right to know this. Our members of the public, our electorate, have a right to know that too. Days lost to strike action impede the economy, and there is no disputing that. The Trade Union Act 2016 introduced by the UK Government was introduced because of a 77 per cent increase in working days lost due to industrial action, from 440,000 days in 2013 to 788,000 in 2014. In 2015, Wales had the fourth highest amount of working days lost out of the UK regions, with six per 1,000 employees. So much for your partnership working and the touchy-feely approach that you have. Days lost to strike action rose again across the UK in 2016. Up to 31 October 2016, 281,000 days were lost to strike action, an increase of 65 per cent. It has been estimated that the Trade Union Act’s 2016 provisions will save 1.5 million working hours a year and boost the UK economy by over £100 million over the next 10 years.

Llywydd, by extending the requirements to publish information on the time and money spent on facility time, requirements that already currently apply to the civil service and to the wider public sector, we can ensure greater transparency and openness with this amendment. Fundamentally, we believe it is right that the Government monitor this practice to ensure it is a sensible use of taxpayers’ money, and that this will ensure that levels of facility time remain appropriate. I will clarify once more: we are not seeking to remove it. A freedom of information request found—[Interruption.]

Will you take an intervention?

Allow the Member to continue, please—. Oh—

A clear—. No, I want to carry on.

No, she’s not taking an intervention.

Our freedom of information request clearly highlighted the need for more transparency in this regard. So, whilst this amendment does not dispute the value of facility time, I think it’s fair and justified to be calling for this to be published. It is critical that transparency and openness are ingrained across the Welsh public sector—it’s critical that they are ingrained in any workings of this Assembly for Wales—to ensure that facility time works for union members, works for public sector delivery, and, fundamentally, works to ensure cost-effectiveness across our public services.

The question is that amendment 2 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, and 43 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is not agreed.

Group 3, the next group, relates to the requirement relating to ballot before action by trade union and removing definitions of devolved Welsh authorities. Amendment 3 is the lead amendment in this group, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you, Llywydd. I move amendment 3. This amendment, of course, refers to the 40 per cent ballot threshold for industrial action affecting important public services. We recognise the importance of trade unions as valuable institutions in British society and know that many dedicated trade unionists have a strong history of working hard to represent their members, campaigning for improved safety at work and giving support to their members when it’s needed. However, I believe it is only fair that the rights of unions are balanced with the rights of hard-working taxpayers who rely on key public services on a day-to-day basis—[Interruption.]

This isn’t a pantomime. This is the National Assembly for Wales undertaking a proper discussion and debate regarding a piece of legislation it may be about to pass. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you. With strikes having such a high impact on the normal lives of such a large group of people, it is sensible that strikes, when necessary, are backed up with an appropriate level of support from those involved. The UK Government’s Trade Union Act 2016 sought to create workable legislation that is fit for purpose in our modern, fluid economic market. What we do not want to see is a small minority of union members disrupting the lives of millions of commuters, parents, workers and employers at short notice, and without clear support from the union members—a situation that has the potential to give unions a bad name in the eyes of the public.

Wales currently has 30 per cent of its workforce with trade union membership. This is far in excess of the UK average of 21 per cent and higher than that of England and Scotland. As such, the impact of trade union ballots will have more far-reaching consequences to this country, and we do need to consider the impact of this Bill on the everyday lives of people across Wales and the ability to deliver much-needed public services. The UK Government’s department for business, energy, innovation and skills data has found that the combined days lost in the sectors of public administration, defence, education, health and social work have accounted for the vast majority of days lost every year since 2008. These sectors remain at the forefront of our security, our well-being and our development, and therefore strike action must be equitable and democratic. As it stands, the Welsh Labour Government’s Bill proposals are neither of those things. As the law stands, the UK Government Act will provide tougher ballot thresholds that will reduce industrial action in important public services like transport, health and education by 35 per cent, saving 1.5 million working hours a year from strike action. Furthermore, the measures in the UK Government legislation will also provide a £10 million boost to the Welsh economy over 10 years. It will protect hundreds of thousands of people across Wales from the effects of undemocratic strike action. This amendment, therefore, will ensure that if strikes do go ahead, it will only be as a result of a clear, democratic mandate and decisions from union members, thanks to the introduction of tougher ballot thresholds.

Well, if I remarked in the debates on the two previous groups of amendments that the Tories just don’t get it, never has that been more true than in respect of these amendments on balloting. Maybe some of the Welsh Conservatives were brought up influenced by the Thatcher philosophy surrounding trade unions. You remember those nasty trade unions dominated by the unrepresentative barons whose only aim in life was to call out their members on strike for no good reason at the drop of a hat, all with a total disregard to the views of their members. Well, let me tell the Tories something that might interest them. Trade unions are simply organisations made up of workers coming together to protect their interests at work. And something else that might interest Janet Finch-Saunders is that those workers are also taxpayers. So, when the Tories attack trade unions, they are not attacking the union barons, they’re attacking ordinary working people who are doing nothing more than coming together in common cause.

Of course, trade unions are also amongst the most democratic organisations in the country. Let’s just look at how they elect their leaders. Trade union general secretaries are elected for set periods by one-member-one-vote ballots amongst their entire membership. And on the issues central to this amendment, balloting on industrial action involves every member of the union affected.

Amongst the uninformed Tory ranks, there is, of course, a myth perpetuated that trade unions actively seek to take their members out on strike. But it’s a complete fantasy to suggest that trade unions welcome calling strike action. I can tell you absolutely, from all my years, both as a lay activist and a full-time trade union officer, that I and other trade union colleagues would consider a failure if we ever had to resort to calling a formal industrial action ballot—a failure because all the work we did, day in and day out, working with employers to resolve difficulties, as outlined earlier, would not have worked. Industrial action is always, always the last resort.

Let’s then talk about the ballots themselves. If this amendment is passed, it would put in place a regime of ballot thresholds that don’t apply in any other democratic situation that I’m aware of anywhere in the UK outside of the Westminster Government’s Trade Union Act. And I challenge the proposer of this amendment to identify one.

It certainly didn’t apply to the—

Are you giving way?

I beg your pardon; sorry.

Do you find it ironic that somebody who got 34.7 per cent of the vote in an election wants a 40 per cent ballot threshold?

I absolutely agree with you, and it was the very point I was just coming on to, Mike. Thank you very much.

The ballot thresholds, as we know, certainly didn’t apply in the EU referendum, which was without doubt the single most important issue that we have voted on in this country in our lifetime. And however close the margin in that referendum, and whatever the turnout, we all agreed that we must abide by the majority of those who voted. We did not say that the result should be invalidated by setting some arbitrary and spurious threshold, but that is what the UK Tories’ trade union Act does for workers balloting for industrial action. And that is what is being proposed in this amendment.

As I said when we debated this issue previously, we could take those dual standards a step further and observe that not a single Conservative Member would have been elected to this Chamber if the same threshold in the UK Act proposed in this amendment had applied to their election. And yes, the same would have applied to all other Members, as well as councillor colleagues who were elected back in May. Before June’s general election, there were only 25 Tory MPs that would have made it into Westminster on that threshold. Now, I confess to the fact that I haven’t checked to see that analysis of the general election on 8 June, but I’m hazarding a guess it won’t have improved much since then. The hypocrisy in this amendment, therefore, is quite breathtaking.

I commented earlier that most trade union organisers would consider it a failure if they had to resort to an industrial action ballot, but let’s go on to explore what happens with such ballots if a trade union does go down that route. All unions have vigorous procedures for approving any action arising from an industrial action ballot. They have to produce an inordinate amount of information to the employer about every member to be balloted, and once they get a result this requires a detailed analysis of the numbers of members who voted, alongside the majorities for or against. Every member gets the opportunity to participate in that ballot. It is their democratic right to choose to be part of that ballot or not, as is their wish. A factor on turnout is always that one of the difficulties is of the antiquated restrictions on methods imposed by previous Tory Governments in terms of how trade unions can ballot their members. But no trade union would ever embark on a programme of industrial action without the confidence that they are able to deliver it. What in fact normally happens under such circumstances is that a ‘yes’ vote for industrial action focuses the minds of all sides in any dispute on an agreed outcome, which, of course, should be the aim of any negotiations. What an arbitrary and potentially unachievable threshold would do is lessen the incentive for one of the parties to reach a negotiated settlement, which anyone with even a basic understanding would recognise as being counterproductive to healthy and constructive industrial relations.

Of course, I am a lifelong and committed trade unionist, so perhaps people would say, ‘Well, Dawn Bowden would say that, wouldn’t she?’ Well, okay, Llywydd, Members don’t need to just take my word for it. The UK Government’s regulatory policy committee deemed that these plans were not fit for purpose. The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development called the UK Government’s proposals under its trade union Act ‘an outdated response’. It went on to conclude that Governments and employers building a better dialogue with their workforces was a better approach than draconian legislation imposing ballot thresholds. Peter Cheese, chief executive of the CIPD said

‘It’s time to start talking about prevention rather than cure when it comes to strike action and the public sector’s workforce challenges in particular. Taxpayers’ interests are best served by an efficient, engaged and productive public sector workforce.’

We need to see more consultation and ongoing dialogue and engagement with the workforce, rather than the introduction of mechanisms that reflect the industrial relations challenges of the 1980s. To jump straight to legislation and strike activity, without considering this, appears to be a significant step back. Of course, we already recognise that here in Wales we have avoided disputes—despite what Janet Finch-Saunders has said—we have avoided disputes in the public sector here through the working of social partnership in bodies like the council for economic renewal, the workforce partnership council, and the Wales Social Partners Unit. Why is it, then, that the Tories are unable to grasp what everyone else can: the need for a constructive and equal partnership framework for the conduct of industrial relations in our devolved public services? Are they just so blinded by an anti-trade-union prejudice that they will not listen to what all industrial relations professionals are telling them? Well, Llywydd, I know where I stand on this issue, and I’ll be voting against these amendments.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Well, in introducing this group of amendments, we heard the authentic voice of the Welsh Conservative Party. On the one hand: trade unions needing to be held down and tied up in complex rules and high thresholds to make sure that they do not wreak havoc in the lives of hard-working taxpayers. It’s exactly that sort of distinction—that setting of one group against another—that we are determined to resist in this Bill. Here in Wales, we have developed a social partnership model in which we recognise that the interests of trade unionists are identical to the interests of those people who rely on public services. That’s why we reject this sort of amendment.

Mike Hedges said that it was ironic that someone who themselves arrived in this place on a ballot that would certainly not have met the text set out in this amendment—it was ironic that it should be put forward in that way. I think it’s a bit worse than that, Mike. I think it’s deeply distasteful to hear people make an appeal to democracy and setting up standards that they themselves could not possibly aspire to meet. That’s true of many people in this room; it absolutely is. If the rules that this amendment sets out applied to you, you would not be a Member of this National Assembly. So, where’s democracy in that, I wonder? That’s why we need to reject this group of amendments. We need to reject it as well because of the conclusion that the committee came to: that, actually, when you introduce a spirit of confrontation into industrial relations, when you pit one side against another, then what you do is you make the risk that things will end up in industrial action rather than being resolved around the table—you make that risk more, not less. Here’s what the committee said:

‘We heard about the very real danger that the additional threshold would lead to heightened industrial tensions and have the inadvertent effect of increasing the likelihood and duration of industrial action.’

That’s what these amendments would do. Far from protecting the public, they would increase the risk that we would be unable to conduct industrial relations in the successful way that we have achieved here in Wales. As with the other groups so far, these amendments deserve to be defeated.

I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to reply to the debate.

Thank you. I’d just like to say to the Cabinet Secretary: if your social partnership has been so successful, why does Wales have the lowest pay, employment and prosperity levels in the whole of Britain? In its briefing for the original UK Government Bill, the House of Commons library found that, in 2015, Wales had the fourth highest amount of working days lost out of the UK regions—six per 1,000 employees. And as I stated earlier, estimations from the department for business, energy, innovation and skills indicate that the current UK Government Act provisions will save over 1.5 million working hours per year, boosting the UK economy by £100 million. It just baffles me why you would not want to see that success.

The CBI has also noted that the introduction of strike ballot thresholds does not contradict any UK-ratified International Labour Organization conventions, or undermine any EU rights. This is about ensuring the employee voice is democratically heard in industrial disputes. Too often, we see strikes go ahead on very low turnout, or with the support of a small proportion of the workforce. In 2014 thousands of schools were closed following a ballot that achieved a turnout of 27 per cent. In relation to political elections, voting to take part in strike action and voting in a general election or Assembly election are completely different. Everyone can vote for their MP or AM, while strikes affect everyone but the majority of those members of the public affected by strikes have no opportunity or no say to vote on whether the strike should take place. It is only fair that strikes should happen on a decent turnout.

Now, interestingly enough, the turnout at this year’s snap election was 68.7 per cent, well above the threshold that we are suggesting here. Llywydd, I don’t expect to see support from across the Chamber, given the exceptional amount of funding provided to certain parties by trade unions. However, I would hope to see Members rise above their own interests and such matters to vote in favour of fair and democratic strike action, which we believe is in the interest of all involved.

The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, and 43 against. Therefore, amendment 3 is not agreed.

Amendment 4—Janet Finch-Saunders.

I withdraw. [Interruption.]

Amendment 5.

I withdraw. [Interruption.]

Okay, okay, calm down.

Therefore, the next group of amendments is group 4. This group relates to prohibition on using temporary workers to cover industrial action. Amendment 6 is the lead amendment in this group and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendment in the group—Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you. I move amendment 6. This amendment seeks to allow employers the freedom to employ agency workers to cover strike action. I’ve already discussed the significant impact on daily life to many members of the public that strikes can cause: having to take a day off work to look after children if a school is closed, for example.

Further to amendment 3, clearly, we do only want to see strikes occurring as a result of clear democratic decisions and we want to tackle the disproportionate impact that any strike could have. The UK Government intends to remove regulation 7 from the conduct regulations to ensure that, while strike action remains a viable and effective option in such a situation if it gains the appropriate support, it will not have a negative impact on the economy and day-to-day lives of our hard-working members of the public.

This amendment seeks to give the recruitment sector the opportunity to help public organisations and employers to limit the impact to the wider economy and society of strike action by ensuring that services can continue to operate to some extent. I move.

So, once again, we’re faced with an amendment proposed that is about as predictable as it is ill-conceived, much like the previous three amendments. As I’ve said before, Llywydd, no trade union or its members lightly or enthusiastically embrace the need to take industrial action, but what you can be equally certain of is that no trade union official or member wants any dispute to drag on unnecessarily, and nor, of course, does any employer want that.

Llywydd, for trade unions, strike action, as I’ve said, is always the last resort. It’s a mechanism that more often than not will bring home to an employer that they are faced with a very real issue that they need to work with the trade unions to address. A protracted dispute will, of course, adversely affect an employer’s business, but it’s equally in the interest of the trade unions to address the issue in dispute as speedily as possible. It is neither in the interest of the union or its members to have members facing the financial hardship, which inevitably arises through loss of earnings whilst on strike. It is this mutual and equal interest that drives both parties to move towards settlement as soon as possible.

Where this balance is distorted, as would be the case if this amendment were to be passed, the incentive for an early resolution of the dispute would be removed, i.e. the dispute is not impacting on the employer, so the employer is less likely to engage constructively with the union to find a resolution to the dispute, which then turns into a protracted war of attrition.

What every employment relations professional understands, and what the Tories evidently don’t, is that in almost every case, there ultimately has to be a settlement of the dispute and a key component of any settlement was to always be how the parties intend working together in the future. This, of course, becomes much more of a challenge where a dispute has been a protracted one, as would inevitably be the consequence of the use of agency workers to strike break. So, from a basic industrial relations perspective, the amendment is just crazy, but there are further reasons for which I will be opposing it today.

The World Employment Confederation has recommended that agency workers should not be used to replace striking workers and in the UK, the Recruitment and Employment Confederation, which represents agency employers said, in respect of the UK Government’s proposals in this area,

‘we are not convinced that putting agencies and temporary workers into the middle of difficult industrial relations situations is a good idea for agencies, workers or their clients’.

Finally, there are real concerns that putting inexperienced agency workers, in far greater numbers, into roles usually performed by a well-trained, experienced and professional workforce could seriously compromise both health and safety and standards of service. So, for the final time today, Llywydd, I will observe that we have a Tory party, driven by anti-trade-union prejudice, proposing legislation which flies in the face of opinion of professionals in the employment-relations field, and, therefore, I shall be voting against these amendments, along with the others submitted in the name of Janet Finch-Saunders.

I’d like to make a few general comments before going into detail on group 4. Plaid Cymru is supportive of this Bill introduced by Labour, but we wish to note that the Blair or Brown Governments didn’t take the opportunitiy to scrap many of those policies introduced by Thatcher—measures that continue to undermine the rights of workers to this day. It’s important that we bear that in mind I think.

In moving to group 4, Plaid Cymru will be voting against these amendments introduced in the name of Janet Finch-Saunders. I was pleased to support a Government amendment during Stage 2 proceedings on this Bill that would ensure that there would be a prohibition on using temporary workers to cover staff during industrial action. Often, agency staff won’t be familiar with the procedures in workplaces, and that raises concerns about safety and the quality of the service provided to the public. Using agency staff to replace people taking part in industrial action can damage the relationship between the employees and the employers, and between the employees and the agency staff as well.

The proposals of the UK Government have been strongly criticised from within the agency sector itself, as we heard from Dawn Bowden, with the head of policy for the Recruitment and Employment Confederation very suspicious of placing temporary and agency workers into difficult industrial relations situations, and advising, indeed, that that wasn’t beneficial to members of the alliance. That’s just one argument for rejecting these amendments.

I want to use some quotes here from the Association of Teachers and Lecturers union. I want to use them particularly because they’re not party affiliated, so that the obvious can’t come back from the other side. And they actually do state in their evidence that the use of agency workers in the public sector comes at an extremely high risk, and that it undermines the right of hard-working, taxpaying workers to exercise their right to withdraw their labour after fulfilling all the obligations that are already in place, and I think that is something that really hasn’t been spelt out here today. It almost seems that the Conservatives are trying to give the impression that people can just go on strike, and that people do just go on strike. They seem to also have forgotten a point that was made just now by my colleague Dawn Bowden: that the strike action costs those people who are employed within those industries, that they are losing their wages, and that people don’t want to come to the table, withdrawing their labour—which they have every right to do, having gone through due procedure—just simply on a whim.

It’s also worth noting that the majority of people who do deliver excellent services in the workplace that is the public sector are women, and it is women who will be disproportionately affected by the changes that are proposed by this trade union Bill. It’s also worth noting that the Government’s own Regulatory Policy Committee deemed the measures not fit for purpose, and that no full impact assessment of the trade union Bill had been made. I think it’s worth noting those things.

And I would ask the Cabinet Secretary, because there has been some confusion on the understanding of the words ‘agency workers’, to clarify for the record that we’re not talking about not allowing existing agency workers who already are used within the public sector—mostly, it has to be said, within the health sector—from coming into work like they would have under normal circumstances, but we are talking about, here, agency workers who are brought in for the specific purpose of breaking a strike.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

Diolch, Llywydd. I was very grateful to the Chair of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee for allowing the committee, during its Stage 1 evidence taking, to take views from contributors on the consultation that the Government had carried out at that time on the use of agency workers, and for the very clear support that the committee gave in their Stage 1 report for an amendment to be brought forward at Stage 2 to make it clear that here in Wales the circumstances that appertain today in which it is not possible to use agency workers to break strike action—that that would continue to be the position here in Wales.

Let me, for the record, clear up the point that Joyce Watson raised: the provisions of this Bill will not affect arrangements such as nurse bank arrangements, where nurses and healthcare support workers provide temporary cover as a result of staff absences, shortages or short-term unfilled vacancies. Those people are not agency workers, and they would not be affected by this provision.

Let me be clear as well, Llywydd, that I do not agree with the proposition that the mover of this amendment put to the Assembly in opening this group of amendments. I believe that what I heard Janet Finch-Saunders say was that by passing this group of amendments, the Assembly would be offering freedom to employers to utilise agency workers during strike action. Now, let me be clear that were these amendments to be passed, it would remove section 2, a key part of the Bill. It would fly in the face of the consultation that was carried out. It would overturn the clear view of the committee at Stage 2, but it would not allow Welsh authorities to use agency workers to cover industrial action. And that is because, while the UK Government consulted on removing regulation 7 of the Conduct of Employment Businesses and Employment Agency Regulations 2003, they have not acted on that consultation. So, I do think it's very important for the mover to clear up this matter for the benefit of the Assembly this afternoon.

If these amendments were passed, the state of the law would remain as it has been for a number of decades, because regulation 7 still remains in place. So, the effect of passing these amendments would not be, I believe, to provide freedom to employers to use agency workers in the case of strike action here in Wales. The status quo would prevail—the status quo that has been sufficient for successive Conservative Governments at Westminster, and the status quo that our consultation here in Wales showed that trade unions and employers were keen to see preserved.

And to respond to the debate, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you. Of course, it remains that there are sectors in which industrial action has a wider impact on members of the public that is disproportionate and unfair. Strikes can prevent people from getting to work and earning their own living and prevent businesses from managing their workforces effectively. For instance, strikes in important public services such as education will mean some parents of school-age children will need to look after their children rather than go to work because some schools would simply not be able to fulfil their duty of care to their pupils during the strike. This would also have a negative impact on some employers of the parents affected, whose workforce and productivity would be affected. Similarly, if postal workers were to strike, individuals and employers reliant on postal services would be placed at a disadvantage due to the resulting large backlog of deliveries. This Bill, unamended, will deny the recruitment sector the opportunity to help employers limit the impact on the wider economy and society of strike action by ensuring that businesses can continue to operate to some extent.

The UK Government has consulted a wide range of stakeholders, including employment agencies, employment businesses, employers, labour providers, trade bodies, employees, individuals who use the recruitment sector to find work, and the public, all of whom are affected by industrial action. This feedback is currently being analysed and will be considered in the context of wider industrial relations legislation and interests. A modern, dynamic—

Will you take an intervention?

No. Sorry, Dawn—yes, whoever. A modern, dynamic workforce needs flexibility to drive economic change. The UK Act is mindful of this. The Welsh version shifts focus away from value for money and back into the trade unions. I move.

The question is that amendment 6 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We'll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, and 42 against. Therefore, amendment 6 is not agreed.

Amendment 7, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Not moved.

The next group, and the final group, of amendments is the amendment relating to coming into force. Amendment 8 is the lead and only amendment in this group, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the amendment.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move amendment 8. Our final amendment seeks to ensure that a full analysis of the true impact of this Bill will be undertaken before it is brought into effect. In essence, by undertaking an assessment of the impact of the UK Government's Trade Union Act, the Welsh Government and the National Assembly for Wales will be able to make a more informed judgment on the impact that this Bill would have, rather than bringing it forward with no in-depth analysis just for the sake of pushing through legislation.

The Welsh Conservatives are in favour of legislative review in other areas, notably recently in the Land Transaction Tax and Anti-avoidance of Devolved Taxes (Wales) Act 2017, and the Landfill Disposals Tax (Wales) Bill. In this instance, many provisions of the Trade Union Act 2016 only came into force in March 2017, and therefore it is important that the National Assembly for Wales is provided equally with the chance of assessment before its own legislation is taken forward. Thank you.

Plaid Cymru will be voting against amendment 8 in group 5, which has been tabled in the name of Janet Finch-Saunders, because it does restrict the Government from introducing the Bill until an impact assessment has been completed and reported back to the Assembly. This is an entirely transparent attempt by the Conservatives to prevent the Bill from passing before the Wales Act is enacted. Under the current powers model, the Assembly has the right to pass the Bill before the Assembly today, but when the Wales Act comes into force, the new powers model will mean that the Assembly won’t have the powers to do that, because industrial relations will be a matter reserved to Westminster.

When Plaid Cymru voted against the Wales Bill in January of this year, we did so because we were of the view that that legislation would roll back powers from this Assembly. Unfortunately, the fact that we are having to pass this trade union Bill before that Act comes into force proves that we were right in that regard. Therefore, Plaid Cymru will vote against this amendment, and we will vote against and oppose any future attempt by the Conservatives in Westminster to take more powers from our national Parliament.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

So, Llywydd, the mover of the amendment says that there’s been no in-depth analysis that lies behind this Bill. Let me just remind Members here of the whole debate that took place in the last Assembly; the efforts that the First Minister made to persuade UK Ministers not to press ahead by trespassing into devolved responsibilities; the LCM that was passed here on the floor of this Assembly, seeking to deny the UK Government the power to act in areas for which they have no responsibility. Let me remind Members here of the manifesto commitments of more than one party here in this Assembly, both at the National Assembly elections a year ago and at the recent general election.

We’ve heard the usual Tory attempt this afternoon, Llywydd, to imply that somehow the motivation behind this Bill is simply the relationship between my party and the trade union movement, a relationship of which we are immensely proud. But what actually lies behind the Bill is the manifesto commitments that we stood on, that were endorsed by people here in Wales, that are shared by more than one party in this Assembly, and which give us the democratic mandate and the authority to put this Bill before the National Assembly. What about the evidence from the public consultation on agency workers? What about the consistent evidence provided to the committee during its Stage 1 consideration? What about the information set out in the explanatory memorandum and the regulatory impact assessment provided and revised ahead of the Stage 3 debate? And more than all of that, Llywydd, what about the evidence of how industrial relations have been successfully conducted here in Wales?

It takes a lot of gall to be a Conservative Member of this Assembly when you ae prepared to argue that the record of industrial relations here in Wales—no firefighters on strike; no teachers on strike; no nurses on strike; no doctors on strike; no physiotherapists on strike; no occupational therapists on strike, all those people that their party have succeeded in driving into industrial action in England and our record here in Wales provides every bit of evidence that any reasonable person would need to show that the approach we have taken here in Wales not only is the right one, but it is the successful one as well. Llywydd, I have tried, during this afternoon, to respond to the substance of the amendments put in front of the Assembly in previous groups, but let me say, for this group, it is simply an attempt to wreck the Bill. It’s simply an attempt by the back door to make sure that the things that have been argued for on this side, by others in the Assembly, consistently supported during the passage of this Bill—at the last minute, there will be an attempt to overturn all of that by a device that is transparent to anybody who cares to look at it. It’s a final attempt to try and make sure that we are unable to carry on doing things here in Wales in the way that this Assembly has endorsed and that trade unionists and employers have come in front of the Assembly to tell us has been one of the successes of the devolution era. Let’s defeat this amendment as well and get this Bill onto the statute book.

I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. Many of the answers, of course, from the Cabinet Secretary and those giving evidence at Stages 1 and 2 of this Bill were simply not sufficiently evidence-based for us to make an independent assessment of the impact of this Bill. For example, going back to amendment 1, we were told continually that the cost for check-off was minimal, without anyone being able to provide an actual figure. Yet we know from the Cabinet Office analysis that it costs a net £9.7 million annually across the UK, which equates to around £0.5 million here in Wales. Further, the explanatory memorandum brought forward by the Welsh Government—. So, there is definitely scope for further analysis in relation to the costings and impact of this Bill and the UK Act. Review and scrutiny are essential to making good legislation, both in analysing that which is already in practice, and in better informing that which we are looking to make.

Given the rush to push through this particular Bill, I do think we need to pause and consider the long-term impacts here, and an assessment of the UK Act is essential to this. Further, this will allow for complete clarity in terms of legislative competence, something which I and my colleagues on these benches feel we do not yet have. It is fair to say there has been some ambiguity in this area. As the UK Bill made its way through the Westminster Parliament, the Welsh Government contested that some of its provisions should not extend to devolved public services, and vowed to bring forward its own legislation to disapply those provisions in Wales at the earliest opportunity—as if that is the main priority for this Welsh Government when you consider the health of our health service, the poor standards in our education—which is where we are now.

The UK Government has continued to argue that trade union law is non-devolved, and so it is highly likely that a third piece of Welsh legislation is going to end up in the Supreme Court via a UK Government referral. This represents an expensive waste of taxpayers’ money for legislation that is unnecessary, regressive and represents little more than a Welsh Government vanity project. What a shame to see thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money used on a court case over competence, just to realise how incompetent the Welsh Labour Government is because we were in such a rush to pass this Bill. Llywydd, the UK Government’s Trade Union Act 2016 demonstrates the forward-thinking nature of the rest of the UK. In this context, Wales simply cannot be seen as going backwards.

I can tell you now, it doesn’t take gall to be a Welsh Conservative; it takes honesty, courage, conviction, principle and morals. I am extremely proud to be a Welsh Conservative, and I’m extremely proud to challenge and scrutinise this legislation, and I would do so any time, any place, and again. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 8 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore, amendment 8 is not agreed.

We have therefore reached the end of our stage 3 consideration of the Trade Union (Wales) Bill, and I declare that all sections of, and Schedules to, the Bill are deemed agreed. That brings the Stage 3 proceedings and today’s proceedings to a close.