Y Pwyllgor Craffu ar Waith y Prif Weinidog - Y Bumed Senedd

Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister - Fifth Senedd

06/07/2018

Aelodau'r Pwyllgor a oedd yn bresennol

Committee Members in Attendance

Ann Jones Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor
Committee Chair
Dai Lloyd
David J. Rowlands
David Rees
Mike Hedges
Nick Ramsay
Russell George
Simon Thomas

Y rhai eraill a oedd yn bresennol

Others in Attendance

Carwyn Jones Prif Weinidog Cymru
First Minister of Wales
Jason Thomas Llywodraeth Cymru
Welsh Government
Mari Stevens Llywodraeth Cymru
Welsh Government

Swyddogion y Senedd a oedd yn bresennol

Senedd Officials in Attendance

Ben Stokes Ymchwilydd
Researcher
Graeme Francis Clerc
Clerk
Kath Thomas Ail Glerc
Second Clerk

Cofnodir y trafodion yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir trawsgrifiad o’r cyfieithu ar y pryd. Lle mae cyfranwyr wedi darparu cywiriadau i’w tystiolaeth, nodir y rheini yn y trawsgrifiad.

The proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous interpretation is included. Where contributors have supplied corrections to their evidence, these are noted in the transcript.

Cynhaliwyd y cyfarfod yn yr Hen Goleg, Aberystwyth.

The meeting was held at Old College, Aberystwyth.

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 11:01.

The meeting began at 11:01.

1. Cyflwyniad, ymddiheuriadau, dirprwyon a datgan buddiannau
1. Introductions, apologies, substitutions and declarations of interest

Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the Committee for the Scrutiny of the First Minister here in the Old College in Aberystwyth. Can we say, first off, thank you very much to the staff here for the way in which they've allowed us to come into this beautiful hall to hold this meeting? We're very grateful. As a committee, we never travel lightly. We always have some very odd demands at times, so we're very grateful that we've been able to meet in this location. There have been a number of apologies today, which we will record, but I won't read them all out. We have no substitutions on this committee. I wonder whether Members do need to declare interests other than anything they have already declared. No, that's fine. Okay. Thank you.

I just should say at the outset, because we're actually outside of the Senedd, then, if you've got a mobile phone, could you put it on to airport mode—or aeroplane mode, please? It does affect the translation and the broadcasting. So, if we could do that, that's fine. We're not expecting the fire alarm to operate. Should it operate, then we will either use the exits that are to my left and directly in front of me or we will take our instructions from the ushers and the staff of the college. So, as I say, we're not expecting the alarm to go off, so, hopefully, that will remain the case. We operate bilingually, as Members know. We all know how to use the headsets, so I don't think that's a problem. 

2. Sesiwn i graffu ar waith y Gweinidog - Y Diwydiant Twristiaeth yng Nghymru
2. Ministerial Scrutiny Session - The Tourism Industry in Wales

So, we're going to move on, then, to the ministerial scrutiny session on the tourism industry in Wales. As ever, it's a pleasure to have the First Minister with us. So, First Minister, could you introduce your officials, please, for the record?

Yes. I have with me Jason Thomas and Mari Stevens.

Thank you very much. And as you know, we've got a set of questions, various questions that we're going to want to go through with you. So, I'm going to go straight into those questions. We've got quite a few, and we'll see how we go for time. So, the first set of questions, then, Dai Lloyd, you're going to start off, and I know others are going to come in behind you. So, Dai.

Diolch yn fawr, Gadeirydd. Bore da i bawb. Mae'n hyfryd bod yn Aberystwyth unwaith eto. Gwnaf i ddechrau efo cwestiwn weddol hawdd—efallai aiff pethau'n fwy anodd fel mae'r bore'n mynd ymlaen. A allwch chi ddechrau drwy olrhain cyflwr iechyd presennol y sector dwristiaeth yma yng Nghymru? 

Thank you very much, Chair. Good morning, everyone. It's wonderful to be in Aberystwyth once again. So, I will begin with quite an easy question, perhaps, but perhaps things will become more difficult as the morning moves on. Could you begin by characterising the current health of the tourism sector here in Wales?

Mae'n dda dros ben, byddwn i'n dweud. Rydym ni'n gwybod wrth ystyried canlyniadau'r baromedr fod hyder yn uchel yn y sector. Rydym ni wedi gweld, wrth gwrs, fod y sector wedi tyfu ac, wrth gwrs, mae yna lot fawr o waith wedi cael ei wneud ynglŷn â chynnal y brand a hefyd sicrhau bod mwy o bobl yn dod i Gymru. So, byddwn i'n dweud bod y sector mewn cyflwr da dros ben. Un ffigwr byddwn i'n ei roi i Aelodau yw hwn: rydym ni'n gwybod bod £356 miliwn ychwanegol wedi cael ei hala yng Nghymru o achos y ffaith bod Visit Wales wedi dylanwadu ar y farchnad. Mae hwnnw'n ffigwr sydd wedi dyblu ers 2013. Felly, rŷm ni'n gweld cynnydd sylweddol o ran faint o arian mae'r sector yn ei roi i'r economi yng Nghymru.

Very healthy indeed, I would say. We know, given the results of the barometer, that confidence within the sector is high. We have seen that the sector has experienced growth and a great deal of work has been done on supporting the brand and ensuring that more visitors come to Wales. So, I would say that the sector is in very good health indeed. One figure I would want to refer to is this: we know that £356 million in addition has been spent in Wales because of the influence of Visit Wales on the market. That's a figure that has doubled since 2013. So, we are seeing a significant increase in terms of what the sector is contributing to the Welsh economy.

11:05

Diolch am hynny. Fel y byddwch chi'n ymwybodol, mae nifer ohonom ni wedi bod mewn cyfarfod cychwynnol y bore yma efo aelodau o'r sector dwristiaeth cyn i'r pwyllgor yma ddechrau. Gwnaethpwyd nifer o bwyntiau teg. Un o'r rheini oedd ynglŷn â chynyddu'r cyllid gogyfer Visit Wales/Croeso Cymru o'i gymharu â'r cyllid mae'r un corff yn yr Alban yn ei gael i hyrwyddo twristiaeth, achos pethau fel hyrwyddo pethau yn rhyngwladol.

Yr ail beth ydy pethau fel isadeiledd megis cyfleusterau cyhoeddus. Maen nhw'n diflannu. Mae toiledau'n diflannu dros y lle i gyd, dros Gymru i gyd. Rŷm ni'n gwybod am sefyllfa ariannol bregus ein cynghorau sir ni. Wrth gwrs, maen nhw'n elfen bwysig iawn o ddenu a chadw twristiaid mewn unrhyw ardal, nid jest yma yng Ngheredigion. Ac, yn y bôn, felly, mwy o gyllid. Beth ydych chi'n ei feddwl am y syniad yma fod Visit Wales/Croeso Cymru yn colli allan o gymharu â'r un mudiad yn yr Alban?

Thank you for that. As you'll be aware, a number of us have been in an initial meeting this morning with representatives from the tourism sector in a pre meeting. Many fair points were raised. One of those was about increasing the funding for Visit Wales compared with the funding that the same body in Scotland receives to promote tourism, because of things like international promotion.

The second point is things like infrastructure, such as public conveniences. They are disappearing. Toilets are disappearing all over Wales. We know of the fragile financial situation of our local authorities. But, they are a very important element of attracting and retaining tourists in any area, not just here in Ceredigion. Essentially, there was a call for further funding. What do you think of this idea that Visit Wales is losing out compared with the same organisation in Scotland?

Mae'n anodd sicrhau bod adnoddau ar gael wrth gofio'r cefndir sydd gyda ni, ond rŷm ni wedi gweld y canlyniadau, rŷm ni wedi gweld bod mwy o bobl yn dod i Gymru, rŷm ni'n gweld bod mwy o arian yn cael ei hala yng Nghymru. Ac, wrth gwrs, rŷm ni wedi sicrhau ein bod ni'n agor mwy o swyddfeydd ar draws y byd. Un o'r pethau roedd yn rhaid eu gwneud oedd sicrhau bod mwy o bresenoldeb gyda ni. Roedd llawer o swyddfeydd wedi cael eu cau cyn 2011. Nid yw hynny'n briodol yn y pen draw. Mae swyddfeydd ym Mharis, Berlin, Düsseldorf a Doha yn mynd i agor cyn y Nadolig ac mae hynny'n rhoi'r presenoldeb i ni sydd ei eisiau arnom ni mewn marchnadoedd sydd yn hollbwysig.

Fe fyddwn i'n dweud ei fod yn un peth i ystyried faint o arian sy'n cael ei hala ar Visit Wales, ond hefyd mae'n rhaid ystyried y gyllideb yn y ffordd fwyaf eang, sef edrych ar yr adnoddau sy'n cael eu rhoi mewn i swyddfeydd tramor, a hefyd wrth gwrs y gwaith sy'n cael ei wneud gan swyddogion a Gweinidogion ynglŷn â gwerthu Cymru dramor. Rwyf wedi dweud sawl gwaith, nid yw'n bosibl i werthu Cymru ac i ddenu buddsoddiad mewn os ydych chi'n eistedd tu ôl i ddesg. Mae'n rhaid mynd mas yna a gwerthu Cymru. Mae'n un o'r pethau rwyf wedi gwneud, yn enwedig, a hefyd Gweinidogion eraill. Byddai pawb yn dadlau, wrth gwrs, fod eisiau cael mwy o arian, rwy'n deall hynny. Byddwn i'n dweud bod cyllideb yna, ond mae yna bethau eraill yn cael eu gwneud hefyd sydd yn helpu'r diwydiant.

It's difficult to ensure that resources are available given the current climate, but we have seen the results, we have seen an increase in the number of visitors to Wales and an increase in spend in Wales. And, of course, we have ensured that we open offices across the world. One of the things we had to do was to ensure that we had a greater presence internationally. Many offices had been closed prior to 2011. That wasn't appropriate. Offices in Paris, Berlin, Düsseldorf and Doha are to open before Christmas and that gives us the presence that we need in those vital markets. 

I would say that it's one thing to consider how much money is spent on Visit Wales, but you must also consider the budget in the broader sense, namely looking at the funds provided for those offices abroad and the work done by officials and Ministers in selling Wales abroad. I've said on a number of occasions that it's not possible to sell Wales and draw in investment if you're behind a desk. You have to get out there and do it. It is one of the things I have done, and also other Ministers. Everyone would argue that we need more funding, and I understand that. I would say that there is a budget in place, but there are other things going on too that help the industry.

Y pwynt sylfaenol yna ynglŷn â thoiledau: sut ydym ni'n mynd i ddygymod â hynny? Achos maen nhw wedi bod yn cau dros y lle i gyd, fel rydym ni i gyd yn gwybod, ers blynyddoedd rŵan, ac wrth gwrs nid oes yna byth ddigon o gyllid llywodraeth leol. A ydych chi'n credu bod hynny yn fater, dywedwch, i Groeso Cymru i ddelio efo fo?

That fundamental point about toilets: how are we going to deal with that? Because they have been closing all over Wales, as we all know, for many years now, and of course there is never enough local government funding. Do you think that that is an issue that Visit Wales should be dealing with?

Awdurdodau lleol sydd â'r cyfrifoldeb, ond rwy'n gwybod bod yna rai awdurdodau lleol wedi dechrau cynllun lle mae yna arian ar gael i dafarndai, i gaffes, i fwytai, i adael y cyhoedd i ddefnyddio eu toiledau nhw heb eu bod nhw'n teimlo eu bod nhw'n gorfod hala arian yn y llefydd hynny. Felly, lle mae cyfleusterau wedi cau, ym Mhen-y-bont, er enghraifft, mae posibilrwydd wedyn i ofyn i fusnesau i adael pobl i ddefnyddio eu toiledau nhw.

Local authorities have responsibility for this area, but I know that some local authorities have started a scheme where there is funding available to pubs, cafes and restaurants to allow the public to use their conveniences without feeling that they have to spend money at those locations. So, where conveniences have closed, in Bridgend, for example, there is a possibility to ask local businesses to allow people to use their toilets.

Fy nghwestiwn olaf, ar y mater yma beth bynnag, am nawr, yw rôl y Prif Weinidog, ynglŷn â sut mae Cymru yn cael ei 'phroject-o' yn fyd eang—hynny yw, y rôl benodol. Rwy'n deall beth rydych chi'n ei ddweud ynglŷn â'r swyddfeydd dros y lle i gyd ac ati, a beth mae Croeso Cymru yn ei wneud ac ati, a mudiadau eraill, ond, yn benodol, mae yna swydd bwysig gan Brif Weinidog Cymru i hyrwyddo Cymru ym mha le bynnag. Rhai wythnosau sydd gyda chi ar ôl nawr, ond a fyddech chi'n ei weld fel rhywbeth allweddol o bwysig i unrhyw Brif Weinidog ein gwlad fod yn ei wneud? Megis cyfleu i bobl tu allan, yn rhyngwladol, sydd yn aml iawn erioed wedi clywed am Gymru, cyfleu ein hiaith ni a'n hetifeddiaeth ni a'n treftadaeth unigryw yn y wlad yma, i wneud yn siŵr bod pobl yn deall hynny er mwyn eu denu nhw yma.

My final question, in this section at any rate, and for now, is on the role of the First Minister in terms of how Wales is projected worldwide—that is, the specific role. I understand what you have been saying about these overseas offices and the role of Visit Wales and other organisations, but, specifically, the First Minister of Wales has a very important role in promoting Wales wherever you may be. You only have a few weeks left in your role, but do you see that as something essential for any future First Minister of our nation? That is, to project to people outside of Wales, who may not ever have heard of Wales, to project our language, our heritage and how unique it is here, in Wales, to make sure that people understand that to attract them here.

Mae'n hollbwysig, achos y ffaith bod Gweinidog neu Brif Weinidog yn gallu agor drysau mae swyddogion yn ffaelu eu hagor a chael cyfarfodydd gyda phobl mae'r swyddogion yn ffaelu trefnu wrth eu hunain. Beth rwyf wedi ffeindio tra fy mod i wedi bod yn mynd i wledydd dros y byd yw, y ffaith eich bod chi'n gallu cwrdd ag unigolion, cwrdd â chyrff sydd ddim ond â diddordeb mewn cwrdd â rhywun sydd yn hŷn yn y Llywodraeth—dyna'r person maen nhw'n moyn cwrdd â nhw. Mae rhai wedi beirniadu’r ffaith fy mod i wedi mynd i wledydd ar draws y byd, a Gweinidogion eraill, ond ni allaf dderbyn hynny. Mae e'n holl bwysig. Mae yna gyfrifoldeb arnoch chi fel Prif Weinidog i sicrhau eich bod chi'n rhoi'r agwedd orau o Gymru ac, wrth gwrs, mae yna gyfrifoldeb arnoch chi i sicrhau eich bod chi'n mynd i farchnadoedd sy'n allweddol er mwyn i bobl weld eich bod chi o ddifrif. Pan fo Prif Weinidog neu Weinidog yn mynd i rywle, y neges sy'n cael ei rhoi yw bod y bobl hyn o ddifrif ynglŷn â'r ffaith eu bod nhw'n moyn, yn gyntaf, gwerthu eu gwlad fel rhywle i fynd iddi, ond hefyd gwerthu'r wlad fel rhywle i fuddsoddi ynddi.

That's crucially important, because a Minister or a First Minister can open doors that officials simply can't and they can have meetings with people that officials couldn't arrange alone. What I have found as I have travelled the world is that you can meet individuals and organisations who are only interested in meeting senior members of Government—those are the people they want to speak to. Some have criticised the fact that I've visited nations across the world, as have other Ministers, but I can't accept that. It's crucially important. There's a responsibility on the First Minister to ensure that you give the best impression of Wales and there's also a responsibility to ensure that you go to those key markets in order to ensure that people understand that you are serious. When a Minister or the First Minister goes somewhere, the message conveyed is that these people are serious. They are serious about selling their nation as a destination, but also selling the nation as a place for investment.

11:10

I've got a supplementary on this. I think, following on from what Dai Lloyd was talking about, that, if you want to develop a tourism industry, you have to get the basics right. People have to be able to get good food, they need to have somewhere good to stay and they need to have access to toilets. Often, from my experience of running training courses in the past, that was the bit that people remembered afterwards; if there was a problem with any of those three things, then that is what they remembered. Surely, one of the things we need to do is ensure that we get those three basics right before we end up getting people who come and don't come again because they're disappointed. 

Consistency is everything. There was a time, maybe 15, 20 years ago, when we did have a serious problem, I think, with consistency in terms of food, in terms of accommodation. I think that has improved immensely since those days. I think we are able to offer people now variety in terms of holiday offer. We're able to offer people a range of accommodation—good accommodation—to suit all budgets, and I also think that our food offer has improved immensely. That doesn't meant there's no room for improvement—of course not.

It's the industry that has to deliver that. There's a responsibility on the industry to do that, which they wouldn't argue with. Of course, there is also the opportunity for us to work with those in the tourism industry in order to deliver. We've done that—for example, the hotels that we've supported, the places to eat that we've supported through our various grants. That's when I think tourism is at its best—when somebody has an idea that can really work, needs a bit of help to get that idea over the line, and then the idea can fly. And that's the way that I think that tourism, or any business, should be able to operate. 

I think there's a number of people—. Simon, you were down on those, then I've got Simon and David Rees and David Rowlands, so—. Yes.

Diolch yn fawr. Croeso'n ôl i Aberystwyth, Prif Weinidog. Nid ydw i'n gwybod sut y gwnaethoch chi deithio i Aberystwyth heddiw, ond mae cludiant cyhoeddus wedi bod yn bwnc sydd wedi amlygu ei hun yn y trafodaethau'r bore yma gyda busnesau—sut mae pobl yn cyrraedd a sut maen nhw'n mynd o gwmpas pan fyddan nhw yn cyrraedd. Mae'r buddsoddiad mewn gwasanaeth bysus a threnau yn hollbwysig. Rŷch chi, wrth gwrs, bellach yn gyfrifol am fasnachfraint Cymru â'r gororau ynglŷn â threnau, ond rŷch chi hefyd wedi mynegi diddordeb a chefnogaeth drwy'r cytundeb ar y gyllideb rhwng Plaid Cymru a'ch Llywodraeth chithau ynglŷn ag edrych ar ailagor y rheilffordd o Gaerfyrddin i Aberystwyth. Nawr, yn y cyd-destun yma, rwy'n edych ar beth ddigwyddodd pan wnaeth y rheilffordd ailagor yn y Borders yn yr Alban. Bellach, maen nhw'n defnyddio'r rheilffordd yna—. Nid yn unig y mae hi wedi cynyddu'r nifer a gafodd ei ragweld y byddai’n teithio, ond mae hefyd wedi cynyddu twristiaeth yn ardal yna. Rŷm ni wedi gweld, er enghraifft, buddsoddiad newydd mewn gwaith celfyddydol ar hyd y rheilffordd. Mae'n cael ei marchnata'n benodol fel rheilffordd sy'n agor y drws i dwristiaeth actif, fel mae'n cael ei alw—pobl sydd eisiau cerdded a seiclo. Ac, eto, y neges a gawsom ni'r bore yma oedd mai dyma ble y mae eisiau gweld twf yng Nghymru, o'r bobl yma sy'n iau, sy'n gwario mwy o arian pan fyddan nhw'n dod, sydd angen rhychwant o lefydd i aros ynddynt. Felly, gyda'r syniad yna, yn gyntaf oll, a ydych chi'n cefnogi’r egwyddor o ailagor y rheilffordd o Gaerfyrddin i Aberystwyth? Pryd wnawn ni weld yr astudiaeth dichonoldeb sydd wedi'i pharatoi? Rydw i'n deall efallai bod hon yn cael ei chyhoeddi ddiwedd y mis yma, a bydd gan bawb ddiddordeb gweld sut mae honno'n mynd. Ac ym mha ffordd rydych chi'n gweld, yn fwy eang, y gallwn ni wella cludiant cyhoeddus yn benodol i hybu a hyrwyddo'r diwydiant twristiaeth?

Thank you very much. Welcome back to Aberystwyth, First Minister. I don't know how you travelled to Aberystwyth today, but public transport has been an issue that has emerged in our discussions this morning with businesses—how people arrive and how they get about when they do arrive. The investment in our bus and train services is crucial in this regard. You, of course, are now responsible for the Wales and borders franchise in terms of trains, but you've also expressed support in the budget deal between Plaid Cymru and your Government for reopening the rail line between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen. Now, in this regard, I'm looking at what happened when the railway re-opened in the Borders in Scotland. They now use that rail line—. Not only have the numbers forecast to use it increased, but it's also increased tourism in that region. We've seen, for example, a new investment in artworks along the rail line. It's marketed specifically as a railway that opens the door to active tourism, as it were—people who want to walk or cycle. And, again, the message that we received this morning was this is where we want to see growth in Wales—in terms of these younger tourists, who will spend more money when they arrive, and who need a range of places to stay. So, with that idea in mind, first of all, do you support the principle of reopening the line from Aberystwyth to Carmarthen? And when will we see the feasibility study that has been prepared? I understand that this may be published at the end of this month and everyone will be interested in seeing how that goes. And in what way do you think, more broadly, we can improve public transport specifically to promote the tourism industry?

Cwestiynau pwysig dros ben. Mae wastad yn neis i fod yn ôl yn Aberystwyth. Y tro diwethaf, rydw i'n credu, roeddwn i yn yr adeilad hwn, roeddwn i'n rhan o brotest a oedd wedi cael ei harwain gan rywun o'r enw Alun Davies. Roeddwn i lan lofft yn siarad gyda'r cyngor—minnau a Richard Wyn Jones. Felly, mae tipyn bach yn od i fod yn ôl yma.

Those are hugely important questions. It's always nice to be back in Aberystwyth. The last time I was in this building, I was part of a protest led by someone called Alun Davies. I was upstairs speaking to the council—myself and Richard Wyn Jones. So, it's a little odd to be back here.

Os caf i ddweud, roeddwn i ond yma ar gyfer darlithoedd, Prif Weinidog.

If I may say so, I was only here for lectures, First Minister.

Na, na, rydw i'n deall hynny, wrth gwrs. Byth mas o'r llyfrgell, os cofiaf i. [Chwerthin.] Cludiant cyhoeddus—. Wel, yn gyntaf, roeddech chi'n gofyn y cwestiwn am fel y daethom ni lan—heibio Llandysul a Synod y dyddiau hyn. Dyna'r ffordd rwyddaf, byddwn i'n ei ddweud nawr, o Ben-y-bont ta beth. Dau beth: ynglŷn â'r trenau, wel, wrth gwrs, bydd mwy o drenau ar gael ar y lein i'r Amwythig. Bydd gorsaf Bow Street yn agor mewn dwy flynedd, felly, mae hynny’n help, hefyd, ynglŷn â sicrhau bod trenau yn fwy aml ar y rheilffordd honno.

Yn y tymor byr, bysiau, wrth gwrs, yw’r ateb ynglŷn â’r de. Trueni mawr oedd bod y rheilffordd wedi cau yn 1964 rhwng Caerfyrddin ac Aberystwyth, efo’r rhan fwyaf o’r rheilffordd honno wedi cael ei thynnu lan yn 1975. So, datblygu’r TrawsCymru, gwasanaethau TrawsCymru, sydd eisiau ar hyn o bryd. Mae yna fwy o wasanaethau nawr nac yr oedd pan oeddwn i yma—un y dydd oedd yn mynd i lawr i’r de. So, felly, yn y tymor byr, sicrhau bod gennym ni system rwydd o ddefnyddio bysiau, a bysus sydd yn gyfforddus hefyd, ynglŷn â chysylltu Aberystwyth â’r de.

Yn y tymor hir, wel, mae’r astudiaeth yna ynglŷn â rheilffordd Caerfyrddin i Aberystwyth. Mewn egwyddor, byddwn i’n gefnogol, ond nid oes neb yn gwybod ar hyn o bryd faint byddai’n costio ac o ble fyddai'r arian yn dod. Wrth gwrs, mae’r rheilffordd i’r gogledd o dre Caerfyrddin wedi mynd, mae heol wedi cael ei hadeiladu dros lle yr oedd mynediad i mewn i’r orsaf, ac mae o leiaf un bont yn eisiau yn Llanbed. So, felly, mae’n rhaid i ni ystyried, yn gyntaf, faint o waith bydd eisiau ei wneud cyn symud ymlaen i’r cam nesaf. Fe fydd yn ddrud ac fe fydd yn anodd; mae’n rhaid imi ddweud hynny.

Ynglŷn â beth sy’n digwydd yn yr Alban, wrth gwrs, rhan o’r rheilffordd maen nhw wedi ailagor, nid y rheilffordd i gyd i lawr i Gaerliwelydd. So, felly, mae wedi bod yn help, ond mae’r rheilffordd yna’n cael ei defnyddio gan bobl sy’n gweithio yng Nghaeredin, mwy neu lai. So, felly, a oes yna bosibilrwydd o wneud hynny ynglŷn â Chaerfyrddin, Abertawe? Y rheini yw’r cwestiynau mae’n rhaid i ni eu hstyried yn y pen draw. Ond, yn y tymor byr, bysiau a sicrhau bod rhwydwaith TrawsCymru’n un sydd yn gynaliadwy i ddechrau, achos mae hanes yn yr ardal lle tynnodd Arriva mas, wrth gwrs, o wasanaethau lleol, a sicrhau ei fod yn rhwydd i bobl i ddefnyddio’r gwasanaeth hwnnw.

No, I understand that, of course—you were never out of the library, if I recall. [Laughter.] In terms of public transport—. Well, first, you asked how we travelled—we came up through Llandysul and Synod Inn. I think that's the easiest route from Bridgend. There are two points I'd like to make. In terms of the trains, of course, there will be more trains available on the line to Shrewsbury. The Bow Street station will open in two years' time, and that will be of assistance in ensuring that trains travel more regularly on that line.

In the short term, buses are the solution in relation to the south. It was a huge shame that that railway line did close in 1964 between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth, and most of the line was actually removed in 1975. So, we need to develop the TrawsCymru bus service. At the moment, there are more services than there were when I was here—there was only one per day travelling to south Wales. So, in the short term, we need to ensure that we have an easily accessed bus system and comfortable buses and coaches in terms of linking Aberystwyth with south Wales.

In the long term, there is that feasibility study into the railway between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen. In principle, I would support it, but nobody knows at the moment how much that would cost or where the funds would come from. The rail line to the north of Carmarthen has been taken up, a road has been built over where the entry point to the station was, and there is at least one bridge missing in Lampeter. So, we first of all have to consider how much work would need to be done before we could proceed to the next stage. It will be expensive and it will be difficult; I have to make that point.

In terms of what's happened in Scotland, of course, it's part of the rail line that they reopened, not the whole rail line down to Carlisle. It has been of assistance, but that line is used by people working in Edinburgh for the most part. So, is there any possibility of doing something similar with Carmarthen and Swansea? Well, that's one of the questions that we need to consider. But, in the short term, it's buses and ensuring that the Traws Cymru network is sustainable, first of all, because there is a history in the area of where Arriva pulled out of local services, and we need to ensure that those services are easily accessible to people.

11:15

A fyddem ni'n gweld yr astudiaeth yn fuan?

Will we see the feasibility study soon?

Beth y gwnaf i yw ysgrifennu at y pwyllgor gyda dyddiad, achos nid ydw i'n gwybod beth yn gymwys yw'r dyddiad ar hyn o bryd, ond fe allaf i wneud hynny, ta beth, so, bydd Aelodau’n gwybod beth yw’r cam nesaf.

What I will do is write to the committee with a date, because I don't know exactly what the date will be at the moment, but I can inform you what the next steps will be.

A wedyn, os caf i jest ofyn yn ehangach, rŷch chi’n sôn am wella gwasanaeth bysiau, a bydd hynny’n cael ei groesawu gan bobl leol, yn ogystal ag ymwelwyr, ond sut yn benodol y gallem ni ddefnyddio cludiant cyhoeddus i hybu’r fath yna o dwristiaeth, twristiaeth actif? So, rydych chi’n sôn, er enghraifft, y bydd yn rhaid i chi gludo beiciau ar gefn bysiau a phethau felly. Mae’n rhaid i ni edrych ar rywbeth llawer mwy dyfeisgar na beth sydd gennym ni ar hyn o bryd er mwyn i ni fynd ar ôl y farchnad yna, sydd yn rhan o’ch cynllun tair blynedd—y gwahanol flynyddoedd gyda’r themâu, ac ati—i sefydlu Cymru fel y lle y mae pobl yn meddwl amdano ar gyfer y fath yna o dwristiaeth.

And, then, if I can just broaden this out, you talked about bus services, and that will be something that will be welcomed by local people, as well as visitors, but, in terms of the use of public transport, how do we use that to promote that type of tourism, active tourism? So, you're talking about, for example, having to carry bikes on buses and so forth. We have to think of something much more innovative than the current situation in order for us to pursue that market, which is part of your three-year plan—thinking of the themed years—and to establish Wales as the destination that people think of for that type of tourism.

Y ffordd i wneud hynny, yn fy marn i, yw marchnata, wrth gwrs, ond hefyd sicrhau bod y bysiau’n gallu cario beiciau, er enghraifft. Mae yna fysiau nawr ar y gwasanaeth, ac un yn enwedig, sydd yn creu gwasanaeth gwell yn fy marn i, ynglŷn â pha mor gyfforddus yw’r gwasanaeth—mae’n rhaid sicrhau, felly, wrth gwrs, bod pobl yn gwybod eu bod nhw’n gallu cario’u beiciau ar y bysys yn y dyfodol a marchnata fe yn y ffordd honno. Un o’r problemau oedd y ffaith bod pobl wedi ystyried y gwasanaeth o Gaerfyrddin i Aberystwyth fel gwasanaeth sydd yn cael ei redeg gyda bysiau arferol ac felly nid yn rhywbeth a oedd ar gael iddyn nhw os oedden nhw’n dwristiaid. Mae hynny’n dechrau newid nawr, a sicrhau bod y momentwm hwnnw’n parhau bydd y nod.

The way to do that, in my view, of course, is marketing, but also to ensure that buses can carry bikes, for example. There are buses in service at the moment, and one particularly that offers improved comfort for travellers, and people need to know that they will be able to carry their bikes on the buses in the future, and then we can market it in that way. One of the problems was that people looked at the service from Carmarthen to Aberystwyth as an ordinary bus route, so it wasn't seen as a tourist route. That's starting to change now, and we need to ensure that that momentum remains and that will be the target.

Thank you, Chair. We've talked about buses, and the buses you refer to, basically, are very much focused upon travelling into the area and bringing people into the communities, but, when I ever go away I tend to use public transport from a base I usually work from, and so it's local buses perhaps. And using bikes on buses is crucial, particularly in my area, which, obviously, you know, has the mountain biking areas. How are you also going to ensure that those local services—not just the Cardiff to Aberystwyth, but the local, say from Aberystwyth into Aberaeron—are regular, so that people can actually move around, and that they're supported? Because, again, in many areas where you can try and attract tourism, some of those areas, moving into that section, are former industrial areas where bus services have been devastated.

In this part of the world, there's a regular service bus between Aberystwyth and Aberaeron, down towards Cardigan, through Newquay and then off towards Carmarthen. It's further inland that the challenges lie. The coastal routes are actually reasonably well provided for at the moment. What is the way to do that? Well, as I've said to you before in the Chamber, we have now control over the bus industry in Wales. The question then is developing legislation in order to make sure that it functions properly. The point of privatising the buses, it is said, was to create competition. Well, bluntly, that doesn't happen in most parts of Wales. So, we then need to look at a different system that will ensure that bus services are not just as comprehensive as they can be but as sustainable, because how many times in Wales have we seen bus companies fold, services disappear and somebody else has to step in and take over the service? If that happens too often, people start to lose faith in the service being there for them, so creating a sustainable, long-term future for the bus industry will be hugely important as we look at what legislation will be needed in the next few years. 

11:20

And will the Welsh Government establish a strategy to look at the areas where there are, as Simon says, activity holidays and activity centres, which would perhaps have those types of buses that can have a bike attach to them, compared to other areas that don't have them? Would you look at a strategy that may help the sectors and those industries in those areas to perhaps expand and purchase those types of buses?

Yes. There are examples we can draw on—the Cardi Bach service that runs along the coast between Cardigan and Newquay. It calls at settlements such as Cwmtydu and Llangrannog, where bus services otherwise wouldn't run. It's not a frequent bus service, but it does run so that people can get onto the service from the coastal path. There's an example of something that potentially could be developed in the future for other communities where there are tourist attractions that people want to go to.

Following on from the line of questioning of Dai Lloyd, Dai had mentioned Scotland's funding, but if you look at Ireland's it's even greater again. And the sad fact is that, if we go abroad, and we say we're from Wales, very often, you're asked, 'Well, where is that?' So, we've got a lot of catching up to do as far as the other two nations are concerned—Scotland and Ireland. Professor Annette Pritchard from Cardiff University described tourism as one of Wales's top performing industries. Yet, in terms of funding, it's a cinderella industry. So, surely there's an argument for increasing the funding quite fundamentally for tourism.

Well, as I say, we operate against a backdrop of austerity, and there are some difficult decisions that we have to take in terms of the budget. I don't think it's right to say—and I don't think, in fairness, that this has been advocated—that tourism is a cinderella industry. Clearly not; it employs more than 130,000 people in Wales. I think it's still perceived as such by, quite often, many of our own people, and that's where the challenge lies—to say to people that tourism is an industry that you don't just work in in the summer or work in casually in this job or that job, but is something you can develop a career in. There's still, I think, work to be done in terms of raising the profile and the prestige of tourism amongst our own people. I don't think it's a problem elsewhere.

In terms of perception, there are some things that occur that you can't bargain for that are a huge shot in the arm—the Euros in 2016. No matter what we spend, we can't replicate the publicity that that gave us. That did enormous good in terms of raising Wales's profile around the world. We now have nearly 1.4 million followers on social media, and we can see the hits going in on Google—other search engines are available—where people were looking to find out more about Wales because of the Euros, and that's hugely important.

Major events are a huge driver in terms of raising profile as well. If we look at Ireland and Scotland, Ireland has a huge diaspora. Ireland has icons, like Guinness, where people look at Guinness and think 'Ireland', even though it is said that Guinness had its origins in Wales. Scotland: people see kilts, they see whisky and they think 'Scotland'. We didn't have those icons that we could draw on that were obvious to people, so we've had to work harder. But being able to draw now on icons such as Gareth Bale, bluntly—you mention the name 'Gareth Bale' and people then think of Wales, and then get people's interest in Wales as a result of that. That's what we have be looking at in the future.

With major events—the Champions League last year; we are the smallest country, and Cardiff is the smallest city, to have hosted it. It was a major undertaking, I can say that, but the exposure it gave us around the world was phenomenal. There are very few countries our size that can do that and host events like that, and that's how we create our icons in the modern era. That's how we say to people, 'Gareth Bale: Wales. Principality Stadium: Wales. Volvo Ocean Race: Wales.' That's part of what we're trying to do.  

Sorry, Nick, you'd indicated a supplementary, but I think it was on the public transport side, was it?

I think we've moved on. I don't want to interrupt the natural flow of proceedings.

No. I'm sure you'll find a way to bring it back round—

No, I'm sure you'll find a way in your set of questions to fetch it back round, I'm sure. Can we move on, then, to the Welsh Government strategy on partnership for growth? Russell, you're going to take this first set, and then we'll move on to Nick.

11:25

Thank you, Chair. First Minister, the Welsh Government launched its 'Partnership for Growth' 2013-20 strategy some five years ago. I wonder if you could highlight where you think progress has been made, but also where you think that progress has not been made, as you may have hoped for?

Well, I think, first of all, it's hugely important to have thematic years. The fact that we're in the Year of the Sea is hugely important to people. Certainly, the Year of Legends was hugely influential around the world, and people took notice of Wales as a result of that. There is a tough target, of course, in 'Partnership for Growth'—a 10 per cent increase by 2020. How do we get there? Where have the successes been? Well, we see Wales's profile having risen in travel magazines. We see the fact, for example, that our brand is widely respected around the world. The fact is that our brand has been recognised as very successful by various different organisations. For example, when we promoted the brand in 2016, it won the best in show and gold at the European design awards in 2017. It was described as one of the rebrands that got it right in 2017 online. So, I'd argue it is the best in class. So, what we focus on now is hitting that target in 2020, and I believe that we are on course to do that.

And what about areas where you'd like to have seen progress but where you think that it's not been achieved as you may have hoped for?

Well, 2020, of course, is the year when people will look to judge how successful the scheme has been. What is the focus now for the next two years? Well, the digital gateway. More and more people are using online sources to find out about other countries, where they'd like to go, what they want to see, how to book hotels, how to book guest houses. We need to make sure that we are ahead of the game in that regard. Perhaps I can ask Jason to come in on this in terms of what's been done with the digital gateway.

Thanks, First Minister. Really exciting—I think it's going to be one of the defining projects for Visit Wales and I guess, I could say, for the Welsh Government over the next couple of years, making really good progress on it. We're looking to launch the beta version at the end of this year. That's going to be the platform that's going to support all of our activities, in Visit Wales but also in the wider Government for, arguably, the next five to 10 years. So, that's a really exciting programme.

Just to your point on strategy, if there is one area in there where I think we really need to redouble efforts, working with the sector over the next two years, it's skills. I think everybody that I've spoken to, out in the sector and within Government, genuinely sees that there is a need to have a really good skills programme for the hospitality sector and for tourism, and I think we've got to do more with stakeholders on that, and I think it's really encouraging to have heard hospitality Cymru the other night saying that they're going to be focusing on this. So, that's one area.

One of the issues that was raised when the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee took evidence last year on our inquiry on selling Wales to the world was that there is a concern from the tourism sector that there was an action plan in place that sits under the strategy for the first three years of the strategy, and that's now ended. Are there plans to bring forward a further action plan for the last three years of the strategy?

Perhaps I could answer this, First Minister. So, the strategy takes us to 2020. I think, as the First Minister said, it's important that we're judged in 2020. We've been really clear for a while now that we aren't going to be there to just produce new strategies. We want to make sure that we deliver this one really effectively. What we are doing is that we are reviewing where we are in terms of tracking against the indicators in the strategy, with a view to working towards a new plan as we come up to 2020. Whether we launch that next year—

Well, correct me if I'm wrong on this, but the strategy is a seven-year strategy from 2013 to 2020. What sits under that strategy is an action plan for the first three years, and that action plan has come to an end. So, is there going to be an action plan that sits under the strategy for the last remaining three years of the strategy?

Well, we did revisit that action plan as well 18 months ago. I'll bring Mari in on that—about 18 months ago.

I'm not sure whether the detailed review we undertook is published, but I can assure you that we have very detailed business plans within each area that we share with the industry at the industry engagement events that we hold every autumn. We are continually—. The strategy that we have is pretty detailed in terms of its contents, and we've recently looked at all of the areas of activity within the strategy, looking at where we've delivered progress, promoting the brand. When we started out on the strategy, we didn't have a clear, integrated brand to promote Wales. That's now in place. Obviously, the key challenge moving forward is to build on that across sectors and in new markets all the time.

In terms of marketing, we've doubled the impact of our consumer marketing since 2013. We're now delivering over £350 million additional spend from marketing. Travel trade activity has increased by 28 per cent just in the last 12 months, and another key element of the strategy is product development, where, I think, we've invested in some world-class products since the strategy was launched. And all of these activities are noted within the strategy, and I can assure you that we're delivering against every aspect of it. As Jason noted, I think the skills area is one area that we need to look at and, probably, international marketing in a Brexit context, and we're very ready for that.

11:30

It perhaps would be helpful, because there's a public action plan that is available—and if I'm wrong, then tell me I am wrong—but as I understand it, there's nothing publicly available in terms of an action plan going forward that's currently available up until the end of the strategy. But if there is, it would be useful if that document could be submitted to the committee.

My final question is—

To the Assembly, I think, rather than just to a committee, do you think?

Sorry. All right, okay. I thought you were thinking of your own committee.

No, I'm thinking of this committee, Chair.

The FSB did say in our inquiry last year that the strategy needs to be reviewed in the light of the Welsh Government's economic action plan. So, I wonder if you think that's appropriate. Also, there's been a number of other changing circumstances we're all aware of since 2013. Is there a need to perhaps bring forward a new strategy, starting now, going into the future?

I'm never keen to produce new strategies for the sake of it. Members will have heard me say many times that the last thing I want Government to be is a strategy factory, where we produce strategies where nothing actually happens. So, I think it's hugely important that we give partnership for growth time to deliver by 2020. Of course, it's right to say that the economic action plan is a newer document, and the question is asked, 'How does this fit with the economic action plan?' Well, it does recognise tourism, of course, as a foundation sector, and rightly so. We want to make sure that that is followed through as part of the plan itself, and particularly in terms of ensuring the skills are there in the future that the industry will need.

To my mind, I can't see the need for another strategy at this stage. Partnership for growth, to my mind, is working. It needs to be given time to work till 2020. Then, of course, that will be the time when whoever's in place at that point in Government will need to think about where tourism goes after that.

I come back to the point I made earlier on: we know that tourism businesses are confident. They wouldn't be confident, I'd argue, if they thought that the Government was heading in the wrong direction. That's not to say, of course, that nothing can ever be changed; of course not. We always want to work with businesses in the sector to make sure that we can adapt to changing circumstances.

Just following on, Jason, from your comments on Visit Wales, one of the criticisms is that you can't book anything on that site at all. Now, are you looking at that to expand that in any way?

This is something that comes up a lot. This is tricky territory for Governments to get into, and I think, unfortunately, the main issue is that having a bookable product, as we call it in the sector, has, in the past, breached state-aid rules. So, we've stayed away from that consciously.

What we are looking to do, potentially, is move into a more commercial space going forward, and we're looking at whether there are ways in which we can work within the legal parameters that there are to have something that's bookable. But this is a complex area, and that's why it's not that at the moment.

Okay. Would you be able to overcome that with links on the site, or not?

We have that now. So, you can link through from the website—a viewer will come to the website, they will see, and it will link through. But we don't have any sort of commercial yield from any of that; they just pass through.

Just specifically on that, of course, that means that, in effect, we're outsourcing booking to Booking.com, or whatever, and they are taking a significant slice from the industry to provide that service. And that means that there is not an alternative, not keeping the money here, that could be used to improve services in that way. Those are state-aid rules. We don't know what the new state aid rules may be as we leave the European Union, but is there an opportunity here for the Government, in collaboration with the industry, to become more proactive in that marketplace and to provide something that keeps more of the money in the industry and more available, rather than letting that money flow out through the online booking agencies?

11:35

Possibly. That might be true. I caveat that by saying that people are now so used to booking through the various different websites, which have their own apps, that it would probably be quite a significant task to try and persuade them to look at another booking engine that they weren't previously familiar with, although I do take the point about how it would, possibly, create a sum of money that could be used for tourism. Once we know what state-aid rules will look like—we don't know that yet—we'll then have the opportunity to assess what would be possible and, secondly, whether it would actually work, given the fact that the private sector booking agencies have already colonised, pretty much, this area of the business.

I wanted to pick up on the point that I think Jason Thomas made about skills, if I might. I think skills are very, very important. I wonder how you are making sure that what you expect to see for skills in the hospitality area or what you expect to see for skills in the tourism industry—how you're portraying that to the providers of further education. How are you making sure that FE colleges are not disposing of hospitality courses and courses on the tourism industry, because they're the easiest ones to get rid of? It's about not working in silos. I think the First Minister knows what I'm talking about in terms of a particular college within my area that has suddenly just decided to close, and there is no redress for that and there is no way that you can look at how they're going to integrate those courses that they were doing there.

I know the example and the course that you're referring to. But if we look at other colleges around Wales, we see hospitality courses and travel and tourism courses that seem to be prospering. We need to make sure that our FE colleges are developing the skills that are needed for the industry in the future, particularly in the light of Brexit. It's pretty well known that tourism and hospitality, as two industries, rely very, very heavily on being able to recruit from other countries, otherwise they'd close. That's the way it would work. Now, what we don't know is what the post-Brexit settlement will look like in terms of movement of people, so there will always be a need to make sure that those courses are there to train up the people that the sector needs. It's a hugely serious problem. We'll end up with a skills shortage, otherwise, that will cause businesses to close. I can't put it more bluntly than that. So, it's hugely important that FE colleges are—. There's the one example that you referred to. The other colleges can see, to my mind, that there is a need for these types of skills. 

But you are trying to avoid working in silos. You are trying to make sure that strategies are being fed into those areas.

Yes. Well, the fact that tourism is seen as a foundation sector in the economic action plan is an indication of how seriously we take the need to develop various different skills in the industry. We can't have a foundation sector if we ignore the need for skills development.

We've touched on branding and I think we're going to come to some specifics on branding. Nick, that's yours.

Good morning, First Minister. How is the thematic years approach to marketing Wales—how successful has that been and has it achieved the Welsh Government's aim for Wales to become 

'well-known for being an outstanding adventure, culture, heritage and outdoors destination'?

I think it's worked very well indeed. If we look at the Year of Adventure in 2016, that helped to promote developments, for example, at Surf Snowdonia and at Zip World. The Champions League final was a peg for the Year of Legends, and, of course, we had the Volvo Ocean Race as part of the Year of the Sea. So, it's delivered positive results. As I say, there was about £356 million of additional spend from our marketing in 2017. We saw record attendances at Cadw and national museum sites in 2017 because of the Year of Legends. So, we see that the thematic years are working.

Tourism is a highly competitive industry. Persuading people that they should come to your country—everyone's doing it. So, how do you then make yourself stand out? The way that we've done it is through having themed years, and they've proven to be successful—just to give one example there, the Year of Legends and visitor numbers on those sites.

11:40

A few years ago—probably more than that; about 10 years ago—I remember being involved in the Brecon Beacons national park's bid to become a site for geo-tourism, as it was called then, which is obviously a niche market, but they were pursuing that to open up the areas of the park that weren't normally visited by tourists. Concepts like that—I perceive that they've run out of steam now. You don't really hear much about geo-tourism and the dark skies initiative that the Brecon Beacons national park is part of as well. I imagine they're still there and they're still happening. How do tourism areas like that fit into the thematic years strategy?

Importantly, geo-parks—of course, there are geo-parks around Europe, certainly the Brecon Beacons. I read an article recently where the Brecon Beacons were being promoted as an area of dark skies. So, those projects are still there. The key is being able to develop yourself in such a way that there are very few competitors who can you match you. Dark skies is one example. Okay, we're not the only—there are other countries who can match us in that regard. With the whole idea of geo-parks, well, there's again a limit on the number of places that can sell themselves in that way. So, those concepts are still very much alive. Even though it might be quite niche in terms of the numbers you would expect to come as a result, all niches taken together are worth developing, because they contribute together so much to the economy. Jason, did you want to come in?

Thanks, First Minister. Just to say that they certainly do exist, and we have funding streams that help those sorts of bids flourish, really. So, we're always interested, I guess, in projects that align with our strategic priorities, really. So, thematic years is a strategic priority for us, so when people come to us, local authorities or tourism providers, and say, 'We've got X project and it fits with X year', we're always interested in those discussions, and we've funded many successful ones over the years.

I will hold back on my local authority question, but just finally, if I can ask on this area: we had the culture Minister in Monmouthshire yesterday, visiting Raglan castle with some local people. A variety of issues, but once again the issue of signage came up. I know it straddles tourism and transport. The brown signage—I remember asking Welsh Government ages ago when I first got elected if there was going to be a review of brown signage. I think there's the potential here to really spruce that up, so that when tourists who travel by road come to Wales, they see our places, like Raglan castle and Tintern abbey and other places across Wales. Are there any plans to address the signage issue, to fill the gaps and also just make it look a little bit more exciting?

There are no current plans to address the issue of brown signs. We see them being developed across Wales. Out of memory, I can't remember what the signage is like around Raglan castle. You certainly can't miss it as you drive past it, but obviously we don't want people to drive past it, we want people to drive to it.

You can miss it if you follow the signs to it, because by the time you've seen the sign you've missed the junction. But that's a local issue that needs addressing.

We want to make sure that as many attractions as possible have brown signs. I've seen them developed over the years. New attractions, they get brown signs. It's a question of a business talking to the local authority, or if it's a trunk road, talking to Welsh Government, and making the case for a brown sign for themselves.

Can I talk about world heritage sites? I think we haven't got enough. I don't believe we've got enough in Wales. I'll mention Hafod copper works, which is slowly making its way forward. But not only having world heritage sites, but actually branding Wales, using that as part of brand Wales. People think of Wales, especially south Wales, as an industrial area, and whilst that might cut across some of the views of the people who want to develop different tourist businesses, actually getting people to come and visit some of our industrial heritage, be it Hafod copper works, be it the magnificent Tabernacle chapel in Morriston, these are unique selling points to Wales that I would think, if we are branding it, especially industrial south Wales, that there is a tourist opportunity.

Two attractions that happen to be in Swansea East, of course. Just at random. The issue with the copper works is, in time, people being able to go in and look at it. It's not ready yet for that to happen. I know there are plans for a distillery as well there. So, it's developing that, because saying to people, 'Go and look at a building from the outside' is never attractive. Morriston Tabernacle, the nonconformist cathedral, is already well-known. I think you're right: industrial heritage does have a market. I remember many years ago Swansea promoting the Weaver building, which is now gone, of course, as being the first reinforced concrete building in the world, I think it was—I remember it being closed and derelict. In the 1980s there were attempts to develop industrial heritage in terms of tourist attractions, but in reality they weren't there. We didn't have Blaenavon, we didn't have Big Pit, we didn't have some of the developments that have taken place around the Heads of the Valleys. Saying to people, 'Come and look at a building from a distance', doesn't really work. So, I think we need to make sure, if we use Hafod as an example, that there is something there for people to feel that it's worthwhile going to look at. There is potential there—there's no question about that—but perhaps not quite yet. But I do take the point that industrial heritage is undoubtedly a growth area of tourism, and we see it not just in Wales but elsewhere where there are mining museums, for examples, in other parts of the UK. We see places like Beamish, places like Ironbridge where people want to go and experience what life was like when those places were in their pomp. There's no doubt there's a market there, and Swansea, I think, is well placed to satisfy that market when the time comes. 

11:45

I think Mike raised the point that industrial heritage is critical, and you've raised two points, I'll raise—[Inaudible.]—but I raise one: Neath abbey ironworks, which is not in my constituency. I attended an event last night with the Friends of Neath Abbey Iron Company, and it's important that we look at a strategy that links up various industrial parts, because the history behind those—. Neath abbey ironworks apparently was where the first iron ship came from, so it is important that we now set a strategy up to tie in these different sites within a region, if necessary, to ensure that we can put an offer to visitors. Is that strategy in place now?

It's interesting, because we've seen examples around Wales of attractions that have come together to promote themselves as a whole. So, for example, there's a food trail in Ceredigion where the food producers have come together and, certainly, a few years ago I helped them to promote what was then a leaflet and website, so that people came to Ceredigion and went to the different food producers, and they knew what was there and that was the theme for their visit. In terms of linking up industrial attractions, I think, Mari, you are writing something. I don't know if you want to come in on this. 

What I would say—and Jason will know more about this in terms of Cadw's work in this area—but I would say that world heritage sites and our industrial heritage are very much part of our story to the world, and we've invested significantly as an organisation in new products in the old industrial heartlands that both support the industrial story, but also show that the region is changing at the same time—things like BikePark Wales, et cetera, around Merthyr. So, telling that story as part of the main Wales message internationally is something we are doing, and we know that culture and heritage are particularly appealing, for example, to international audiences. That partly informed the decision to make 2017 the Year of Legends to enable us to tell that story from Wales. 

But what we also do is we've got quite a variety of schemes to support partners within the industry to develop products and trails and activities underneath the Wales brand. We work with people like Cadw to develop those sorts of initiatives, and I'm sure Jason has more to say on Cadw's work in this area over the last few years. 

Thanks, Mari. Thanks, First Minister. Just what I'd say on world heritage, I guess: we do have a plan. It's called the all-Wales interpretation plan, which isn't just about industrial, but it's about the different threads that tell the story of Wales, as Mari said. It's open-source for everybody to use to be able to join together products, basically. We've seen some success with all of that. 

One of the challenges that we do have—and I say this with a Cadw responsibility—is that we've done some really detailed research into the visitors that come to our sites. So, if you look at the castles of Edward I, we looked at people who were coming into the four castles that make up that, and it was quite telling, actually. We can do a note for you on this, but the amount of people who come to these world heritage sites without even realising that they're world heritage sites, and they're just things that they want to see because they've heard of them. 

So, there's one side of it where I totally agree we need to use that status to do further promotion, but then there's another aspect as well, which is that people want to come and see these monuments in their own right anyway, so can we use world heritage status to improve their experience when they come there?   

And is there a fund for some of these organisations to be able to establish these sites, so that they can be part of a package? 

We've got schemes right across Visit Wales that help. It touches on, I guess, all the areas that you've talked about today already, from basic infrastructure through our tourism amenity investment support scheme, which does things like toilets, coach parks and basic infrastructure, through to more innovative product development through things that we've got like the tourism investment support scheme and the regional tourism engagement fund—different funds that we have that allow different products to come forward. So, yes. 

11:50

Wrth hybu ymwybyddiaeth o gestyll Edward I, mae'n rhaid hefyd fod yn ymwybodol o'r hanes sensitif weithiau, yn enwedig os ydych chi eisiau creu modrwy haearn fel rhan o'r Flwyddyn o Chwedlau. Sut yn y byd wnaeth hynny ddigwydd yn y lle cyntaf?

In promoting awareness of Edward I's castles, there has to be an awareness of the sometimes sensitive history around that, particularly if you want to create an iron ring as part of the Year of Legends. How on earth did that happen in the first place?

Ni sydd eu piau nhw nawr, Dai, a'r ddraig goch sydd yn hedfan ar y cestyll hyn. Rwy'n deall y pwynt. Y pwynt yw, nid oedd y cestyll wedi cael eu croesawu gan neb a oedd yn byw yng Nghymru ar y pryd. Erbyn hyn, wrth gwrs, 800 mlynedd ar ôl hynny, pam na ddylem ni ddefnyddio'r cestyll er mwyn tynnu twristiaid i mewn o Loegr er mwyn eu bod nhw'n hala eu harian yng Nghymru? Dyna beth fyddwn i'n ei ddweud. Rwy'n deall y sensitifrwydd, wrth gwrs, ond nawr gallwn ystyried y cestyll fel llefydd sydd nawr yn gallu hybu'r economi lleol, ac nid fel llefydd sy'n cadw'r bobl leol mas, fel yr oedden nhw. 

Well, we own them now, Dai, and the red dragon is flying above these castles now. I understand your point, of course. The castles weren't welcomed by anyone living in Wales at that time. Now, 800 years later, why shouldn't we use those castles in order to draw tourists in from England so that they spend their money here in Wales? That's what I would say. I do understand the sensitivities, of course, but we can now look at the castles as locations that can promote the local economy, rather than as places that suppress local people. 

Neu eu carcharu nhw. Diolch, Gadeirydd.

Or imprison them in fact. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Sorry, David Rowlands has been very patient.

The Federation of Small Businesses in a recent survey found that its members didn't find the Visit Wales brand very useful. On the face of it, that's a pretty damning statement from businesses within the industry itself. So, what's your assessment of the understanding of businesses of the Visit Wales brand? 

Well, it's surprising because it's at odds, to my mind, with what our own barometer is saying, and it's difficult, of course, to know why. If businesses are saying, 'Well, we don't use the brand', or, 'We don't have an affinity with it', why is that? That's not explained. So, from our perspective, the brand is still, I suppose, relatively new in terms of its genesis. We'll keep on rolling it out, and of course, I hope that small businesses will then see that, actually, what we're trying to do is to sell Wales as a whole, including being able to improve the viability of their own businesses. But, actually, understanding why is more difficult. Mari.  

Yes, I wouldn't mind contributing here. The same report was positive about the themed years approach and, in a way, that's our means of communicating the brand to the industry. A brand is about far more than a logo. It's about a direction and what we stand for, and we know that awareness and positivity are pretty high among the industry for the themed year approach.

Also, it partially isn't surprising because we've only just started the process of rolling the brand out in the form of the quality grading and quality assurance approach to tourism businesses across Wales. It's relatively new, as the First Minister said. We have been engaging with hundreds of tourism businesses through the various meetings that we have, through our industry engagement newsletters, through our partnership working, about the project. But, it does take time for something as bold and ambitious and ultimately outward-looking to get into the heart of individual businesses on the ground. But, that's very much the phase we are currently in with the project, where we're rolling the brand out now to every single accredited business in Wales.

Okay. That brings us on quite nicely to support for small businesses. Russell.

Thank you, Chair. How much revenue and capital support does the Welsh Government provide to tourism businesses each year?

Well, we've provided businesses with just over £7.2 million in revenue funding and £20.3 million in capital funding. That's through the—

That's in capital funding through the tourism investment support scheme—that's since April 2013—as well as £1.9 million to micro and small businesses. On top of that, the tourism attractor destination programme—a £62 million programme—has supported 13 important and iconic tourism destinations across Wales. We also have the tourism amenity infrastructure scheme. That helps the public and third sectors provide free access to tourism infrastructure. In 2017, £2.4 million was awarded to 21 projects.

Over the past three years, the majority of support—88 per cent of it—went to SMEs, and 70 per cent of those are micro or small businesses. So, what we have tried to do over the past few years is make sure that there is support there, which will be fairly substantial for the bigger projects, but in doing that, ensuring that the support is there for smaller businesses as well.

You mentioned small businesses. The FSB have said in the past that most funding opportunities are out of the reach of their members, when they asked them. Is that a fair comment? 

11:55

It's difficult to know without knowing what the evidence is. We know that nearly £2 million has gone to micro and small businesses, so it's not as if it's they're being excluded from the money that's available. But without drilling deeply into what are said to be the reasons behind that, it is difficult to give you an answer, other than to say that the money is there.

Has the Government got any plans to do that, to drill into that detail? Would it be useful to have an assessment of how small businesses are being supported and what investment has been provided to them through various funds? How successful has that been? 

I think that's for the industry representative bodies to inform us of. The reason why those bodies are there is obviously to represent their members, but also to point out where they think things might not be working as they should, to suggest alternatives and for us to talk to them and to listen to them. So, I would say it would be their call to identify an issue and then bring it to our attention. That's what they would see their role as. 

The industry has said—. I know the Wales Tourism Alliance have said that their analysis is that, from various support schemes, funding has probably been running at no more than £10 million annually, and the FSB have already said that small businesses feel that most schemes are out of their reach. So, that's their analysis, but I'm wondering what work the Government can do in terms of drilling down to the detail that you talk about. Surely that's for Government to do rather than the industry. 

The figures don't seem to support the findings of the FSB in the sense that, as I said earlier on, 88 per cent of businesses that have been supported are SMEs, and most of those, 77 per cent of them, are small or micro. So, there are businesses that are receiving help. One of the issues that might, of course, be happening here is that businesses may not know what's available, and, as a result, feel that they can't access funding, because they don't really know what's there. I think then what we need to do as Government, working with the industry representative bodies, is to make sure there's more of a flow of information to businesses so they know that there are schemes there for them, rather than thinking that they don't exist. That flow of information is always going to be important and improving it is always an ongoing task. 

If I can briefly go on to ask you about potential reform of business rates. There's Airbnb and other online outlets and you've got other businesses that are competing against those types of businesses that are paying little business rates or no business rates. There are other examples in the sector. I know from some casework recently that one business has got 4 self-catering units on their accommodation, and they're paying full business rates. Another business that's got 4 self-catering units that are spread across a wider area, not located to one area, don't pay any business rates. They do pay council tax, but at a much lower level. So, the issue being raised by sectors of the industry is that it is an unfair playing field when it comes to business rates. Is that something you recognise?

It's very difficult to comment without knowing the full detail of those two examples. I don't dispute them, but, from our perspective, looking at business rates as a whole, we have in place a generous small business rates relief scheme, which has covered, I think, more than half of small businesses in Wales. So, we've no plans to change the system. And bear in mind that whenever there's a revaluation it's cost neutral; it doesn't raise any extra money for the Government. There will be some people who pay more, that is correct, but there will be other people who will pay less. But in terms of individual examples, what I would say is that if people feel aggrieved then, of course, they have the opportunity to appeal to the Valuation Office Agency.  

I think the issue is—. You've mentioned the level of funding for small businesses, but the industry is saying that that support isn't going to small businesses in the tourism sector. That's not something that they're recognising. Do you have contrary suggestions to that? 

I've seen no evidence to suggest that there's a particular anomaly in the tourism sector, but if there are examples that Members want to bring to my attention, feel free to do so.  

Thank you. We've got roughly about half an hour left for this part of the agenda and we do need to move to the impact of Brexit and then—.  So, if we deal with the impact of Brexit to start with, and then post-Brexit afterwards. David Rees. 

Thank you, Chair. First Minister, you know that the external affairs committee has often raised questions with you about the preparedness for Brexit. When the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport came before us last year, he indicated that there were nine sectors that they were doing an impact analysis for. Can you confirm whether tourism was one of those sectors?

12:00

I can't confirm that, but what I can say is that tourism, to my mind, is one of the sectors that will be most impacted. There are two issues here. First of all, there is the issue of what regulations—what bureaucracy, bluntly—might be brought in to make it more difficult for businesses to recruit from other countries. Will there be a need for visas, will there be a need for some kind of reference scheme for people to obtain those visas? But, on top of that, of course, it's the image that's projected by the UK. There's no doubt in my mind that the image that's being projected at the moment by the UK is that it doesn't welcome people to work in the UK. There's a drop in the number of nurses who are coming from other countries. We are hearing stories now of businesses in agriculture, for example—and we hear this in terms of tourism—who can't recruit because their workforce feels that they're no longer welcome in the UK. So, there's the bureaucratic side of it—visas—but there's also the perception side that actually the UK doesn't want people from other countries. The reality is, of course, that tourism and hospitality particularly is hugely dependent on workers from other countries coming and working seasonally particularly—but not just seasonally—in the UK's own tourism industry.

Thank you for that. I'll come onto, probably, the implications for workers and your paper on the fair movement of people in a couple of minutes, but I suppose I want to try and come to the point—. I was just wondering whether the Welsh Government has done any work to provide the evidence to look at the impact of Brexit on the sector.

There's no specific work that I'm aware of, but I've certainly heard many, many businesses express to me their concern that they won't be able to recruit. There's ample evidence, from what I've heard, that this is an issue for them. And it's not just the issue of work permission and visas; it's the issue of them not being able to recruit now because the UK is seen as somewhere that people don't want to go to and there are better opportunities elsewhere where people feel more welcome.

Before you move on to fair movement of people, I think—

You'll come back to it? Because David's got a question on the specific impact of Brexit. And then I'll come back to you, David.

You'll not be surprised at the tenor of my question, First Minister, because I'm going to ask what your response is to the suggestion from the Wales Tourism Alliance that, as the rules are being rewritten, Brexit could present an opportunity to realise the potential of the tourism industry and the wider visitor economy. I think they're talking about the relaxation of perhaps some of the more bureaucratic rules coming out of Europe et cetera.

Which rules do they refer to?

Well, I don't know exactly which ones, but they feel that there's an opportunity to have a relaxation of some of them.

Without knowing what they are, it's very difficult to comment. I can't, for the life of me, see what opportunities there could possibly be for tourism through Brexit. It could be argued—I don't agree with this argument, but I've heard the argument made—that there are opportunities in terms of the movement of goods and services, potentially, if there are free trade agreements with the US and so forth. My view on that is well known, but that is the argument that's made by some. I just cannot see how that works in terms of tourism, because Brexit can only make it more difficult for tourists from some countries to come to the UK and not make it easier for other tourists to come in their place. I just can't see what the advantage actually is. But if there are rules that the tourism industry feels are bureaucratic, it would be useful to know what they are.

Okay. Thank you. We'll come back to you, then, David Rees.

Obviously, you've highlighted the threats: basically more concern about the staffing issues in particular, and the ability to recruit employees in the sector, because we are heavily reliant upon EU nationals at the moment in that sector. What are your views and visions at the moment on the current position of the UK Government? Because it's published its settled status arguments now as to how those who are already here can remain. Is that going to be a benefit, or are we seeing a number of people now returning to their home nations because they are worried about their future status here in the UK?

'Yes' is the simple answer to that, because people feel they're not welcome and not wanted. The bureaucracy is one thing; the perception is another, as I've said. I have no idea what the UK Government's position is. We may know more today, who knows, if it's still there after today. To my mind, I can see no reason at all why we shouldn't follow something close to what Norway does, where there is free movement of labour but not people. Members have heard me say this before: what the Norwegians said to us is, 'We don't allow people to move in unless their residence is connected to a job.' So, if somebody has a job, then they can reside. There is a three-month window either side for people to look for a job, if they're looking for a job, or, if they have lost their job, to look for another one, otherwise they lose their right of residence. Now, I think that is a sensible way of dealing with the issue of freedom of movement, and it's in line with the EU's own rules. The EU's rules are about freedom of movement of labour, not people. The western European countries went further at the beginning of the last decade, but, in reality, what Norway does is follow the rules more strictly, but still lawfully, and on that basis, they get the access that they want to the single market. Now, if Norway can do it, it surely isn't beyond the ability of the UK Government to do the same thing in the UK.

12:05

Obviously, you produced a paper, 'Brexit and Fair Movement of People', which feeds into that concept, and we're awaiting the immigration Bill and perhaps, even, a White Paper on the immigration Bill. In relation to how the UK Government looks at this, have you had any feedback from the UK Government on the immigration Bill, and have you had any requests for consultation on the immigration Bill?

No. I don't know what their plans are, and they certainly haven't shared it with us.

And does that really worry you, in the sense that we don't know where that situation will arise, so we don't even know how we can support our industry?

Well, there are many areas where this is a problem. We don't know what the immigration policy will look like; we don't know what the trade policy will look like. Trying to plan for these scenarios is difficult. For example, the worst-case scenario is a 'no deal' Brexit. How can we plan for that? Not easily, because there are many things that just won't happen and there's nothing we can do to change that situation. So, for example, if we see tariffs or non-tariff barriers against, for example, our agricultural products, no amount of planning is going to mitigate the effect on farming. We will just lose farmers. There's nothing we can do as a Government because they won't have the market they have now to sell into. So, certainty, I think, is hugely important, and we don't have that certainty at the moment. Even if there was certainty in terms of the way forward that I didn't agree with, in some ways, that would be preferable to having no idea what the UK Government's thinking actually is. We may get some enlightenment today.

Okay. And I'll come back on the funding aspect, following Simon Thomas in one sense, but I suppose I just want to find out—. I would assume there would be no need to change your strategy on the tourism strategy based upon Brexit because to actually encourage tourism it shouldn't matter whether we're in or out. Is there any consideration of changing your strategy on tourism as a consequence of Brexit?

Well, rationally, there's no reason to change the visa regime that already exists for those who can enter the UK visa-free anyway. Why would you want to impose a tourist visa on people coming from France? That doesn't make sense. The issue of people being able to work in the UK is another issue, but it would seem to me perfectly rational to say that people can enter the UK without a visa, so it shouldn't make any difference at all.

There is one issue, though, that does trouble me, and that's people's perception of the UK when they arrive. I've travelled through Heathrow a few times in the past few months and it's terrible. There are huge queues there, lots of different booths and three quarters of them not staffed, machines that don't work. The impression it gives to people who come from other countries is a very poor one. For those of us with EU passports, we can go through pretty easily. For those without EU passports, there is a queue. Now, what the UK Government seems to be suggesting is that those with UK or Irish passports could go through one way, then everyone else through another way. We'd end up with hours of queues, and that, actually will do a huge amount of harm to the UK in terms of the way the UK is perceived. It's bad as it is; it'll only get worse in the future because the resources aren't being spent on border control. The resources aren't being spent in the ports. We run the risk of being seen as a very difficult country to get into because of the sheer bureaucracy and queueing that's involved, and that's a good way to put off people coming as tourists.

I know the British Irish Chamber of Commerce are actually meeting today, talking about ports, particularly between Wales and Ireland. The common travel area, clearly, is going to be continuing. Have you had discussions with Ireland in the sense of how that will operate?

Well, the view of the Irish Government is that they want the common travel area to continue, and that would apply to links with GB as well as with Northern Ireland. How that works, I just don't know, because it would mean that there's a certain category of European citizen who is able to work and travel freely in the UK as well as in the EU, which is why an Irish passport is a very valuable commodity to have at the moment. In our house, there are three with Irish passports and one without—me—and I'm not entitled to one, so I will now be in a different queue, potentially, to the rest of of my—. You know, they've got dual nationality, but I will potentially be in a different queue to the rest of my family when it comes to going on holiday in the future, and there are many others in the same position. It's that kind of thing that annoys people and put them off going to a country. One of the problems that the US sometimes has is that border control in the US can take hours to get through, and that does put people off visiting the US—whereas, for example, at the moment, if you travel to Spain, travel to Portugal, travel to Italy, you can get in with no problem at all, effectively, through passport control fairly quickly—because it is outside Schengen.

Anything that is seen to put a barrier up, whether it's a bureaucratic barrier or a barrier in terms of difficulty getting into a country, is bound to be bad for tourism. In terms of Ireland, well, I suppose the danger there is that people think, 'Right, the UK's airports are a nightmare to get through, so what we will do is we'll fly to the Irish airports and then fly into the UK from there, because we won't go through border control. We'll get past the Schengen barriers in Ireland.' That then means that we then start losing people to Ireland, because they may say, 'Oh, well, now we're in Ireland we may as well stay. What's the point of going to Wales? What's the point of going to England or Scotland?' These things—they're not official barriers, but they're the sort of things that play on people's minds. We run the risk of Ireland being seen as a far easier country to go to, and Ireland being seen as the springboard into the UK, which means we then start to lose trade through our airports and ports.

12:10

Okay. Should we come on to post Brexit, Simon? I think David Rees is going to come in as well, but, Simon, are you going to take the lead on this?

Cyn i fi jest droi yn benodol at hynny, jest i bontio o gwestiynau David Rees—rŷch chi'n dweud nad yw'n gwneud llawer o synnwyr i ni gael fisa twristiaeth, ond nid oes llawer yn gwneud lot o synnwyr i fi ar hyn o bryd, beth bynnag, yn y trafodaethau yma. Mae sôn wedi bod bod angen i ddinasyddion y Deyrnas Gyfunol gael fisa i ymweld â gweddill yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Rydw i wedi clywed a gweld rhyw sôn a siarad am £65 i dalu am fisa i ymweld â gwledydd rŷm ni'n gallu mynd iddyn nhw yn ddirwystr, fel rŷch chi'n dweud, ar hyn o bryd. A ydych chi wedi cael gwarant gan Lywodraeth San Steffan na fydd fisa ar gyfer twristiaid o beth sydd nawr yn gymuned yr Undeb Ewropeaidd i ddod i Gymru ar ôl i ni adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd?

Before I turn specifically to that, I just want to bridge from the questions from David Rees. You say it doesn't make much sense for us to have a tourism visa, but there's much that doesn't make sense to me about the discussions ongoing currently anyway. There has been mention that we, as UK citizens, would need visas to visit the rest of the EU. I have heard talk about a £65 payment for visas to go to nations that we can visit currently without any barriers, as you mentioned. Have your received an assurance from the Westminster Government that there will be no visa for tourists from what is now the European Community to come into Wales after we leave the European Union?

'Na' yw'r ateb i hynny. Nid oes dim gwarant wedi dod o'r Deyrnas Gyfunol, na hyd yn oed yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Nid oes neb yn dadlau y dylai fe ddigwydd ond, wrth gwrs, rŷm ni mewn sefyllfa nawr lle gallai pethau ddigwydd nad oes neb wedi'u rhagweld, ac nid oes neb yn eu cefnogi. So, na, nid oes unrhyw fath o warant wedi dod wrth neb ynglŷn ag a fydd twristiaid o'r Deyrnas Gyfunol yn gorfod talu am fisa cyn mynd mewn i wlad arall—gwledydd newydd, gwledydd eraill.

'No' is the answer to that. There has been no guarantee from the UK Government, or even from the European Union. Nobody is arguing that it should happen but, of course, we're in a situation now where things could happen that nobody has anticipated and nobody would support. So, no, there's been no guarantee given from anyone as to whether tourists from the UK would have to pay for a visa to enter another country.

Rwy'n deall bod neb yn cynnig hynny, ond rŷm ni'n gweld llawer o bethau yn digwydd oherwydd nad oedd pobl wedi rhagweld y sefyllfa ac wedi paratoi am y bleidlais bosib i adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd. Nid oedd dim paratoi wedi digwydd yn y maes yma.

A gaf i droi at faes arall sy'n deillio o hyn? Byddwch chi'n ymwybodol bod y diwydiant twristiaeth wedi elwa o arian cronfeydd strwythurol a buddsoddiad ar y cyd â Llywodraeth Cymru dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf. Rŷm ni wedi clywed bore yma, er enghraifft, am enghreifftiau o gynlluniau twristiaeth llwyddiannus sydd wedi derbyn cymorth gan Gynnal y Cardi fan hyn yng Ngheredigion, sydd yn gynllun LEADER, i bob pwrpas, ar gyfer hynny. Rŷm ni hefyd wedi gweld tystiolaeth gref fod twristiaeth yn dibynnu ar economi cefn gwlad ffyniannus. Nid oes neb eisiau ymweld â chefn gwlad lle nad oes dim tafarn ar agor, lle nad oes dim bywiogrwydd, lle nad oes dim byd yn digwydd. Mae pobl eisiau gweld bod cefn gwlad a thwristiaeth yn mynd law yn llaw mewn economi ffyniannus. Felly, eto, beth yw'r cynlluniau, neu, yn benodol, pa asesiad ydych chi wedi'i wneud fel Llywodraeth Cymru nawr o'r cynlluniau a ddaw yn sgil y cronfeydd strwythurol—? Mae sôn am gronfa cyfoeth ar y cyd—mae sôn am wahanol gynlluniau fel hyn. A oes gyda chi amcan neu asesiad yn benodol o beth digwyddith?

I understand that no-one is proposing that, but we are seeing many things happening because people hadn't anticipated the situation and hadn't prepared for the vote to leave the European Union. There had been no preparation in this area.

May I turn to another area that follows on from this? You will be aware that the tourism industry has benefited from structural funding and joint investment with the Welsh Government over the past few years. We have heard this morning, for example, of examples of tourism plans that have been successful and received support from Cynnal y Cardi here in Ceredigion, which is a LEADER project, to all intents and purposes, for that. We've also seen strong evidence that tourism depends on a flourishing rural economy. No-one wants to visit a rural area where there is no pub open, where there's no life, where nothing is taking place. People want to see tourism and the rural economy going together hand in hand in a successful economy. So, again, can you tell us about what the plans are, or, specifically, what assessment you have undertaken as the Welsh Government of the schemes that will be put in place as a result of the structural funds going? There has been talk of a shared prosperity fund and various other plans and schemes. Do you have a specific assessment of what will take place?

Wel, beth rŷm ni'n gwybod yw, ar ôl 2022, ni fydd arian ar gael—arian Ewropeaidd. Mae hynny yn glir. Ar ôl hynny, nid oes dim byd yn glir. Mae yna sôn wedi bod ynglŷn â chronfa Brydeinig. Nid oes neb yn gwybod, yn gyntaf, faint o arian fydd ar gael, ym mha ffordd fydd yr arian yn cael ei ddosbarthu, a beth fydd rôl Llywodraeth Cymru. Achos beth rydw i'n ei ofni yw bydd Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig yn dweud, 'Wel, ni sy'n mynd i redeg hwn yn gyfan gwbl, ac nid oes dim rôl i chi o gwbl.' Mae hynny yn torri ar draws datganoli yn hollol, ac mae'n beryglus ynglŷn â busnesau—bydden nhw ddim yn gwybod pwy i siarad â nhw. Ar hyn o bryd, maen nhw'n gwybod pwy sy'n gwneud beth. So, na, nid yw'n glir ar ôl 2022 beth fydd ar gael. Un o'r pethau mae'n rhaid i fi ddweud, wrth gwrs, yw na allwn ni ffeindio'r arian yng Nghymru. Ond fe gafodd addewid ei wneud na fyddai Cymru yn colli ceiniog, ac mae'n rhaid i'r addewid yna gael ei gadw.

What we do know is that after 2022 there will be no European funds available. That's clear. After that, nothing is clear. There has been some talk of a British shared prosperity fund. Nobody knows, first of all, how much money would be available, how that money would be distributed, and what the role of the Welsh Government would be in that. Because what I would fear is that the UK Government would say, 'Well, we're going to run this in its entirety and you have no role in it at all.' That cuts entirely across the principles of devolution, and it's very dangerous for businesses—they wouldn't know who to speak to. At the moment, they know who to approach. So, no, nothing is clear after 2022 in terms of what will be available. One of the things that I have to say is that we can't find that money in Wales, but a pledge was made that Wales wouldn't lose a penny, and that promise has to be kept.

12:15

Pa mor allweddol ydy'r arian yma wedi bod i gefnogi eich brandio a hyrwyddo twristiaeth yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf?

How crucial has this funding been to support your branding and also to promote tourism over the past few years?

Wel, nid dim ond hynny, ond beth sydd wedi bod ar gael i gymunedau a busnesau er mwyn iddyn nhw allu adnewyddu'r adeiladau, er mwyn eu bod nhw'n gallu ehangu beth maen nhw'n ei wneud, ac mae yna fusnesau ar draws Cymru sydd wedi elwa o hynny. Nawr, heb yr arian cyfalaf yna, ni fyddwn ni'n gweld datblygiadau ar yr un rât â rŷm ni wedi gweld dros y blynyddoedd diwethaf. So, mae'r arian yna wedi bod yn hollbwysig, ac nid dim ond ynglŷn ag adeiladau, ond ynglŷn â hyfforddiant hefyd. Mae'n rhaid inni gofio bod yna lawer o gynlluniau fel Jobs Growth Wales, er enghraifft, sydd wedi cael eu cyllido gyda chymorth Ewropeaidd. Wel, ni fydd yr arian yna ar gael yn y pen draw, a dyna pam mae'n hollbwysig bod yr addewid yn cael ei gadw.

Well, it's not just that, but it's the money available to communities and businesses too, so that they can renovate buildings, they can expand their activities, and there are businesses across Wales that have benefited from that. Now, without that capital funding, we won't see developments on the same level as we have seen over recent years. So, that funding has been crucially important, and not just in terms of buildings and premises, but also in terms of training. We must bear in mind that there are many proposals such as Jobs Growth Wales that have been funded using European funds. Well, that funding will no longer be available, and that's why it's crucial that that promise is kept.

So, beth yw eich gofynion chi i Lywodraeth San Steffan wrth adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd? Ai bod yr arian cronfeydd strwythurol yma yn cael ei ddodi yn y block grant, i bob pwrpas—bod hwnnw'n cael ei drosglwyddo nawr, ac yn cael ei adlewyrchu dros gyfnod o amser, gyda chwyddiant a phethau felly, neu a ydych chi'n chwilio am ryw gronfa y mae pobl yn bidio mewn iddi ar y cyd? Neu a ydych chi'n fodlon gweld VisitBritain nawr yn gyfrifol am arian twristiaeth Cymru?

So, what are your asks to the Westminster Government as we leave the EU? Is it that the funding from the structural funds will be put into the block grant, to all intents and purposes—that that is transferred now, and that that will be reflected over a period of time, with inflation being considered and so forth, or are you seeking some sort of fund that people can bid into, perhaps jointly? Or are you satisfied to see that VisitBritain will now be responsible for tourism in Wales?

Na—i'r ail. Rŷm ni wedi bod yma o'r blaen, lle'r oedd VisitBritain neu'r British Tourist Authority, fel yr oedd e, yn gyfrifol am dwristiaeth, ac rwy'n credu ei bod yn iawn i ddweud eu bod nhw'n edrych ar Lundain, yr Alban a Stratford, a braidd ar unman arall. Wrth gwrs, y broblem ar hyn o bryd gyda VisitBritain yw ei fod yr un peth â VisitEngland. Nawr, mae yna broblem fanna na allai fyth godi yn y sector breifat. Byddai pobl yn dweud, 'Gall hynny ddim digwydd—rydych chi'n cynrychioli pedair gwlad a hefyd, ar yr un pryd, yn cynrychioli un.' Nid yw hynny'n gwneud unrhyw fath o synnwyr, so, na, fyddwn ni ddim yn moyn gweld hynny.

Beth yw'r ffordd o ddatrys hyn? Mae hyn yn wir am dwristiaeth a chronfeydd Ewropeaidd, ac mae'n wir hefyd am amaeth. Dylai cronfa o arian gael ei chreu tu fas i Barnett. Dylai'r rheoliadau sydd yn llywodraethu'r gronfa honno fod yr un peth ag y maen nhw nawr, so byddai system o reolau mewn lle er mwyn i bobl allu cael mynediad at gyfalaf neu hefyd at refeniw. Ond ni fyddai'r system hynny yn newid nes bod yna gytundeb gan bob Llywodraeth yn y Deyrnas Unedig. A'r un peth gydag amaeth: ni fyddem ni'n moyn gweld arian amaeth yn mynd i mewn Barnett; byddem ni'n colli arian o achos hynny, ac nid ydw i'n credu y byddai ffermwyr yn moyn gweld arian taliadau ffermio yn cystadlu ag iechyd ac addysg, ynglŷn â lle y dylai'r arian hynny fod.

So, i fi, y ffordd o wneud hwn yw dweud, 'Wel, hwn yw'r crochan yn fan hyn o arian Ewropeaidd sydd ar gael nawr. Dylai hynny gael ei ail-greu neu ei gadw ar lefel Brydeinig, ac ni ddylai'r rheoliadau yn gyffredinol newid.' Ond y peth diwethaf a ddylai ddigwydd yw gweld Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig yn cael gafael ar unrhyw gronfa a rheoli'r gronfa mewn ffordd newydd, a heb gytundeb oddi wrth neb arall.

No—to the second. We've been here before, where VisitBritain, or the British Tourist Authority, as it was, was responsible for tourism, and I think it's right to say that they looked at London, Scotland and Stratford, and virtually nowhere else. Of course the problem with VisitBritain now is that it's the same as VisitEngland, so there's a fundamental problem there that couldn't arise in the private sector. People would say, 'That wouldn't be allowed—you're representing four nations but also representing one nation.' That makes no sense whatsoever, so, no, we wouldn't want to see that.

What's the resolution here? This is true of tourism and European structural funds, and it's also true of agriculture. A fund should be created outwith Barnett. The regulations governing that fund should be the same as they are now, so there would be a system in place and there would be rules and regulations in place so that people could access that capital or revenue funding. But that system wouldn't change until there was agreement from all Governments in the UK. The same is true of agriculture: we wouldn't want to see agricultural funding Barnettised because we'd lose out, and I don't think that farmers would want to see farm payments competing with health and education, in terms of where that money should be spent.

So, for me, the way to do this is to say, 'Well, this is the pot of European money available now. That should be replicated at a UK level, and the rules and regulations, generally speaking, shouldn't change.' But the last thing that should happen is that the UK Government should get hold of any such fund and manage that fund in a new, central way, without any agreement from other Governments.

Efallai eich bod chi'n ymwybodol bod y pwyllgor rydw i'n ei gadeirio, y Pwyllgor Cyllid, wedi gofyn i'r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol, Alun Cairns, i ddod gerbron y pwyllgor ac esbonio sut fyddai rhyw gynllun fel yna yn digwydd. Yn anffodus, gwnaeth e wrthod dod i'r pwyllgor. A ydych chi'n gallu dweud wrthym ni fod yna drafodaethau o'r math yma yn digwydd nawr rhwng eich Llywodraeth chithau a Llywodraeth San Steffan? A oes yna drafodaethau ynglŷn â manylion cynllun o'r fath, boed yn shared prosperity fund neu beth bynnag? A ydym ni'n trafod ym mha ffordd y mae hyn yn gallu gweithio—parhau â'r rheolau, fel rydych chi'n sôn amdano, sut mae penderfyniad yn cael ei wneud, sut ydym ni'n gwneud yn siŵr bod y cronfeydd buddsoddi yma ar gael ar gyfer ardaloedd nid yn unig yng Nghymru, wrth gwrs, ond ardaloedd yn Lloegr hefyd sydd wedi cael buddsoddiad dros y blynyddoedd?

Perhaps you may be aware that the committee that I chair, the Finance Committee, did ask the Secretary of State, Alun Cairns, to come before us and to explain how such a scheme would work. Unfortunately, he refused the invitation to come to the committee. Can you tell us, then, whether there have been discussions of this type between your Government and the Westminster Government? Have there been discussions about the details of such a scheme, whether it is the shared prosperity fund or whatever? Have there been discussions about how this could work—what kind of rules there could be, as you talked about, how decisions could be made, and how we can ensure that these investment funds are available for areas not only in Wales, of course, but areas in England that have received investment over the years?

Mae trafodaethau wedi cymryd lle. Rŷm ni wedi dweud ein barn ni, ac rwyf wedi'i ailddweud eto yn fan hyn y bore yma. Nid oes yna ddim ateb wedi dod ynglŷn â'r manylion. Fe fydd yna gronfa o ryw fath, ond nid oes neb yn gwybod faint o arian fydd ar gael, ac nid oes neb yn gwybod ym mha ffordd fydd y gronfa honno yn cael ei rheoli. Na, yn anffodus, ni allaf i ddweud ein bod ni wedi cael ateb clir, ac mewn ffordd, nid yw'n syrpréis i mi nad yw'r Ysgrifennydd Gwladol eisiau dod o flaen y pwyllgor, achos nid oes dim atebion ar hyn o bryd.

Some discussions have taken place. We've expressed our view, and I've repeated it here again this morning. We've received no response on the details. There will be a fund of some kind, but nobody knows how much money will be available or how that fund will be managed. So, unfortunately, I can't say that we've got a clear response, and in a way it's no surprise to me that the Secretary of State doesn't want to appear before the committee, because there are simply no answers at the moment.

A pha ddarpariaeth ydych chi'n ei gwneud fel Llywodraeth, yn benodol ym maes twristiaeth nawr, ar gyfer sefyllfa a all godi mewn llai na dwy flynedd, lle nad oes yna ddim cefnogaeth a buddsoddiad yn y maes yma? Rŷch chi wedi dweud nad oes dim arian i gael gyda chi, ond a ydych chi mewn sefyllfa o gwbl i baratoi ar gyfer y fath gyd-destun?

And what provision are you making as a Government, specifically in the field of tourism currently, for a situation that may arise within fewer than two years, where there is no support and investment in this area? You have said that you have no funding available, but are you in a position at all to prepare for this type of context?

12:20

Rŷm ni'n gallu paratoi ynglŷn â hyfforddiant, ynglŷn â gweld faint o arian a fyddai gyda ni er mwyn llenwi peth o'r bwlch, ond nid wyf i'n moyn camarwain pobl a dweud y gallwn ni ei lenwi fe i gyd, ac wrth gwrs byddai hynny yn torri ar draws yr addewid a gafodd ei wneud. Un o'r pethau rwy'n credu sy'n bwysig ddim i'w wneud fel Llywodraeth yng Nghymru yw llenwi bylchau sydd yn cael eu creu gan Lywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig. Lle mae hynny'n gorffen yw'r broblem. Mae yna demtasiwn i'w wneud e, wrth gwrs, ond ble mae e'n gorffen? Ond ynglŷn ag a fyddai'n bosib sicrhau bod yr un faint o arian ar gael yn y pen draw i fusnesau twristiaeth â beth sydd yna nawr, heb fod yna arian ar gael o Lywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig, yr ateb i hynny yw 'na'. Ni fydd yna sut gymaint o arian ar gael.

We can make preparations in terms of training and identifying the funds available to us to fill in some of those gaps, but I don't want to mislead anyone and say that we can fill in all of the gaps, and of course that would go contrary to the pledge made by the UK Government. One of the important things not to do as a Welsh Government is to fill gaps created by the UK Government. Where that would end is the problem. There is a temptation to do that, of course, but where would it end? But in terms of whether it would be possible to ensure that the same level of funding was available ultimately for tourism businesses as is the case now, without there being funds available from the UK Government, the answer to that is 'no'. There won't be that level of funding available.

There's obviously a short space of time to get all the ducks lined up with this, and I understand the difficulties the Welsh Government is in with the shared prosperity fund because there's very little meat on the bones. In this situation, does that mean that, when it comes down to—? Suppose a sum of money that we want is given to Wales eventually to replace the European funding, is it likely, then, that rather than there being separate systems for giving farmers money and tourism money, or whatever, that there will be a general rural development pot, for instance, that could be bid into, because there isn't time enough to actually sort out individual schemes?

There might be change. The first thing to secure is the money. The second thing to ensure is that there isn't unfair distortion across the UK, and that means if, for example, EU state aid rules no longer apply—we don't know whether that's true or not—there would have to be UK state aid rules agreed by all the Governments involved, because the last thing we want is for there to be no rules, because the biggest wins in those circumstances, and we're not the biggest. So, it's important that there are rules, as far as we're concerned, generally, that everybody follows, and an enforcement process for those rules via a court—I would argue the Supreme Court—who would then police those rules.

In some ways, what we've got to be careful of is mixing up the pots, because, at the moment, farmers get subsidies, whereas most other European funds are bid for, and so there are dangers in saying, 'Okay, we won't have farming subsidies any more; people will have to bid for all the money.' I mean, clearly, that would be a major change that would be very difficult for the farming industry. So, my inclination—this wouldn't be for me now, but my inclination would be to secure the money, secure the system, and then look at how the system could be changed, and talk to all the stakeholders to make sure that nobody finds themselves in a position where they suddenly lose a huge chunk of their income.

Just a couple of points. I think you mentioned that European funding will be available until 2022, but the reality is that, in fact, those programmes that have been approved will have funding possibly until 2022, depending on their programme length, but in reality, because the multi-annual financial framework is being discussed between 2022 and 2027 now, from 2020 onwards, basically, we need to have an understanding of what programmes can be funded here in Wales from the UK Government, because if we don't have that knowledge now, they can't prepare for it and it will be too short notice. So, I appreciate your concern, but without understanding what the shared prosperity fund is—and I think Nick was being very kind to say that there's some detail; I don't think there's any detail in that, from what I'm gathering—we can't do that. But—

Yes, it's just a name. But the question I want to ask is on the transition fund. For the transition fund, you've identified certain amounts of money to be put away. Have you identified any block of that to be allocated to the tourism sector in particular?

It's early days yet. The fund itself is £50 million, but it's early days yet in terms of how that money will be used, but it is available to help with the transition. We felt it was important that there was money available to help businesses. We can't simply say, 'Well, this is only difficult because we don't have certainty.' We have to do what we can and set aside the resources that we can find in order to help business. I think part of the problem that we have with the UK Government is—. My belief is that the UK Government takes the view that we should not expect the same level of funding in the future, because the ambition always was not to qualify for the highest rate of structural funds in the future, and, indeed, that's true. The odd thing about convergence funding is that you want to get to a position where you have less money in the future. But if that had been the case, there would have been transitional funding in place. That's the issue, and the point I've made to the Secretary of State and others is, 'Well, okay, you're saying to me that our ambition was not to qualify, but we would nevertheless have had a soft landing had we stayed in the EU', and the UK Government, at the very least, needs to provide that soft landing and provide a transitional fund, which would have been there had we stayed in the EU.

12:25

And the transition fund—. What the Cabinet Secretary for Finance said in our committee this week was that there's a transition fund consequence coming from the UK, but it's about £25 million, £21 million, this year and next year, and that's basically all we know. The consequence of the £3.5 billion he mentioned, actually, was more for Government capacity than anything else. Is there any more funding coming from the UK to actually help businesses and not Government, in one sense?

Not that I'm aware of. At the moment, everything is still up in the air.

Okay. Thanks very much. I think that brings us just within time, just for me to say, on item 2, then, thank you very much for the detailed answers there. You have agreed to write to us with a date of the feasibility study and also if the strategy that Russell George was questioning on is available to come to this committee, and also a note around Cadw on the visitor experiences. I know it's on Edward I castles, but I think probably a note on how visitors look at sites—but we'll write to you with that.

3. Sesiwn i graffu ar waith y Gweinidog - Materion Amserol
3. Ministerial Scrutiny Session - Topical Matters

We're going to move on to item 3 on the agenda, which is topical questions. There are a number of topical questions today, so I think we're going to have to try and be slightly restrictive in people popping up and saying, 'Can I have a supplementary to this one?', because we've got quite a few. So, first off, then, it's Nick Ramsay—your question.

You see, you didn't expect to be first, did you? [Laughter.]

Local government reorganisation—the Government's plans for reorganisation have themselves been reorganised for the umpteenth time, which, as you know, pleases me no end in that Monmouthshire and Pembrokeshire live to fight another day—

And Ceredigion. In terms of branding, I think that areas like Monmouthshire, like Pembrokeshire, like Ceredigion, they have a very strong brand themselves within the overall Welsh branding. So, I suppose my question is, bearing in mind that things look like they're going to stay as they are structurally: what is the Welsh Government doing to support local brands like that? And, within the brand of Monmouthshire, for instance, we've got the Abergavenny Food Festival and we've just had the Abergavenny Arts Festival as well. It seems to me that these are just as important to the overall Welsh brand as brand Wales and Visit Wales itself. So, I just wondered what your plans are for supporting brands like that.

It's a matter for local authorities to develop that, and we're happy, of course, to work with them in order to assist them to do that. I think Abergavenny is its own brand. I don't think the fact that it's in Monmouthshire affects Abergavenny; I think it's a strong brand as it is. If you look at the events that we have around Wales, the brand tends to evolve around the event, rather than the venue, necessarily. Quite often, it's the same thing, but I don't think people think, 'Well, this is in Monmouthshire, so I'll go there because it's in Monmouthshire'. They go to the event because it's in Abergavenny and they know it's got a strong history.

And if I can just—. Earlier, I didn't ask my question, because I thought it might impede, on transport. We were talking about the reopening of the railway line to here, which I think would probably cost hundreds of millions, but is a great idea in principle. In terms of the metro system in south-east Wales, I've asked Ken Skates, the economy Minister, in the past about the potential for a hub at the Celtic Manor. I see that the new conference centre at the Celtic Manor is going up very fast. Are we any more advanced with plans for a transport hub there, which, in the absence of railway lines going up to Monmouth and the rural areas, would be a valuable hub-and-spoke system, where you could get people to the Celtic Manor and then spoke out into the countryside with buses?

I think it's fair to say that that would be something that would be some years away. We're focusing at the moment on the first phases of the metro. Bear in mind as well, of course, that, as you rightly point out, it's not just about light and heavy rail; it's about buses as well.

I think the full impact of integration of bus and rail services will come once legislation is in place with the bus services. That's where the greatest opportunity arises. So, the focus for us has been on looking at how we can redevelop the existing railway lines—some of them will become light rail, some of them will remain heavy rail but will change in terms of traction—so, to focus on that and then look at how the network can be expanded. The whole point about the metro is that it is expandable, which is why it's not all about heavy rail, because the reality is that light rail is far easier to create than heavy rail, and buses even more so. So, the metro will be expanded over the next decade—

12:30

It's not going to be—. New heavy rail is not going to happen, especially when we consider that we're talking here about relatively short journeys. Light rail does the job for new routes. That's what other cities do, and other countries, and it's something that we shouldn't be too afraid of doing. 

Okay. That was very nicely woven in there. Well done. 

Dai Lloyd, you've got a question, a topical question, and then I think Mike's got a supplementary to it. So, Dai, you start off. 

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Beth roeddwn i eisiau ofyn oedd: beth sy'n digwydd nawr ar ôl y penderfyniad trychinebus yna bythefnos yn ôl i wrthod cynllun morlyn llanw bae Abertawe? Wrth gwrs, mae yna siom enbyd yn ardaloedd Abertawe a Chastell-nedd, ac ati, ac mae'r dicter yn aros. Mae yna nifer o bobl yn sôn am, 'Wel, mi allem ni gael rhyw fath o gynllun amgen ein hunain, sydd ddim yn dibynnu ar Lywodraeth San Steffan na'u harian nhw'. Ac, wrth gwrs, byddwch chi'n gwybod yn y trafodaethau cyn rŵan rydych chi wedi cynnig £200 miliwn o arian Llywodraeth Cymru i helpu'r fenter cyn rŵan. Wrth gwrs, mae'r fenter sydd—. Wel, mae'n farw yn y dŵr rŵan, yn naturiol, ond mae'r dicter yn aros ac mae pobl eisiau gweld y cynllun yma'n dod i fodolaeth.

Pa gymorth a pha drafodaethau a ydych chi'n gallu eu cynnal, neu wedi eu cynnal neu yn bwriadu eu cynnal yn lleol? Achos mae arweinydd cyngor Abertawe—mae'n debyg y bydd Mike yn gwybod mwy—hefyd wedi bod yn sôn am gynllun gwahanol ac y buasai cyngor Abertawe yn fodlon arwain ar y fath gynllun. Achos, wrth gwrs, rydym ni'n gwybod bod hwn yn gynllun arloesol a fuasai'n ddiwydiant cyfan gwbl newydd a fuasai'n rhoi statws i'n cenedl—sôn am frandio ein cenedl—fel un sy'n arwain y byd o ran datblygu morlyn llanw fel hyn ac ynni adnewyddol ac yn y blaen. Nid ydw i eisiau mynd dros y dadleuon, ond, yn sylfaenol, beth sydd yn digwydd rŵan?  

Thank you, Chair. What I wanted to ask was: what is happening now after the dreadful decision made a few weeks ago to reject the tidal lagoon scheme in Swansea bay? Of course, there is huge disappointment in the Swansea and Neath region and more widely, and people are still feeling angry. There is talk about perhaps having an alternative plan or scheme of our own that doesn't depend on the Westminster Government or their funding. And, of course, you will know that there have been discussions in the past where you have proposed funding from the Welsh Government of £200 million. The scheme that was in place is now dead in the water, but people's anger does remain and they want to see this scheme coming into existence somehow.  

So, what support and what discussions can you have, have you held or do you intend to have locally? Because Swansea council's leader—Mike will probably know more about this—has also been talking about an alternative scheme and that Swansea council would be willing to lead on such a scheme. Because we do know that this is an innovative scheme that would be an entirely new industry that would bring a great status to our nation—we've been talking about branding our nation—as a world leader. This is an instance where we could be one in developing a tidal lagoon such as this, and in terms of renewable energy and so forth. I don't want to rehearse the arguments, but I do want to ask: what's happening now? 

Nid ydw i wedi gweld unrhyw fanylion eto ynglŷn â fel y byddai unrhyw gynllun arall yn gweithio, ond mae yna summit yn mynd i gael ei gynnal er mwyn edrych ar pa fath o fodelau gwahanol a allai weithio. Nid yw'r model sydd yna ar hyn bryd yn mynd i weithio. Nid yw'r arian yno i'w wneud e, ond mae'n hollbwysig i ystyried modelau newydd, ac rŷm ni'n barod i gymryd rhan yn hynny i weld—gan weithio gyda'r cynghorau lleol, gweithio gyda busnesau—a oes yna ffordd arall ymlaen.   

I've not seen any details as to how any alternative proposal would work, but a summit is to be held in order to look at what sort of alternative models could work. The model there at the moment isn't going to work because the funding isn't available for it, but it is crucial that we consider new and alternative models, and we're happy to participate in that to see—and, of course, we would work with local councils and local businesses—if there is an alternative way forward. 

A couple of quick comments before I ask a question. The first one is: I don't think the Welsh Government or the local Members across parties representing the area of south-west Wales could have done more. I give credit to you as First Minister and to the Welsh Government for the support you've given, and to all my colleagues who live in the area, representing—. Every single party has given full support. 

The second statement I'd make is that if these rules that the tidal lagoon has to pass had been brought in for wind or had been brought in for solar when they first came in neither would be in use today; we'd just have coal, coal and more coal. So, I think it's hugely unfair. My question is: who, apart from the local authority, can the Welsh Government work with to try and get a tidal lagoon up and running? 

Well, it seems to me that we'd need to be, obviously, involving the private sector. There'd need to be involvement from more than one local authority; it can't be just Swansea on its own. 

Neath, yes. It's got to be wider than that, even, I would think. In order to create the market for what the lagoon would generate, it needs to be far bigger than that to make it potentially viable. In terms of the figures, the point—. I thought you'd said at the beginning that I could have done more, but you said I couldn't have done much more. 

I misheard it; thank you for that. 

Yes. We're a broad church. The difficulty I always had with it was there was a failure on behalf of, particularly, civil servants in London to look at this in the widest possible context that, yes, it is a punt, but it's a new technology. Everything was new once. We could have been world leaders in the technology. We could have exported it. If you look at it more broadly, you're creating a century's worth of power. You're talking about jobs. But they tended to fall back on what they know, and, at the moment, if I was an investor, I wouldn't have any confidence that the UK Government wanted to encourage anything other than nuclear or offshore wind. Well, nuclear—we are supportive of Wylfa, but we need to broader than that in terms of what the energy mix looks like. That is the real problem now in the UK—that investors are saying, 'Well, you know, whenever a project is suggested, it doesn't go forward or the costs start to change', and the very people who said to me, 'Well, you know, the costings don't add up' are the very same people who produced the costings for Hinkley. Now, we saw what happened there. So, it's not as if we have robust costings here that are beyond question, and I come back to what I said some weeks ago: all we asked for was the same financial deal as Hinkley, no more than that. Despite not asking for more than that, the whole thing was scuppered—after a year and a half. My suspicion is that the Hendry review was set up in order to recommend that it shouldn't go ahead, but it recommended the opposite. I mean, a year and a half of dithering and then a negative decision. You do wonder sometimes whether people were waiting to see if the company would fall over so they wouldn't have to take that decision. The money we put on the table ensured that that didn't happen, but it's—. What will happen now is that other countries will move forward with the technology, and then we will follow. Because one of the things that I picked up on is that they wanted to see the costs drop. Well, that happens if other people do it and then you follow them. Again, Wales and the UK lose out, potentially, unless we can look at other schemes, on being world leaders.

12:35

I fully concur with your views on the tidal lagoon, and perhaps I'm more cynical and maybe have a conspiracy theory in that they will want to try and push fracking as much as they can, but who knows?

No, I know. It's not my question. The question is actually on the White Paper that is being discussed today, or the so-called White Paper—

Are you assuming I've seen it?

Well, exactly. Now, yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance attended the JMC(EN) alongside his colleague from Scotland, and both expressed very strong opinions that Welsh and Scottish voices were not really going to be considered in any negotiations because they actually hadn't had a chance to input into that process. From the answers you've said today, I'm assuming you haven't had a chance also to see those papers. Therefore, can we really rely upon the UK Government's promise that we will be involved in phase 2 negotiations if we've not even been involved in looking at what their proposals are?

Well, this is the problem. I have to say—and I say this lightheartedly, but I say it seriously as well—there's a reluctance to share documents with us for fear that they might go elsewhere. Actually, we are probably more reliable than some members of the Prime Minister's own Cabinet in terms of being able to keep documents confidential. There's no way we would give documents to a third party, because that would mean that we wouldn't get them in the future. I mean, why would we do that? So, we're in a situation where we've seen some elements of the White Paper, but the elements aren't devolved. So, it doesn't help in terms of the effect of trade policy in devolved areas. For example, we know, if we had a free trade agreement with New Zealand that led to a freer flow of agricultural produce between New Zealand and the UK, that might have a negative impact on Welsh farming, yet we'd have had no say at all in the development of that agreement, and that's where the whole system starts to fall down. Yes, it isn't devolved, I understand that, but in reality there's a very strong reason for the devolved Governments to be around the table in order that the UK Government can recognise the pitfalls that may exist in negotiating an agreement. It was common practice when I was rural affairs Minister: we would go to Brussels if there was a Council of Ministers meeting. We'd all be there. It would be the DEFRA Secretary of State who was in the meeting doing the talking, but we were there so that, if there was a proposal on the table, we could say, 'That works', or 'This doesn't work for Wales'. Then, having fed that back, the DEFRA Secretary of State could then go and renegotiate. It worked very well; it worked very well. There's no reason why that can't be replicated now in the future.

And there are no discussions from the UK Government as to actually doing just that.

I think the problem is that, unless they know what they want to do themselves, they're not going to share anything with us.

Well, at least we didn't have to leave our phones at the door. Mind you, perhaps it would have been better if I'd left mine, because I'd left it on.

Simon, you've got a point on this, and then you've got a couple of topicals yourself. 

Ie, diolch. Jest i ddilyn pwynt David Rees, mae cyd-destun ehangach fan hyn nawr hefyd achos mae Ysgrifennydd Gwladol Cymru wedi datgan ei hunan fel un o'r Brexiteers caled ac yn unoliaethu â'r rhai yna. Felly, mae buddiannau Cymru ynglŷn ag amaeth, porthladdoedd, busnesau, Airbus—popeth yr ŷch chi'n gyfarwydd ag ef—bellach yn edrych yn isel iawn ar yr agenda yn y trafodaethau sydd yn digwydd yn Chequers heddiw. Ond ynglŷn â'r berthynas sydd gyda chi â Llywodraeth San Steffan, roedd datganiad gyda chi ddoe—gan eich Llywodraeth chi ddoe—yn dweud bod hyn, sef y diffyg rhannu yma, yn groes i'r sicrhad blaenorol gan Lywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol y byddai gweinyddiaethau datganoledig yn cael cyfle ystyrlon i gyfrannu at lunio safbwyntiau negodi wrth iddynt gael eu datblygu. I fi, mae'n ymddangos bod ysbryd y cytundeb rhynglywodraethol sydd gyda chi a Llywodraeth San Steffan—rŷch chi wedi cytuno arno fe, ac, fel rŷch chi'n gwybod, ni wnaethom ni ym Mhlaid Cymru gytuno ar hynny—eisoes yn cael ei dorri. Nid y gair, rwy'n cytuno, ond yr ysbryd, achos os nad ydyn nhw'n fodlon rhannu hwn gyda chi, beth mae hynny'n dweud ynglŷn â'r ffordd, dros y saith mlynedd nesaf, rŷm ni'n mynd i fod yn trafod y meysydd sydd yn llifo yn ôl o'r Undeb Ewropeaidd a'r ffordd rŷm ni'n gallu deddfu yn eu cylch nhw? Bellach, sut ydych chi'n teimlo, jest chi eich hunain, fel Prif Weinidog Cymru, ynglŷn ag agwedd San Steffan tuag at y trafodaethau yma, ac a ydych chi wir yn dal i fod yn hyderus eu bod nhw mewn sefyllfa i fod yn bartneriaid ar y cyd â chi?

Yes, thank you. I just wanted to follow up on David Rees's point, that there's a broader context at play now also, because the Secretary of State for Wales has now declared himself as one of the hard Brexiteers and has joined that group. So, Wales's interests when it comes to ports, businesses, agriculture and all the things that you're familiar with, are currently looking very low on the agenda of the discussions taking place in Chequers today. But, in terms of the relationship that you do have with the Westminster Government, you made a statement—or your Government made a statement yesterday—that this lack of sharing runs counter to the previous assurance we received from the UK Government that the devolved administrations would have a meaningful opportunity to contribute to the design of negotiating positions. It appears to me that the spirit of the inter-governmental agreement between you and the Westminster Government—which was agreed between you, and, as you will know, Plaid Cymru did not support that—has already been broken. Not broken in word, I agree, but in spirit, because if they're not going to share this with you, well, what does that say about what is going to happen over the next seven years in terms of negotiations about the areas that will be flowing back to us from the EU and how we will legislate there? So, can you tell us how you are currently feeling, as the First Minister of Wales, about the attitude of Westminster towards these discussions, and are you still confident that they are in a position to be partners with you?

12:40

Y broblem yw eu bod nhw'n ffaelu cytuno gyda'i gilydd—dyna beth yw'r broblem. So, rydw i'n credu ei bod hi'n anodd iddyn nhw ddod â phapurau o flaen y JMC achos y ffaith nad oes dim cytundeb ymhlith eu hunain, a dyna beth yw'r broblem yn fan hyn yn fy marn i. Mae'n hollbwysig, wrth gwrs, ein bod ni'n sylweddoli bod cytundeb gyda ni, ond, fel y dywedais i o'r blaen, os na fydd y cytundeb hynny'n cael ei gadw, bydd pethau'n gallu newid, ac mae hwn yn brawf i Lywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig. Ond mae'n anodd gwybod beth yw safbwynt y Llywodraeth yn Llundain, o achos y ffaith bod y safbwyntiau'n newid. Mae siẁd gymaint o bobl â gwahanol safbwyntiau, ac maen nhw'n fodlon, wrth gwrs, eu dweud nhw'n gyhoeddus. Nid oes dim disgyblaeth yna ynglŷn â fel byddai Cabinet confensiynol yn gweithio, ac fe gawn ni weld heddiw beth sy'n digwydd. Beth rwy'n gweld yw hyn: rwy'n clywed pobl fel Boris Johnson yn dweud, 'Wel, bydd yna bris i'w dalu yn y tymor byr.' Wel, ni ddywedodd neb hynny ar y pryd. A beth rwy'n clywed yw dynion—a dynion ydyn nhw—cyfoethog yn dweud wrth bobl gyffredin, 'Wel, rŷch chi'n mynd i ddioddef damaid bach, ond bydd e'n werth e.' Ni fyddan nhw'n dioddef, ond y bobl gyffredin fydd yn dioddef.

The problem is that they can't agree with each other—that's the fundamental problem. So, I think it's difficult for them to bring papers to the JMC because they cannot agree on matters themselves, and that's the problem here in my view. It is crucial, of course, that we realise that we do have an agreement in place, but as I have said previously, if that agreement isn't honoured then things can change, and this is a test for the UK Government. But it's difficult to know what the stance of the Government in London is, because their stance changes so often. There are so many people with different viewpoints and they're willing to make them public. There is no discipline there in terms of how a conventional Cabinet should work, and we will have to wait and see what happens today. What I see is this: I hear people such as Boris Johnson saying, 'Well, there will be a price to pay in the short term.' Nobody said that at the time of the referendum. What I hear is men—and they are men—who are wealthy men, telling ordinary people, 'Well, you're going to have to suffer, but it will be worth it.' They won't suffer; it's the ordinary people who will suffer.

Bydd Cymru'n dioddef yn fwy na rhannau eraill hefyd.

Wales will suffer more than other parts of the UK.

Ni fydd neb yn elwa o hwn o gwbl—neb. Ac mae yna ffordd synhwyrol o'i wneud e. Mae yna ffordd synhwyrol i'w symud e ymlaen, ond mae Prif Weinidog Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig wedi paentio'i hunan i mewn i gornel, o achos beth ddigwyddodd yn yr etholiad y llynedd, ac mae'n drueni, achos rwy'n credu y byddai llawer mwy o hyblygrwydd gyda hi pe na bai hi wedi gwneud hynny'r llynedd. Fe gawn ni weld beth ddigwyddith. Mae'n rhaid i rywbeth dorri heddiw, un ffordd neu'r llall, ac fe gawn ni weld beth ddigwyddith.

Nobody will benefit from this—nobody. And there is a sensible way of progressing here, but the UK Prime Minister has painted herself into a corner because of what happened in the last general election, and it's a shame, because I think there would have been far more flexibility if she hadn't done that last year. We'll have to wait and see what happens. Something's got to give today, one way or another, and we'll have to wait and see.

Ie. Un o'r pethau y gwnaethoch chi—gan droi at bethau sydd yn llwyr yn eich dwylo chi, bellach—ei godi ddoe, adeg saithdegfed penblwydd yr NHS, oedd ein bod ni'n gallu codi trethi i godi'r arian angenrheidiol ar gyfer cynnal y gwasanaeth. Erbyn hyn, mae treth incwm yn cael ei ddatganoli, y flwyddyn nesaf, i'r Cynulliad ac, felly, i Lywodraeth Cymru gael gwneud hynny. Faint fyddai ceiniog o dreth incwm Cymraeg yn ei godi tuag at yr NHS yng Nghymru?

Yes. One of the things—turning to things that are entirely in your hands now—that you raised yesterday, with the seventieth birthday of the national health service, was the possibility of raising taxes to provide the necessary funding to maintain that service. Income tax will be devolved next year to the Assembly and, therefore, to the Welsh Government in order to be able to do that. How much would one penny of Welsh income tax raise for the NHS in Wales?

Amboutu £100 miliwn yw'r ffigur, so nid arian mawr. Beth sydd ddim gyda ni yw digon o bobl sy'n talu ar y lefel uchaf ar hyn o bryd. So, byddai'n rhaid codi trethi yn fwy na hynny er mwyn gwneud unrhyw fath o impact ar y gwasanaeth iechyd. Dyna pam, yn mynd yn ôl i'r pwynt y gwnes i ddoe, mae'n well yn ariannol i ni i weld trethi'n cael eu codi ar lefel Brydeinig a chael siâr o'r gronfa hynny na thrio codi trethi ein hunain. Nid yw hynny i ddweud na fydd yn digwydd yn y pen draw, ond mae yna addewid yn fy mhlaid i ddim i wneud hynny yn ystod tymor y Cynulliad.

Ac yn ail, fel y dywedais i, mae yna filoedd o bobl o Gymru yn cael triniaeth yn Lloegr. Mae hynny'n mynd i ddigwydd. Dyna beth yw daearyddiaeth Cymru, ac ni fyddwn i'n moyn i bobl beidio cael mynediad i Gaer neu Amwythig neu Henffordd. So, mae'n hollbwysig, hefyd, fod y gwasanaeth yn Lloegr yn rhoi'r un gwasanaeth hefyd, ac mae hynny'n meddwl y byddai'n rhaid i drethi godi yn Lloegr hefyd, yn fy marn i. So, felly, rydw i'n ei ystyried e yn y ffordd hyn: mae'n well i gael siâr o'r gronfa fawr nag ystyried, ar hyn o bryd, godi trethi dim ond yng Nghymru.

Around £100 million, so it's not a huge amount of money. What we don't have is a sufficient number of people paying taxes at the higher rates at the moment. So, we would have to increase taxes more than that to have any real impact on the health service. Returning to the point I made yesterday, it's better financially for us to see taxes increased at a UK-wide level and to get a share of that rather than imposing taxes ourselves. It's not to say that it won't happen ultimately, but there is a pledge made by my party not to do that during this Assembly term.

Secondly, as I said, there are thousands of people from Wales being treated in England. That's always going to happen, because of the geography of Wales, and we wouldn't want people not to be able to access Chester, Shrewsbury or Hereford. So, it's crucially important that the service in England provides the same level of service too, and that would mean that taxes would have to increase in England too, in my opinion. So, I look at it in these terms: it's better to get a share of the larger fund rather than, at the moment, considering raising taxes in Wales alone.

Fel rŷch chi'n dweud, byddai ceiniog ar y dreth incwm ar y raddfa gyffredin yng Nghymru ond yn codi, ar y mwyaf, 2 y cant ychwanegol i gronfa'r NHS yng Nghymru, ac mae hynny, fel rŷch chi'n gwybod, eisoes tua hanner, i bob pwrpas, gwariant y Llywodraeth, ac wedi ei ragweld i gynyddu dros y ddau ddegawd nesaf i bron 66 y cant o hynny. Ond, gan eich bod chi'n dweud mae'n well trio trafod hwn yn y cyd-destun Prydeinig—ac rydw i'n siŵr y cawn ni ddadl ynglŷn â hynny rhywbryd pan ddaw'r etholiad Cynulliad nesaf—pam ydych chi'n cynnig lefi gofal cymdeithasol ac â chymaint o ddiddordeb mewn cael lefi neu dreth ychwanegol ar gyfer gofal cymdeithasol yng Nghymru pan mae hynny hefyd yn glir yn nwylo Llywodraeth San Steffan ac yn etifeddiaeth Llywodraeth San Steffan? Fe gawson nhw gyfle i wneud rhywbeth am hyn gydag adroddiad Andrew Dilnot ryw saith mlynedd yn ôl. Mae Llywodraethau yn San Steffan o bob lliw plaid wedi bod yn eistedd ar y broblem yma ers dros 15 mlynedd. Pam ydych chi'n meddwl y dylai Cymru ateb problem yng Nghymru sydd wedi ei chreu gan bolisi San Steffan yn achos y lefi, ond nid yn achos treth incwm?

As you say, one penny on income tax at the basic rate in Wales would only raise, at most, an additional 2 per cent for the funding of the NHS in Wales, which is already, as you know, about 50 per cent, to all intents and purposes, of Welsh Government expenditure, and it is anticipated that that will increase to almost 66 per cent over the next two decades. However, as you say it's better to discuss this in a British context—and I'm sure we will have a debate on this issue at some point when the next Assembly elections arise—why are you therefore proposing a social care levy and so interested in having a levy or an additional tax for social care in Wales when that also is clearly in the hands of the Westminster Government and is an inheritance from them? They had an opportunity to do something about this following Andrew Dilnot's report some seven years ago. Westminster Governments of different colours have all been sitting on this issue for over 15 years. So, why do you think Wales should solve a problem in Wales that has been created in Westminster in the case of the levy, but not in the case of income tax?

12:45

Achos mae'r system yn wahanol. Beth rydym ni'n ystyried ynglŷn â'r lefi yw hyn: creu cronfa o'r dechrau lle bydd pobl yn talu i mewn i'r gronfa honno ac felly, wrth gwrs, yn gallu cael y gofal sydd ei eisiau arnyn nhw ar ôl talu stamps, fwy neu lai. Un model y byddai hwn yn gallu gweithio oddi tano yw system insiwrans cenedlaethol, ond, yn lle bod popeth yn cael ei daflu i mewn i'r un crochan, byddai fe'n cael ei gadw tuag at dalu am ofal cymdeithasol. So, byddai hwn yn rhywbeth a fyddai'n adeiladau dros y blynyddau, a phobl yn talu i mewn i system a fyddai yno iddyn nhw pan fyddai ei heisiau hi arnyn nhw.

Wrth gwrs, un o'r pethau y byddai'n rhaid i ni ei wneud yw sicrhau nad yw pobl—wel, nid oes ffordd rwydd i ddweud hwn—yn symud i mewn i Gymru a wedyn yn cael gofal heb fod wedi talu i mewn, achos byddai hynny'n dodi pwysau ar y system a fyddai'n ormodol. So, mae'r ddau beth yn wahanol yn fy marn i, achos, ynglŷn â'r lefi, mae yna ffordd i greu system yng Nghymru i bobl Cymru, ond byddai honno'n system a fyddai'n cynyddu fel cronfa dros y blynyddau. Dyna un ffordd ac, i fi, y ffordd rwyddaf i'w wneud e. Byddai gan bobl eraill farn arall ynglŷn â'r ffordd y gallai fe weithio, ond yn lle dechrau â rhywbeth lle mae pawb yn cael yr un gwasanaeth reit ar y dechrau—byddai pobl yn gorfod talu i mewn a ffeindio system lle byddai'r bobl sy'n ffaelu talu i mewn yn cael stamps yn yr un ffordd ag y mae'r system insiwrans cenedlaethol yn gweithio nawr.

Because the system is different. What we are considering in terms of the levy is the creation of a new fund where people would pay into that fund and could, therefore, access the care that they need, having paid for their stamps, to all intents and purposes. One model under which this could work is the national insurance system, but, rather than everything being thrown into the same pot, it would be ring-fenced to pay for social care. So, this would be something that would build over years, with people paying into a system that would be there for them when they needed it.

But, of course, one of the things that we would have to do would be to ensure—there's no easy way of saying this—that people don't move into Wales and then access care without having paid into that pot, because that would place excessive pressure on the system. They're two different things, in my view, because, on the levy, there is a means of creating a system that is made in Wales for the people of Wales but that would be a fund that would increase over years. That's one way of doing it, and the easiest way of doing it in my view. Other people could have views on alternatives, but, rather than starting something where everyone has exactly the same service at the very outset, people would pay in, and those people who couldn't pay in would have stamps just as it works with national insurance at the moment.

Mae'n gynnig diddorol ac mae'n haeddu ystyriaeth lawn, ac mae'r Pwyllgor Cyllid yn mynd i holi Gerry Holham ynglŷn â'r cynnig yma yn fuan iawn. Ond mae e hefyd yn gynnig sy'n cymryd amser. Os ydych chi'n talu i mewn i gronfa, mae'n cymryd amser i aeddfedu a dod i'w lawn rym. Mae hefyd cyswllt gwleidyddol pwysig yma. Fe dorrwyd y cyswllt rhwng national insurance a'r gwasanaeth iechyd gan Lywodraeth Geidwadol, fel mae'n digwydd. Er efallai nad yw pobl yn sylweddoli hynny, i bob pwrpas, trethiant cyffredinol a threthiant heddiw sy'n talu am y gwasanaeth iechyd. Sut ydych chi'n gallu, o gofio beth ddywedasoch chi wrthyf fi mewn cyd-destun gwahanol tua hanner awr yn ôl, sef nad ydych chi'n dymuno llanw bylchau gydag arian Cymru—bylchau methiant San Steffan—sut ydych chi'n gallu gwneud yn siŵr nad yw'r addewid yna gan unrhyw wleidydd, gan unrhyw blaid, sef y byddai lefi gofal cymdeithasol ond yn cael ei ddefnyddio at y pwrpas y mae wedi cael ei greu ar ei gyfer ac mae pobl wedi talu i mewn ar ei gyfer, yn arwain at ymdeimlad bod rhywbeth wedi ei breifateiddio yn y cyd-destun yma, neu ei fod e'n rhywbeth sydd yn bersonol i unigolion a ddim yn cael ei rannu gan bawb? Achos, fel y dywedasoch chi, allwch chi ddim cael sefyllfa lle mae rhywun yn symud i mewn i Aberystwyth yfory ac yn cael buddion llawn polisi nad ydynt wedi talu i mewn iddo fe dros y degawd cynt.

That's an interesting proposal and it does deserve full consideration, and the Finance Committee is going to be asking Gerry Holtham about this very soon. But it is also a proposal that will take some time. If you are paying into a fund, it will take time to mature to its fullest extent. There's also an important political link here. The link between national insurance and the NHS was cut by a Conservative Government, as it happens. Although many people may not realise this, it is general taxation that today pays for the NHS. So, how can you, given what you told me in a different context about half an hour ago, which is that you don't want to be filling the gaps of policy failure in Westminster with Welsh money, how can you ensure that that pledge by any politician or any party that a social care levy would only be used for the purpose that it was created for or that people have paid into it for, does not then lead to a sense that something's been privatised in this context, or that it's something that is personal to individuals and not shared by everyone? Because, as you said, you can't have a situation where someone moves to Aberystwyth tomorrow and has all the benefits of a policy that they've not paid into for the past decade.

Mae hynny'n iawn. Yr unig ffordd y gallai hynny weithio fyddai petasai rhyw fath o gynllun yn Lloegr a byddai modd o drosglwyddo'r arian nôl yma.

That's quite right. The only way it could work if there were some sort of scheme in England and you could transfer the funding here.

Wel, ie, mae hynny'n bosibilrwydd.

Well, yes, that is a possibility.

Ond heb gynllun fel hynny, ni fyddai fe'n gweithio. Mae hynny'n iawn. 

Preifateiddio—na. I fi, er mwyn i'r cyhoedd dderbyn lefi fel hyn, byddai'n rhaid dweud wrth bobl, 'Rydych chi'n talu i mewn, ac mae'r arian yn cael ei gadw ar wahân. Nid yw e'n cael ei daflu'n syth i mewn i'r crochan a neb yn gallu gweld ble mae'r arian yn mynd.' So, byddai'n rhaid cadw'r gronfa ar wahân i unrhyw ffynhonnell arall o gyllido.

But without such an arrangement, it wouldn't work. You're entirely right.

Privatisation—no. For me, in order for the public to accept such a levy, you would have to explain to people that they pay in and that the money will be ring-fenced. It's not just thrown into the pot and nobody can see where it's gone. So, you would have to ring-fence that fund and keep it separate from any other funding stream.

Os caf i symud at y materion eraill rwyf i eisiau eu codi gyda chi, wythnos diwethaf fe gyhoeddasoch chi fel Llywodraeth dargedau newydd ynglŷn â datgarboneiddio. Roedd hynny yn ymateb i her cytundeb Paris a'r her sydd gyda chi i ostwng nwyon ac allyriadau carbon. Nawr, mae'r targedau newydd sydd gyda chi yn rhai—wel, nid ydyn nhw'n uchelgeisiol, os cawn ni ei ddweud e fel hynny: erbyn 2020, 27 y cant o ostyngiad ar ffigurau 1990, ac, erbyn 2040, gostyngiad o 60 y cant. Ond eisioes mae Claire Perry yn Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Gyfunol wedi sôn am wella ar y gostyngiad o 80 y cant sydd gan y Deyrnas Gyfunol erbyn 2050. Mae'r Undeb Ewropeaidd â gostyngiad o 40 y cant erbyn 2030. Rydych chi wedi gosod ffigurau sydd ddim yn ffitio i mewn, fel mae'n digwydd. Mae'n anodd cymharu pan ŷch chi'n defnyddio degawd gwahanol i bawb arall, ond, hyd yn oed wedyn, o graffu ar y ffigurau yma, rydych chi'n llai uchelgeisiol na'r Undeb Ewropeaidd ac yn llai uchelgeisiol na beth mae hyd yn oed Llywodraeth Geidwadol San Steffan yn ystyried nawr. Ar ben hynny, mae'r allyriadau carbon wedi bod yn cynyddu dros y degawd diwethaf yng Nghymru, ac yn sydyn iawn y flwyddyn ddiwethaf wedi mynd i fyny 5 y cant. A ydych chi'n ddigon uchelgeisiol ar yr agenda datgarboneiddio yma?

If I move to the other issues that I want to raise with you, last week, you as a Government published new targets for decarbonisation. This was in response to the Paris agreement challenge and the challenge that you have to reduce greenhouse gases and carbon emissions. Now, these new targets that you have are not ambitious, if I can put it in that way: by 2020, a 27 per cent reduction on the 1990 figures, and, by 2040, a reduction of 60 per cent. But Claire Perry from the UK Government has already talked about improving on the 80 per cent reduction that the UK Government wants to see by 2050. The European Union has a 40 per cent reduction by 2030. You have set figures that don't really fit in, as it happens. It's difficult to compare when you're using a different decade to everyone else, but, even so, from scrutinising those figures, it appears that you are less ambitious than the EU and less ambitious, even, than what the Conservative Westminster Government is currently considering. On top of that, carbon emissions have been increasing over the past decade in Wales, and last year suddenly jumped up by 5 per cent. Are you ambitious enough on the decarbonisation agenda?

12:50

Rydw i'n credu ein bod ni. Mae'n un peth i gael targedau; mae'n beth arall i gael targedau sy'n realistig. Fe fyddwn i'n dadlau bod ein targedau ni yn realistig. Mae Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig wedi dweud eu bod nhw'n moyn gweld cwymp yn allyriadau. Un o'r pethau fyddai wedi helpu hynny yng Nghymru, er enghraifft, fyddai trydaneiddio y rheilffordd rhwng Caerdydd ac Abertawe.

I think we are. It's one thing to have targets; it's another thing to have realistic targets. I would say that our targets are realistic. The UK Government have said that they want to see a decline in emissions. One of the things that would have assisted that in Wales would have been the electrification of the rail line between Cardiff and Swansea.

A'r morlyn llanw hefyd, os caf i ychwanegu.

And the tidal lagoon, too.

Wel, yn wir. Nid yw hynny'n mynd i ddigwydd. Wrth gwrs, mae gyda ni ddiwydiannau yng Nghymru sydd yn creu allyriadau. Mae'r diwydiant dur yn gwneud hynny, er bod y diwydiant dur wedi lleihau allyriadau dros y blynyddoedd. Os ydych chi'n moyn edrych arno fe mewn ffordd allyriadau, petasai Port Talbot ddim yna byddai allyriadau yn mynd lawr, ond byddai'r swyddi i gyd wedi mynd. So, mae yna gydbwysedd i ystyried. 

Trafnidiaeth: mae'n hollbwysig ein bod ni'n creu trafnidiaeth gyhoeddus sy'n gryf ac mae pobl yn moyn ei defnyddio. Dyna beth mae'r metro amdano. Mae'n sôn am gryfhau y ffyrdd y mae pobl yn teithio ar draws Cymru ac, wrth gwrs, tu fas i Gymru. Mae hynny'n hollbwysig hefyd. Fe fyddai rhai yn dweud, felly, fod rhaid i ni beidio ag ystyried hewlydd rhagor, ond nid yw cweit mor rhwydd â hynny, byddwn i'n dweud, achos rydym ni'n gwybod bod rhai o'r hewlydd—. Mae Port Talbot yn un enghraifft. Nid yw sefyllfa Port Talbot yn rhwydd i'w datrys wrth ystyried cael hewl arall. Un o'r problemau ym Mhort Talbot a rhai rhannau eraill o Gymru yw'r ffaith bod ceir yn aros â'r injans ymlaen drwy'r amser am eu bod nhw'n ffaelu symud achos bod siẁd gymaint o draffig. Felly, mae'n rhaid i ni ystyried, yn fy marn i, cynllunio hewlydd mewn rhai rhannau o Gymru sy'n mynd i sicrhau bod traffig yn symud yn glouach ac nad ydyn nhw'n gallu eistedd â'r injans arno a'r allyriadau'n dod mas o'r injans.

So, wrth gwrs, mae'n rhaid i ni symud ymlaen gyda trafnidiaeth gyhoeddus. Rŷm ni wedi dangos ymrwymiad ynglŷn â hynny. Fe fydd yna rai rhannau o Gymru lle bydd rhaid ystyried rhai hewlydd er mwyn sicrhau bod traffig yn symud yn glouach, a hefyd, wrth gwrs, gweithio gyda diwydiannau fel dur er mwyn eu helpu nhw i leihau allyriadau yn y pen draw.

Well, yes. That's not going to happen either. Of course, we have industries in Wales that do have high emissions. The steel industry is one, although the steel industry has reduced emissions over the years. If you want to look at it in terms of emissions, if we didn't have Port Talbot then emissions would go down, but all the jobs would disappear too. So, there is a balance to be struck.

Transport: it's crucially important that we create public transport that is robust and that people want to use. That's what the metro is all about. It will strengthen the way people travel across Wales, and outwith Wales. That's crucially important, too. Some would say, therefore, we shouldn't consider road building any more, but it's not quite that simple, because we know that certain roads—. Port Talbot is one example. The situation in Port Talbot isn't an easy one to resolve in terms of having a new road. One of the problems in Port Talbot and some other parts of Wales is that cars are stationary with their engines running all the time because they can't move because of congestion. So, we do have to consider designing roads in some parts of Wales that will ensure that the traffic is moving and that the engines aren't issuing emissions when they are sitting idle.

Of course, we have to make progress with public transport. We've shown our commitment in that area. There will be certain parts of Wales where we will have to consider new roads in order to ensure that traffic can move more freely, and also work with industries such as the steel industry to help them to reduce their emissions ultimately.

Rwy'n derbyn rhai o'r pwyntiau rydych chi'n dweud, ond beth sy'n digwydd yng Nghymru yw bod y sector dur wedi lleihau allyriadau, rhyw 5 y cant, rwy'n meddwl. Y sector sydd wedi cynyddu yw'r sector cynhyrchu ynni, a chynyddu'n sylweddol iawn—22 y cant mewn un flwyddyn. Mae'n anodd gweld sut mae hynny wedi digwydd yn uniongyrchol. Yn sicr, yn yr Alban, mae wedi mynd lawr yn sylweddol iawn wrth iddyn nhw ddatblygu diwydiant ynni gwynt, nid ar y môr ond ar y tir—rhywbeth sydd wedi mynd yn stond yma yng Nghymru.

Rwy'n dod nôl at y pwynt gwreiddiol. Mae eich targedau chi, newydd eu cyhoeddi yr wythnos diwethaf, ar gyfer 2040 yn llai uchelgeisiol, fel na fydd Cymru yn cyrraedd nod cytundeb Paris, sef rhywbeth wnaeth y Cynulliad bleidleisio drosto. Mae'n bell o fod yn cyrraedd unrhyw beth yn agos at net zero erbyn post 2050. Dyna lle mae'r gwledydd datblygedig, modern, cyfoes yn edrych i ddatblygu—ynni yn arbennig, a thrafnidiaeth, fel rydych chi wedi sôn amdano. Onid ydych chi'n teimlo jest bach o gywilydd, fel Llywodraeth sydd wedi sôn am hyn ers dros ddegawd, eich bod chi off the pace pan mae'n dod i ostwng allyriadau carbon Cymru? 

I accept some of the points you're making, but what's happened in Wales is that the steel industry has reduced its emissions by some 5 per cent, I believe. The sector that has increased is the energy production sector, and that has been a significant increase at 22 per cent in one year. It's difficult to see how that has happened directly. Certainly, in Scotland, it has decreased quite significantly as they've developed the onshore wind industry—something that has been at a standstill here in Wales.

I return to my original point. Your targets, which were just published last week, for 2040 are less ambitious, meaning that Wales will not reach the Paris climate agreement aim, yet it was something the Assembly voted for. It is far from reaching net zero post 2050. That is where contemporary, modern, developed nations are currently looking to develop—on energy in particular, and transport, as you have mentioned. Don't you feel a little bit ashamed of being a Government that has talked about this for over a decade but which is off the pace when it comes to reducing carbon emissions in Wales?

Mae'n dod nôl i'r ddadl hyn nad oes neb yn gwybod yr ateb. Mae'n un peth i greu targedau; mae'n beth arall i'w cyrraedd nhw. Beth sy'n bwysig yw bod targedau gyda ni lle rydym ni'n credu ei bod hi'n bosibl i'w cyrraedd nhw, nid i greu targedau sydd yn edrych yn dda ar y dechrau a wedyn yn ffeindio nad yw'r targedau hynny wedi cael eu cyrraedd.

It comes back to the same old argument that nobody knows the answer to this. It's one thing to create targets; it's an entirely different thing to achieve those targets. What's important for us is that we have targets that are achievable, rather than putting very ambitious targets in place and then finding that they are unachievable.

Rydych chi wedi methu'r targedau sydd wedi cael eu gosod.

You have failed targets that have been set.

Okay, thanks very much. I think we're done now.

Can I say thank you very much to the First Minister again, and your officials, for attending this morning? There is a draft transcript sent to check for accuracy, so we hope very much that you'll do that. As was noted before, there are several points that we're going to write to you as a committee on, and we'll expect you to come back to us.

4 Papurau i’w nodi
4 Papers to Note

Item 4 on our agenda, before we go into private, is to note two papers. Is the committee happy to note both those papers? Thank you very much. That's great.

So, we've come to the end of the public part of the meeting. Can I thank the venue once again for allowing us to use these facilities? They've been fantastic. It's been a very comfortable meeting, given that it's probably very warm outside. It's been a very comfortable meeting in terms of the temperature, so we'll certainly think about you again when we want to come back out again. 

12:55

It's cold in winter, is it? Okay, we'll come back in the summer then. I'll say thank you to the audience as well for staying and we hope that you found it useful to see. It's something that we're proud of as a committee, that we do come out and about, and we intend to carry on doing that. 

5. Cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42 i benderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o'r cyfarfod
5. Motion under Standing Order 17.42 to resolve to exclude the public from the meeting

Cynnig:

bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42.

Motion:

that the committee resolves to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 17.42.

Cynigiwyd y cynnig.

Motion moved.

Can I just ask now that we move into private under Standing Order 17.42? Is everybody happy? Okay, thank you very much.

Derbyniwyd y cynnig.

Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 12:55.

Motion agreed.

The public part of the meeting ended at 12:55.