National Assembly for Wales

I call Members to order.  

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Mick Antoniw. 

Llywydd, the maintenance of social cohesion should never be taken for granted. The pressures of austerity and starkly differing views about Brexit cause particular challenges in our own time. The responsibility for fostering social cohesion is one shared by us all.

First Minister, thank you for that answer. In Wales, we have seen how the Brexit process has accelerated the trend towards a less cohesive and more fragmented society, where intolerance has become normalised, and this growing intolerance is not only aimed at people who have recently made Wales their home, but is increasingly towards anyone who holds a different viewpoint. This trend is deeply worrying for all of us who believe that a fractured society inevitably results in increased influence of those who promote racism and the scapegoating of those on benefits, those with disabilities, the homeless. First Minister, it is vital, whatever the Brexit outcome, we do all we can to reverse this trend. So, I would ask, will the First Minister commit to a Welsh Government campaign to help restore the traditional Welsh values of tolerance, solidarity and inclusivity? 

Well, Llywydd, I thank Mick Antoniw for that supplementary question. I do agree with him that there are real pressures in our society towards incivility and to regarding somebody with whom you have a difference of view as not somebody just with whom you can have a proper debate, but somehow that this is to be personalised and to be carried out in terms on which I don't think anybody in this Chamber would wish to see public debate conducted. That's bad enough amongst people who, in some ways, like those of us in this Chamber, put ourselves in a position of public debate, but it is even more so with people who find themselves scapegoated, singled out, made the butt of comments by others and, as the Member has said, there are events that mean that that risk is increased.

The Welsh Government has done a series of things to try and create the sort of all-Wales response that Mick Antoniw referred to. We're expanding our regional community cohesion programme and we're providing another £1.52 million from the EU transition fund in order to do that. We intend to do more to support those citizens directly affected by leaving the European Union, and there are some encouraging signs, Llywydd, as well.

Members here may have seen the recent report of the inspectors of constabulary, which highlighted work that is going on here in Wales. The report said that, in Wales, the national hate crime criminal justice board brings a consistency and co-ordinated approach to police action in relation to hate crime in Wales. It singled out Gwent Police, where our former colleague Jeff Cuthbert is the police and crime commissioner. It said that the Gwent Police force had a comprehensive and sophisticated approach to responding to victims of hate crime, which was not

'currently available in any of the other forces that we have visited.' 

So, I think that demonstrates, Llywydd, that where we do take concerted action, we are able make inroads even into the difficult circumstances that the Member outlined, and, as a Welsh Government, we are determined to go on doing more to achieve just that. 

First Minister, one way of promoting social cohesion is to ensure there's full and proper access to culture and arts programmes. I wonder if you've observed some of the Fusion programme, which, in fairness, your Government has promoted to expand access to arts and culture, and the Caerau and Ely Rediscovering heritage project in your constituency is, at this very moment, unearthing new finds that go back to the Mesolithic era, in which Cardiff and the area around were really, really important in terms of the development of this part of the British isles. That's involved people from the local community, some of whom are now at university as a result of working on this project. I commend Cardiff University in particular for their vision in signing up and being a key partner in this.

Can I thank David Melding for that, Llywydd, and agree with him in his general proposition that participation in cultural and sporting and artistic events allow people to share experiences, to offer perspectives from their own histories and cultures in a way that enriches everybody? I'm particularly grateful to David Melding for mentioning the CAER project in the Cardiff West constituency, and to take this opportunity, therefore, Llywydd, to congratulate them on winning a major National Lottery, Heritage Lottery award last week. The new Cardiff West High School will open its doors in two weeks' time, and its links with the archaeological work that is going on on that remarkable site will open opportunities for young people on that estate that have hitherto been very scantily available to them. 

I thank John Griffiths for that. The Welsh Government deploys all the levers available to us to help overcome the way in which life chances are unfairly distributed by economic circumstances. The Fair Work Commission appointed by my predecessor will report shortly and add to the repertoire of actions available to us in this area.

First Minister, when a baby comes into this world in Wales, the social class he or she is born into will affect every aspect of their life, whether it's life expectancy, healthy life expectancy, the standards and qualifications experience of education that she or he receives, their job, lifetime earnings, standards of living, quality of life. Far too often, those born into lower income groups are disadvantaged in all of those terms and, indeed, many others. So, I think most of us would agree, First Minister, that social justice, equality of opportunity and outcome, demands an effective strategy, a set of policies, that address all those disadvantages too often experienced. So, will Welsh Government commit to redoubling its efforts to ensure a fairer Wales?

I thank John Griffiths for that very important question. He's absolutely right to say that economic chances determine social chances, and your relationship to the economy right at the start of your life has such an impact on the chances that are available to you. But, as John Griffiths knows, our commitment to a more equal Wales is also about narrowing the gap between those who have more than they will ever need, or know what to do with, and those who struggle every day to meet the most basic needs that they have. And more equal societies not only promote better economic chances, but they determine the chances you have at the start of life. A female child born in Japan today will live, on average, to be 100 years old, and that's because the gap between the top and bottom of society in Japan is the narrowest of the sort of economies that Japan represents. 

Now, here in Wales, we are determined, as part of our Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, to create that more equal Wales, and that does mean, as John Griffiths has said, investing in those earliest years, those first 1,000 days of a child's life, because of the way that that goes on making a difference to the rest of the life course. It's why we introduced the foundation phase in our schools, to make sure that learning through play meant that children from those backgrounds learnt from the beginning that schooling and education was for them as well as everybody else. In the budget that was passed on the floor of this Assembly in January, we more than doubled the amount of money going into the new pupil development grant access fund, and that, again, is there to make sure that, from the very beginning, we equalise some of the unfair chances that children are dealt, so that the benefits of those investments can go on being felt in the rest of their lives. 

First Minister, social class, household income and personal wealth all affect someone's life chances and influence their chances at schools, their lifestyle and how long they'll live. You've just mentioned the Japanese experience. Figures released by Public Health Wales, from the child measurement programme, show that more than 1,000 children in Wales starting school are classed as severely obese. The figures were highest for those living in the most deprived areas in Wales, such as Merthyr Tydfil—the highest rate of severe child obesity in Wales is in Merthyr. If things continue as they are, this current generation of children could well be the first to live a shorter life than their parents. That's a dismal figure—that's a very sad story. Will the First Minister agree to review his Government obesity strategy in the light of these findings to see what more can be done to address the problem of children from poorer backgrounds being dangerously overweight in Wales?

Well, Llywydd, it's an important question. I think it's important to say to the Member that life expectancy amongst some people who are alive today is falling in some parts of the United Kingdom for the very first time since those figures were collected in the way that they are collected. And that is the impact of austerity that is being seen in our society. And personally I believe that obesity amongst very small children is a product of austerity as well. It is the ways in which families who have the very least available to spend are obliged to buy food that fills children up quickly, gives them an immediate boost. And if you don't have the choices that money allows you to make, then you end up making the sorts of choices that lead to the figures that Mohammad Asghar has pointed to. So, this is how those issues of health justice are equally linked to economic justice. And of course we need to make a difference in the lives of those children, because that start in life, arriving at school already overweight and obese, is going to have an impact on that child's long-term well-being. But, fundamentally, that is an economic issue—it's about making sure that those families have genuine opportunities to prosper and to thrive, and tackling it in isolation from those formative conditions I don't think gets to the root of the problem.

Questions from the party leaders now. The leader of the opposition, Paul Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, when will you make a decision about the future of the M4 relief road, given that the inquiry's report is now on your desk?

Well, as the Member knows, advice has been published. That makes it clear to me that a decision on the M4 relief road is captured by the civil service rules of purdah. I'm unable—the Government is unable—prevented by the right-and-proper rules from making an announcement that could have an impact upon a local by-election of that sort. So, there will be no announcement from me. I am unable to make any announcement until that by-election is concluded.

Well, it seems to me that it's one excuse after another, First Minister. Last time—[Interruption.]—last time, last time—[Interruption.]—last time I questioned you about the relief road in this Chamber, it was as clear then as it is now that, even though successive Welsh Labour Governments have dithered on this topic for nearly 20 years, you are still struggling to find the accelerator and deliver an answer to the nation. Welsh businesses, commuters and others have come forward in support of a relief road for this choking artery at the heart of Wales's economy. And yet, despite paying £44 million for this inquiry, we're still waiting for a commitment from you and your Government. If you're still not willing to give us your answer, First Minister, on the findings of last year's inquiry, it's time that you added transparency to this process by allowing other Members of this Chamber to see the recommendations of that report as soon as possible. Will you commit here today, First Minister, to sharing this report as soon as possible, which I would remind you was paid for with public money, so that this Chamber can scrutinise and debate this matter appropriately? And if you are going to share this report, when will that be?

I think the Member will want to think carefully about some of the things that he has said. The reason that we have a by-election is not because of anything that the Welsh Government did, but because of the death of the sitting Member of Parliament. There's nothing in that that can be laid at the door of the Welsh Government, as somehow holding up proceedings.

And as to what he said at the very beginning, surely he understands there are rules—there are rules—about the way in which these decisions can be made. I am as bound by those rules as any Member of Parliament, any member of his Government in Westminster, would be if similar circumstances had happened in a by-election in another part of the country. Those are the rules. It's nothing to do with being held up here; it's because of the way in which decisions are properly made. As to making the report available, when that is possible, I'm absolutely happy to make it available as soon as it can be. As soon as the rules allow for that to happen, the report will be made available to Members. But we will do it in line with the way in which the proper conduct of Government is carried out. I think he understands that, really, and I think his questions ought to reflect that.

First Minister, the people of Wales are getting restless with this waiting game. You should have delivered a solution for the commuters and communities around the M4 a long time ago. It's time for you to stop dragging your heels and offer further reassurance by telling us how long the people of Wales will now have to wait before they see this project become a reality. Now, you've touched on the forthcoming by-election, but let me remind you, First Minister, we were told in this Chamber at the end of last year that a decision was going to be made by the previous First Minister, but we are still waiting. So, could you therefore today, First Minister, confirm whether this Chamber is still going to have an opportunity to vote on this project, given that we were promised a vote on this project before Christmas of last year?

Llywydd, the commitments that were given as far as the involvement of this Chamber is concerned have not altered. The Member is quite right to say that the previous First Minister would have wished to have made a decision had he been able to do so, but he too was following the proper procedures that have to lie behind a decision of this magnitude. I say to the Member again, when he reads out his notes about dragging feet, there is no dragging of feet here. The circumstances in that by-election have altered, the by-election itself puts a constraint on my ability to announce any decision. And I'm afraid, impatient as he may be, he will find that he is bound by the rulebook just as much as I am.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, last week, in your speech to the Scottish Labour Party conference, you stated that social class, rather than geographical accident at birth, is the single most powerful factor in shaping peoples's lives. But, surely, seen through the prism of Welsh experience, poverty and place are hardly unconnected. Poverty is indeed the single most important determinant of life outcomes, as John Griffiths said, but poverty is unevenly distributed, and is particularly concentrated in Wales—and that's, of course, after two decades of devolved Labour Government.

You referred to falling life expectancy across the UK, but it is true, is it not, that life expectancy is falling in Wales faster than anywhere else—indeed, faster than anywhere else in western Europe. To depart from the language of a seminar here, let's spell out what that actually means: the chances of a child born today, which John Griffiths referred to, in Wales living to the age of 90 are significantly lower than they are in England. Will you accept that this now represents a full-scale public health crisis here in Wales?

I think the Member needs to be careful in the way that he deploys figures, because the evidence of falling life expectancy is very recent, and I don't think that you would sensibly project trends into a 90-year future on the basis of what we know so far. 

But I want to agree with the basic premise of what Adam Price has said. Of course, poverty has a shaping impact on people's lives, and that is why we are determined as a Government to do everything we can to address the circumstances of people who live in poverty, and to use the levers that are in the hands of the Welsh Government to make a difference wherever we can. And that's something that we have been doing since the start of the devolution era and which we are determined to go on doing, even in the very constraining circumstances that austerity puts on our ability to fund all the public services to the extent that we know those services ideally would require. 

Let's delve a little deeper into particular aspects of what I certainly regard as a growing public health crisis here in Wales. Take the incidence of diabetes: the numbers diagnosed in Wales with diabetes is increasing and now higher than anywhere else in the UK. The highest number of all in Wales and among the worst in the UK—8 per cent of the population—is in Gwent. Only last week, the Assembly's health committee said that Wales is facing a national crisis in terms of our children's health. The latest figures from Public Health Wales show an increase in the numbers of obese four to five-year-olds over the last two years, with 27 per cent overall now overweight or obese, compared with just 23 per cent in England. The lack of physical activity among children is a primary factor, but surely among the key drivers of this worrying trend are the limited role of physical activity in the curriculum and the lack of wider public health interventions against obesity. And, surely, in this context, the biggest inactivity of all has been your own as a Government. 

That was a question that was doing quite well until the end. So, look, where I agree with Adam Price is on this, Llywydd—that when you look at rising incidence of diabetes, when you look at rising incidence of obesity, the answer isn't, 'What is the health service going to do about it?' The answer is in that wider public health agenda that he outlined, and we look at the shaping causes that lie behind those figures. And they are to be found in poverty that drives people to have to shop in particular sorts of ways. So, diet and food poverty is part of all of this. The figures that were published of children arriving at the school door already overweight cannot have been caused by lack of exercise in school, because these children weren't in school at that point. But it is to do with ways in which people live their lives and it is up to Government to create the conditions in which people are able to take the actions that allow them to promote their own health into the future. So, it is that combination of actions that people themselves can take, but Governments have to act in order to give them the opportunities to act in that way. That is a public health agenda, and, to that extent, I agree with the points the Member was making. 

Obviously, the determinants of this public health crisis are complex, interrelated, multiple. They're the result of a toxic cocktail of low incomes, poor housing, poor diet, low physical activity and high pollution. Some of these matters are reserved at Westminster, but many of them are within your sphere of control. Let's take cancer, for example. In the last six years for which figures are available, the long-term decline in cancer death rates has slowed markedly in Wales. Over the same time period, the rate of decline in Scotland, which has a similar deprivation profile, has increased. Now, Public Health Wales has itself said that the causes of these and other changes to death rates are not fully understood and are being explored further. Now, can I suggest that doesn't exactly convey a sense of urgency? Can I put it to you that the need to understand what is happening here and find answers is a matter of utmost urgency? People's lives literally are at stake. Your spokesman's response to the health committee report was that the new school curriculum, due to come into effect in 2022, will include a focus on health and well-being. But that's three years away. Can we afford to wait three years when the crisis is happening to our children now?

Well, Llywydd, Adam Price is right when he points to some of the long-term trends that we are dealing with here. Every single generation since 1945 has been heavier than the generation that preceded it. And that has been true in times of economic success as well as times of economic decline. These are really long-term trends in which actions by Government cannot be expected to make a short-term difference. But we are not waiting for particular events in order to make a difference. We're already doing things. The Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 passed by this Assembly makes a difference every day to the chances that children can walk or cycle to school. The actions that we are taking in the food field to try to make sure that those families that need the most help to make sure that they are able to access the type of diet that they need, to provide families with the skills they need in order to prepare food that is good for the long-term health of their children—those are programmes that are happening in Wales today. If there are more things that we can do, as we will through the new curriculum, of course we will do them. Because we want to focus, as I said, Llywydd, on those levers that are most directly in the hands of the Welsh Government and then to maximise the impact that they can have in the lives of families and children in Wales.

Leader of the UKIP group, Gareth Bennett.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, I'm very interested in a message that went out from Trade and Invest Wales recently. As you know, Trade and Invest Wales is a marketing initiative run by your Welsh Government. They seem to be pushing out the message to potential foreign investors that workers in Wales earn up to 30 per cent less than workers in other parts of the United Kingdom. Is it your official strategy to market Wales to companies abroad as a low-wage economy, whereby firms can come into Wales and set up shop here and pay their workers extremely low wages?

Llywydd, that was not a message put out by any Minister. It is not a message that should have been put out, and I can assure the Chamber that it is not a message that will be repeated.

So, it was just a mistake. Okay. Well, whatever strategy your Welsh Government does come up with, claiming that you are trying to improve working conditions in Wales, is likely to be undermined by the real situation we have here in the job market, which is that, in general, wages in Wales are very low and 20 years of a Welsh Labour Government haven't done anything to change that.

I see that yesterday your Brexit Minister brought out a statement asserting that we needed to keep freedom of movement to the UK even after Brexit. This means that even after we leave low-skilled migrants will still be able to flood into Wales from eastern Europe, keeping wages low. Wages in Wales will never rise unless we take active steps to cut off this flow of cheap, unskilled labour. So, why is your Welsh Labour Government so determined to keep the cheap labour force flowing into Wales? 

Well, Llywydd, let me correct the Member in the first place, because he repeats an old canard about the Welsh economy. The truth of the Welsh economy is that, while we have more low-paid jobs in Wales, when a person in Wales is doing a job they get paid comparably with what that person would be paid for doing the same job somewhere else in the United Kingdom. It is simply not the case, as he suggested at the outset, that, somehow, wages in Wales are generally depressed.

Let me say that I completely agree with what my colleague said yesterday. The continuation of jobs in the Welsh economy—in businesses, in public services and in our universities—depends upon our ability to go on attracting people from other parts of the world to come and make their futures here in Wales. The message we want to give out to the rest of the world is that they are welcome here. They play a really important part in our society and in our economy, and messages to the contrary are actually to the detriment of those people who are already living here and their economic prospects.

I think the truth is, First Minister, that you want to set up your Fair Work Commission that you mentioned earlier, and pretend that you are committed to improving pay and working conditions in Wales, when the reality is exactly the opposite. The truth is that you want to keep pay and working conditions low in Wales by allowing companies to keep accessing cheap foreign workers. 

It's amazing to me that it's the Labour Party and a Welsh Labour Government, which are supposed to stick up for the rights of Welsh workers, that are doing this. I've asked you this before, First Minister, and I'll ask you it again: would it not be now more appropriate if you renamed your party the 'cheap labour' party?

Well, it was a cheap remark the last time the Member made it—I'm surprised that he doesn't have at least somebody alongside him to advise him on not repeating the same mistake twice. Let me give him the example that I've given him before. It's a real-world example—it was put to me directly by the employer. This is someone who runs a large and successful business in the middle of Wales, in a place where there is sparsity of population. In order for that business to succeed, as it has succeeded for many years, he needs 100 people to make his business work year in, year out. Eighty of those people he is able to recruit from that local community. In order for the business to run, he has to recruit 20 other people and, indeed, those 20 other people are not to be found locally, and they come from outside Wales. It is the jobs of the 80 people who are already there that depend upon the 20 people who come from elsewhere. That's why those people are welcome to be here in Wales. Far from, as the Member suggests, those people being somehow to the detriment of Welsh people, our ability to persuade people from elsewhere to come and be part of our successful economy is part of the success we will have, and we as a Government are determined to go on giving the message that those people will be welcomed. They're welcome now, they'll be welcome in the future, whatever our relationship with the rest of the world will be.   

Llywydd, the Welsh Government supports veterans across the range of our responsibilities, including employment, health and in education. 

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. There are 51,000 veterans in north Wales alone, and although we have Veterans' NHS Wales, there are only three psychologists to look after their mental health needs. That's clearly not viable, but that isn't really what I'm driving at here. But having said that, I don't think it's fair to expect Government and the NHS to do everything, and we should be encouraging self-help whenever possible. Tŷ Ryan was a project in Wrexham that involved veterans taking part in the building of one and two-bedroomed apartments for occupancy by veterans. Tŷ Ryan made a huge difference for those veterans involved. It improved their mental health, as well as providing much needed housing. For some time, my office has been in contact with Woody's Lodge, a charity concerned with the welfare of veterans. Like me, they see how self-build projects can benefit veterans, and that around north Wales there are plots of unused brownfield land that could be used for these projects, often owned by local authorities. So, would you agree to meet with myself and representatives of Woody's Lodge charity for veterans to see if we can develop a way to locate and release unused local authority land for future veterans' self-build projects? 

I thank the Member for her supplementary question. As it happens, Llywydd. my colleague Rhianon Passmore was talking to me about Woody's Lodge and the work that it does only very recently, so I'm aware of the work that it does and Project 360°, which is part of that initiative. And it is part of that self-help way of doing things that has been a very prominent part of the way the veterans community has organised amongst itself to make sure that it's able to share experiences and allow people to draw strength from one another. Now, my colleague Alun Davies nearly a year ago committed to a scoping exercise to identify any perceived gaps in service delivery for veterans and their families here in Wales. And the expert group that we have set up to carry out that scoping activity and other things will engage with service charities, including Woody's Lodge and Project 360°, to see if there is more that we can do to ensure a collaborative approach between what public services can provide for veterans, and those many ways in which veteran organisations mobilise themselves to help their own members.   

First Minister, can I welcome the work that the Welsh Government has put in with other partners to support our veteran community across Wales, and to embed the armed forces covenant in our public services? One of the issues that was recently discussed at the Cross-Party Group on the Armed Forces and Cadets was the difficulty sometimes that many veterans face in trying to access employment once they have left their time in the military. One of the things that was raised at our meeting as something that perhaps the Welsh Government could consider is that in the United States, there are guaranteed interviews with some public sector employers so that veterans have the opportunity to at least present themselves directly to an employer. Is this something that the First Minister might consider for the Welsh Government, and promote more widely within the public sector in the future? 

I thank Darren Millar for that idea. The Welsh Government has been working recently with key partners to develop an employment pathway, and we've been working with Business in the Community, because they've developed an employers' toolkit, and that toolkit is designed to help employers recognise the qualities that ex-service personnel can offer to them in the jobs that they have on offer. Now, the idea of a guaranteed interview, in which people can at least make sure that they make their pitch and get their voices heard, is one that we've used in other parts of the Welsh Government. We've used it, for example, for people with disabilities to make sure that they can get in front of employers and so on. So, I'm very happy to take that idea away and have it discussed within that work on employment pathways and the employers' toolkit that we are already doing. 

I thank the Member for the question. Health boards are responsible for providing bereavement care and support for their population. The Welsh Government funds third sector organisations directly to enhance services for people who are bereaved.

Diolch. Forty per cent of the 33,000 people who die in Wales each year die in the community, 55 per cent in hospital. Although bereavement support following a child's death in paediatric intensive care units is referred to in the current Welsh Government delivery plan for the critically ill, the plan does not make reference to the importance of bereavement care for families where an adult has died following critical care. A significant proportion of bereavement support is provided by our charitable hospices in Wales, with some 2,300 families supported in 2017-18, but it's understood that families whose loved one dies in the acute setting after receiving intensive and critical care are missing out on the bereavement care they need through lack of signposting or availability. It's certainly a concern that's been raised with me by the adult hospices in north Wales, which also tell me that the health board had not consulted them on their palliative care plan. So, how is the Welsh Government working with NHS Wales, ensuring that every family experiencing bereavement has access to appropriate bereavement support, regardless of the setting or circumstances of their loved one's death? 

Well, I thank Mark Isherwood for that supplementary question and thank him as well for the work that he does as chair of the cross-party group on funerals and bereavement care, which gives us access to some of the information that helps us in developing the services that we provide in this area. Now, he will know, I'm sure, that the Welsh Government has recently commissioned a piece of work funded through the end-of-life care board, and that is a scoping study into the breadth of bereavement care services in Wales. The board has asked Marie Curie and Cardiff University to lead on that study. It begins by mapping existing support and then identifying areas where further services are needed. We can undertake to make sure that the points the Member has raised today are fed into that study.  

First Minister, the loss of a loved one to suicide is a uniquely devastating bereavement in my view, and yet support services for those bereaved by suicide are practically non-existent in Wales. Organisations like the Jacob Abraham Foundation are doing sterling work supporting families with not a penny of public funding. There is also a pattern I am seeing in my work, on both my committees, of statutory services increasingly looking to third sector organisations to provide services across the board in health and social care, but without stumping up the funding for those organisations involved. I'm aware of the mapping exercise that you've referred to, but that is going to take time. Will the First Minister commit to discussing the particular needs of those bereaved by suicide with the health Minister, with a view to taking urgent action in this area, which is particularly important given that it is a fact that those bereaved by suicide are themselves at much higher risk of dying by suicide?  

Those are important points, Llywydd, that the Member makes. To be bereaved by suicide does bring with it a whole set of additional issues that families who are left behind have to grapple with and themselves are often a cause of mental health concerns for those families themselves. So, I entirely recognise the points that the Member makes. Of course, the health service does work with a wide range of third sector organisations, and in some fields—and this is certainly one of them—it is often the case that families would rather be in touch with an organisation outside the more formal constraints of public services. And through Cruse Bereavement Care and through the Samaritans, we do provide assistance to the third sector in relation to suicide prevention and bereavement counselling, and the Minister has committed funding of £0.5 million a year to continue to support national and regional approaches to tackling suicide and self-harm prevention. The study that I mentioned, and I know the Member was aware of it—we've already decided that there will be a particular focus within the study on services to support those who have had a sudden unexplained death or a death by suicide of someone in their family or close to them. And, of course, I'm very happy to continue to discuss these matters with my colleague Vaughan Gething as that work matures.

I thank the Member for that. Since a written statement on the review was issued in September, work has focused on reducing the number of national procurement programmes and developing pilot action to expand procurement activity at local and regional levels.

I thank you for that answer, First Minister. I know that, last week, Nick Ramsay raised the same question with the finance Minister in her questions, and many of the answers came back that reducing the number to be more regional but also community benefits would help. For example, there's a £100 million project in my constituency in which the community benefit was the employment of local people. Six people we employed in security roles—not sustainable, not an improvement to the economy. The way to improve the economy is to ensure that businesses locally have access to gaining those contracts in the first place. Mike Hedges has often raised the concept of smaller contracts, split down, easier—that's one way. But if you're going to review the National Procurement Service and it's going to be the leading type of approach to procurement, will you ensure that it's spread across the public sector to ensure that all public sector organisations follow your example of improving community benefit to ensure they're long term and sustainable, to ensure that those contracts are available to local businesses, where the real money comes in for the local economy in those businesses being maintained? And will you also look at frameworks, because many of our local businesses are being excluded because of the frameworks? So, it's a whole package that needs to be looked at, and will you therefore do that once you've done the review of the NPS?

I certainly agree with the Member that it's a package of measures that we have to put together to ensure that we get maximum public value from the spending of public money, and there are some very good examples of community benefits. The one the Member cited does not sound like one of those, but we've now had more than £2 billion-worth of projects in which community benefits have been secured—that's over 500 projects, that's 2,500 jobs and over 1,000 apprenticeships that have been secured through the community-benefit approach. And ensuring that we do more of that and we do better is part of the procurement review.

Quite certainly, our ambition is that contracts are let in ways that maximise the opportunity for indigenous suppliers, and we try to do that in the way that David Rees suggested, by linking together different aspects of our procurement activity. So he will, I know, be a strong supporter of the work that we have done to produce a procurement advice note in relation to steel procurement to make sure that, when public money is being spent in the twenty-first century schools programme, for example, where Welsh steel can be supplied or UK steel can be supplied, we maximise that in the way that procurement is carried out here in Wales. Indigenous contractors already secure 80 per cent of contracts valued in excess of £750,000 that are awarded here in Wales, and that figure has grown significantly in recent times. There's more to do. The circumstances that we face, if we are to leave the European Union, are part of that, and it's part of the way that that review is being conducted.

First Minister, I'm most probably one of the last people who calls for legislation in certain areas, but in this particular area the French Government have taken the lead with the French agricultural Bill that has recently been enacted about public procurement and the use of public procurement to drive localised economies. I'd implore your Government to look at the example they've set, because, very often, we are cited—and we'll hopefully be leaving the European Union, but very often we are told that by our membership to the European Union we can't use certain instruments to drive public procurement as an energiser of the local economy. Well, in France, they've managed to do that with the agricultural Bill with minimum levels of public procurement and also safeguarding localised produce. I do believe that those avenues will be open to your Government and the Minister will, I understand it, be putting forward an agricultural Bill and I think that would be a perfect vehicle to drive this agenda forward.

Well, Llywydd, of course, we're very happy to look at that example. It fits very much with the work that my colleague Lesley Griffiths is doing and in the foundational economy where Lee Waters made a statement to the Assembly very recently. Of course, the example does pinpoint the argument that the Member was making. We are told that we have to leave the European Union in order to gain these freedoms, and yet the example he points to is of a country in the European Union and intending to remain in the European Union and is still able—

You cite it.

—to obtain the benefits that the Member pointed to. So, where there are examples of how we can better use existing freedoms and stretch the rules so that they are to the benefit of local economies, I agree that we should do that. We don't need to leave the European Union in order to be able to achieve it.

I thank the Member for that. Amongst our priorities for the remainder of this Assembly term is the implementation of band B of the twenty-first century schools programme from April this year. It will invest record amounts in providing school and college buildings where all children can reach their potential.

First Minister, it was a pleasure to join you on Thursday at the official opening of the brand-new £7.2 million Cwmaman Primary School in my constituency, just the latest in a series of new school buildings where my constituency has benefited from investment to the tune of over £100 million—more than any other constituency in Wales, I believe. And, as a former teacher, I know only too well the importance of providing these flexible and aspirational educational settings and the impact that that can have on our pupils' attainment. One thing that struck me particularly about the Cwmaman site was the way that the outdoor space was being used in order to maximise pupils' use of the outdoors and the very many benefits that that can bring in terms of attainment, well-being and performance all round. So, how else is the Welsh Government working to promote opportunities for outdoor learning?

Well, I thank the Member for that. I congratulate her on her success in lobbying for twenty-first century schools expenditure in her constituency. It was a real pleasure to be with her on Thursday of last week at the most strikingly beautiful site that the Cwmaman Primary School now occupies, and to be shown by the headteacher and others the new opportunities that that brings for allowing children to learn in the open air. It's a really truly beautiful site and those opportunities are very real there. As the Member knows, we put great emphasis in the foundation phase particularly on outdoor learning, but that goes right through to the Welsh baccalaureate in its community challenge component, where, again, young people are encouraged to be out and about and learning in the world outside the school.

The new buildings that we are providing through band A of the twenty-first century schools programme and now through band B as well mean that right across Wales we have a more extensive building programme than any time in 50 years, and it is not simply the number of buildings that are being provided, it is the quality of those buildings, the fantastic quality of Cwmaman Primary School and the opportunities that it provides to allow children to thrive inside the school building and beyond it.

Our plans for improved rail services in Monmouthshire will see refurbished trains in service this year on both the Abergavenny and Chepstow lines, providing increased capacity and modern facilities. New trains and additional services will follow as the Wales and borders rail contract is rolled out.

Diolch, First Minister. Can you update us on your efforts to deal with some of the teething problems that have befallen the Transport for Wales franchise in its first few months? I did raise this issue in the business statement with the Trefnydd last week. One of my constituents, studying at Hereford Sixth Form College, has experienced many services being delayed or cancelled, and she's very worried about her exams coming up shortly, in a few weeks' time, and the effect that a cancellation of trains may have on her. She catches the train from Abergavenny station.

I know that the Minister for Economy and Transport has said that a lot of this is due to maintenance issues and a lack of maintenance of rolling stock in the closing days of the previous franchise. Whatever the reasons might be, what reassurance can you give my constituent and, indeed, other passengers of the Transport for Wales franchise in my neck of the woods in south-east Wales, that these issues are being looked at and will be dealt with at the earliest opportunity?

I thank the Member for that; I can give him that assurance. As he knows, in the early days of the franchise, the age of the fleet and the large amount of maintenance backlog did pose real challenges to Transport for Wales. Since that time, the pattern of services has improved, delays and cancellations are down.There is a £40 million investment in the current fleet to improve service performance, and that includes fitting the current fleet with wheel slide protection, which is one of the reasons why there were early difficulties.

We've also made it easier for passengers to claim compensation when any disruption is experienced, but our ambition, and that of Transport for Wales—an ambition that they are increasingly fulfilling—is to make sure that services are provided on time, without cancellations, and to the satisfaction of users.

Finally, question 8, Dawn Bowden.

Llywydd, those whose lives have been most affected by poverty have been made to bear a wholly unfair burden of the austerity policies pursued by the UK Government—policies now in their ninth year. The Welsh Government focuses on those practical measures that we can take that release money into the pockets of those affected by poverty in Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney, and across Wales.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister, and I'm sure you'll agree that it is shocking that in my constituency, as in other Valleys communities, organisations such as Merthyr Valleys Homes are supporting schemes like holiday hampers to help tackle hunger amongst children. I'll just repeat that: in 2019, they run schemes to tackle the problem of hunger amongst children in our communities.

You'll also be aware that the Bevan Foundation recently ran an event in Merthyr Tydfil, bringing together organisations involved with food insecurity, looking at the impact of welfare reforms and its impact on health and behaviour. And just this weekend at my advice surgery, I again issued a food bank voucher to a young mother in full-time employment because she had fallen into debt as her salary, her income, was not enough to cover her outgoings and to live on. Now, in light of this, and whilst I fully appreciate that the Welsh Government does not hold many of the key economic levers, can you assure me that the Government carries out poverty proofing, not just on policies but on all decisions, in order to help tackle the root causes of poverty and hunger in our communities?

Well, Llywydd, I thank the Member for that question. On Monday of this week, I met with the Trussell Trust in Wales; it was a sobering meeting. Of course, the trust carries out fantastic work with the volunteers who they have recruited in many communities in Wales. But they said to me the pattern of use of their food banks is moving from being a crisis service, where they deal with families who somehow manage most of the time, and then every now and then are in need of help, to a chronic service, where they see families who cannot manage week in and week out because of the ways in which their incomes have been depressed and where the burden of debt, particularly, erodes their ability to meet even the most minimum of day in, day out needs.

As the Member knows, we have increased the funding for our own school holiday enrichment programme. We've been providing £0.5 million a year; we're going to provide £900,000 a year for the holiday enrichment programme this year. One of the things we want to do is to be able to move that programme beyond the school setting, where it has been up until now, so that it can work with others like Merthyr Valleys Homes, like the Caia community in Wrexham, where I met volunteers alongside my colleague Lesley Griffiths, so that we can provide that help in more settings and more places. We're very glad to do it. We're very determined to do it. It's part of our poverty-proofing measure. But to think that in a country that is the sixth richest on the face of the globe we are having to provide services to prevent children from going hungry in school holidays, that can hardly be a matter of celebration for any of us.

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd to make the statement. Rebecca Evans.

Diolch. There are some changes to this week's business. The statement on tourism strategy has been withdrawn, and the statement on 'Apprenticeships: Investing in Skills for the Future', will be delivered by the Deputy Minister for Economy and Transport. Finally, as the last item of business today, the Business Committee has scheduled a motion to agree the reallocation of the Chair of the Petitions Committee to a different political group. Draft business for the next three weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Can I call for a statement from the Welsh Government to the Trefnydd in respect of sepsis management in the health service? Many of my constituents have been alarmed to read that over the past three years, or between 2016 and 2018, there's been a significant increase in north Wales in terms of the number of sepsis related deaths: up from 151 in 2016 to 238 in 2018. Now, I know that hospital staff are much better now in terms of identifying sepsis, and that's certainly one of the reasons why more cases have been identified, but the number of deaths is very concerning, and I think that we do need to understand precisely the action that's being taken by the Government in order to raise further awareness and to treat people quickly when sepsis is identified. I know that my colleague Angela Burns, if she were here, would be banging the drum about this issue, given her significant interest in having suffered sepsis herself in the past. One of the things that she has called for, of course, is mandatory sepsis awareness training amongst front-line NHS staff, and I think that that would go a long way to reassuring some of my constituents that a greater effort was being made by the NHS in order to capture this very life-threatening condition.

Thank you very much for raising this issue and also for recognising the work that your colleague Angela Burns has been doing on the issue of sepsis for some time now, because clearly we're all concerned about sepsis. The international community, however, has recognised the considerable efforts being made in Wales to improve prevention, diagnosis and early treatment. I know that there's lots of work going on through our 1000 Lives programme in particular. The health Minister informs me that rolling out sepsis training is a priority for Welsh Government. It's my understanding that some of the figures that might suggest that there has been an increase in rates of sepsis in recent times are actually a result of coding changes in 2017 in the health board area, but I can certainly provide the Member with more information on that.

Trefnydd, in a Brexit statement on 22 January, the Minister for local government stated that the Welsh Government were,

'continuing to work with local authorities to identify and plan for impacts across all services' 

of a 'no deal' Brexit. We were told that the Welsh Government is funding the Welsh Local Government Association to support councils to prepare for Brexit. My understanding is that some local authorities are obviously at different stages in terms of their planning for Brexit, with some local authorities in Wales having undertaken next to no planning.

Given where we are today, with the continuing uncertainty as a result of the Prime Minister's latest attempt to get a deal across the line, I would call on the local government Minister to provide a further, more detailed statement on the progress—or not—of Brexit planning throughout local authorities in Wales. Questions around the impact on the workforce, finance and local economies remain, and I'm sure that the Minister for local government would want to provide clarity in terms of how far developed Welsh local authorities are in terms of their planning, so I'd be grateful for a statement.

Because, such is the concern about Brexit amongst ordinary members of the public, Trefnydd, for example, that they are taking some extreme actions. Ed Sides, from Killay in Swansea, set off from Swansea last Wednesday and is walking all the way to London, talking to people along the way of the concerns that many of us share around Brexit. He is fed up of the way that Brexit has been handled and of the disastrous impact that it will have on Wales, and I'm sure that you would join me in wishing him well on his journey.

Certainly I have huge sympathy for his view that he is absolutely fed up with the way that Brexit has been handled. I think that a large proportion of us in the Chamber would certainly share that concern, and the Prime Minister's recent announcement, in terms of the discussions that she's been having with our European neighbours recently, do nothing to move us forward. Absolutely nothing has really changed in terms of what she was able to bring back from her visit last night. 

In terms of support for local authorities, I believe that there'll be a further announcement tomorrow on our support for local authorities through the European Union transition fund, and, of course, we have a further statement on Brexit from the Brexit Minister next week, and I'll be sure to ask him to address the issues of support for local authorities and civil contingencies more widely. 

Trefnydd, can I ask for four statements? I don't often get up, so I'm going for four this time. [Laughter.] The first one is obviously on the Banksy work in Port Talbot. Clearly, we're still not clear where we are moving forward with the protection of that work and the location of where that work will be placed for the public to access. I've spoken to the local authority and, clearly, there are proposals being put forward, but there's the very strong question of long-term sustainability of those locations, and they're looking for Welsh Government support in that case, because it's easy to spend some money doing the gallery up, but you've got to make it sustainable for the long term, and you have to make sure that it's continuing after the time on which we've been guaranteed the Banksy to be there. So, it would be very helpful if the Welsh Government could actually give us a statement as to what their view of the contemporary art gallery is, and whether that could be used as one of those hubs being discussed. 

The second statement is on the ownership of the Rhondda tunnel in particular, because we know that this has been a continuing issue between the tunnel society and the Welsh Government as to who owns it. We know Highways England owns it at the moment, but some of the funding that they require to actually undertake further work will be dependent upon that ownership. So, can we have a statement on Welsh Government actions to date on the ownership of the tunnel, and when we might see some transfer from Highways England to the Welsh Government, or bodies linked into the Welsh Government?

The third one is—and the Member may know as she passes my constituency daily—there's a very large ship at the moment in Port Talbot docks—the Sertão. It's been placed there by the Admiralty Court because it has been seized because of  bankruptcy in terms of its ownership. If you know that ship, you will see that it's towering above the cranes in the docks and it's taken a berth. And from what I understand, it's there indefinitely at this point in time. Can we have a statement as to what discussions the Welsh Government is having with the Admiralty Court to seal the future of this ship because it does take up a berth? We might not use the berth—the unloading berth is on the other side—but when we have two ships there sometimes, they do berth on that side, and therefore it's taken a berth. So, what is the long-term situation regarding that ship in the Port Talbot docks?

And, finally, is a statement from the health Minister in relation to community mental health teams. This afternoon, I chaired the mental health cross-party group in the Assembly, and there was a report from both Care Inspectorate Wales and Healthcare Inspectorate Wales regarding community mental health teams, which I know they have published, and I understand the Welsh Government is responding to by, I think, the end of next week. But at that point, it would be very helpful and important for us in this Chamber to have a statement from the Minister for health regarding that report, and the actions that Welsh Government in relation to that. 

Thank you very much for raising those issues. Certainly, with regard to the long-term plan to ensure that the ship in Port Talbot docks issue is appropriately dealt with, I'll ask the economy Minister to provide you with an update on that. On Banksy, of course the Minister with responsibility for arts has heard what you've had to say, particularly with regard to the potential contemporary art gallery, and I know that he will give that full consideration. On the Rhondda tunnel, again, I will seek further information from the appropriate Minister as to the ownership there.FootnoteLink And the health Minister has confirmed that he will certainly provide an update to Members when we respond to the report by the end of next week. 

May I ask for a statement from the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs on the closure of mountain biking trails around Cwmcarn forest? I've received a number of complaints from mountain bikers who use the Cwmcarn forest trails and are growing increasingly frustrated at the disruption caused by the tree felling in the area. Work to cut down diseased trees has resulted in logging debris being left blocking trails in the forest. A petition by Steve Harris to get these trails reopened has already attracted well over 800 signatures. Please, can we have a statement from the Minister on what action she will take to intervene to ensure that Natural Resources Wales and the contractors get these trails open, so that mountain bikers are able to continue to enjoy this wonderful asset and the beautiful landscape of Wales?

Thank you very much for raising that issue. And I completely understand and sympathise with the frustrations of the mountain bikers, as you've described. We're currently contributing to the Tree Council's ash dieback action plan, which outlines four key ways for local authorities to help manage that particular disease. And that plan is due to be launched in Wales on 28 March, at the National Botanic Garden of Wales.

I'd like to request a debate in Government time on staff shortages within the NHS. In the news today is the report about maternity services at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital, and these services have now been centralised. A large number of angry and worried people from Maerdy in the Rhondda have also been in touch with me over the weekend about problems with their local surgery. At one minute to five last Friday, I received an e-mail from the senior manager at Cwm Taf health board that said: 

'The health board has made an urgent and unplanned decision to temporarily close Maerdy surgery for a period of four weeks, from Monday 11 March, for health and safety to investigate an exterior pest control issue in the grounds or near the surgery. During this time the surgery cannot provide any appointments or repeat prescriptions'.

All of this is driven, in my view, by staff shortages. Maerdy surgery has already cut its hours to 20 per week, putting an incredible amount of pressure on nearby Ferndale surgery. And I have received complaints since yesterday, from Maerdy people, describing the difficulties that they've had getting through to Ferndale surgery, by phone, to book an appointment.

Now, people in Maerdy fear that this is the thin end of the wedge, and that their local surgery is going to be run down, and eventually closed down. Does it really take a month to sort out a rat infestation, and why weren't other premises considered? There are plenty of other empty and underused buildings in the community—austerity has made sure of that. The people of Maerdy are seeking guarantees that your NHS staffing crisis won't result in threatening the future viability of their surgery. This is a community at the top of the Rhondda Fach, which is already isolated as a result of poor transport and roads, and people are sick and tired of having services taken from them. We'll be gathering at the surgery this Saturday morning, at 10 a.m., and I hope people there will turn out to show the strength of feeling on this. But a debate about wider staffing questions, with an opportunity for the Minister to give assurances and guarantees to this community, would be more than welcome.

I would also like to congratulate and welcome the announcement made on International Women's Day by the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales, Sophie Howe, that she is providing for time off for staff experiencing domestic abuse. This follows on from groundbreaking policy developments in New Zealand, where Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern got such a policy through Parliament in July of last year. This is already party policy for Labour at a UK level. When the policy was announced by Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities, Dawn Butler, she said:

'On average two women a week are murdered by their current or former abusive partner. These 10 days could literally help save the lives of those women.'

Having worked closely with Welsh Women's Aid, I know that Dawn Butler is not exaggerating here.

Given that this Senedd is the only national institution in the UK that is run by Labour, and Labour here is in a position to actually do something about this and show leadership that will mean that, hopefully, others will follow, when can we expect an announcement from Welsh Ministers for all Welsh public sector workers to be given the right to time off to deal with domestic abuse? Otherwise, how can you hope to be what has been called a feminist Government, striving to make Wales the safest place for women?

Thank you very much for raising both of those issues. And, of course, I hope that you will take the opportunity at the rally on Saturday to confirm that there are no plans to run down and close down Maerdy surgery, because I do think that linking an infestation and staffing shortages is a bit of a stretch, to say the very least.

I will have a discussion with the relevant Minister regarding the issue of Welsh public sector workers, and how we support those people who are experiencing domestic abuse, and best supporting them to get out of those abusive relationships. And I'll ask the Minister to respond to you on that.

Last week's important Barbican report around the poor state of music access across the UK describes fully the evidence on growing elitism in young people's access both to music as a curriculum subject and as a career pathway, in particular for working class children, and it highlights a chronic lack of opportunity in accessing music provision and tuition for the poorest in society. The Professor Carr of South Wales University report 'Land of Song', which was launched at the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama, and the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee inquiry 'Hitting the Right Note', and various debates and statements of opinion to this place also, have scoped the very real issues facing Wales as a nation, and describe fully a growing lack of ability in Wales in accessing music, tuition, music support services and the opportunity pathways it provides. So, as a country solidly rooted in our musical history, heritage and legacy, and enjoying an international reputation exporting our music success, and international artists both popular and classical, the loss of systemic foundational teaching services is a loss to us all, and a loss of social diversity in our elite musical ensembles is also very worrying at many levels.

So, further to the various Welsh Government initiatives, I wish to ask for a full statement to this place that outlines to me and the likes of Owain Arwel Hughes CBE, the BBC National Orchestra of Wales, the Welsh National Opera, the Musicians' Union, the association of music services of Wales, CAGAC, the Wales conservatoire, the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama, the Incorporated Society of Musicians and others a full evaluation. Can I ask for the status and health of our current, non-statutory music education performance provision across Wales, after now nearly a decade of austerity and the inevitable shrinkage of Welsh local government non-statutory services; an analysis of what mitigations are in place and are being strategically planned to counter and stop the loss of non-statutory music education provision across Wales; the status of the development of a national music educational performance strategy or plan; an analysis of the efficacy of legislating for statutory music support services; and, finally, the state of development of a Welsh Government-supported funding mechanism for local government to provide and/or commission a music teaching support service for Wales as part of a holistic national strategy for Wales? Thank you.

Thank you very much for raising this issue. We certainly recognise the current pressures facing music services and the need to take action, and positive action, as soon as possible. This is one of the reasons why an additional £3 million of funding has been provided over 2018-19 and 2019-20 for music provision across Wales. Since the Minister for Education's response to 'Hitting the Right Note', I can confirm that officials have been working on taking those accepted recommendations forward and an element of that work is to carry out a feasibility study to explore suitable options for the future delivery of music services in Wales. I understand that officials have undertaken a consultation with stakeholders and with key partners to seek their views on various aspects of that study, and following consideration of all information received, and the options available, the Minister has approved the procurement of the feasibility study. The invitation to commission a contractor to undertake that study has been published on Sell2Wales and is currently open to tenders.

Organiser, could I draw your attention to the tweet that was put out by Trade and Invest Wales? I appreciate it was touched on by the First Minister in questions that were put to him by various Members here this afternoon, and reading the website, it does say it is the official Welsh Government foreign direct investment marketing initiative for Wales portal, an arm of the Wels Government, so actually saying that non-Welsh Government did this, or it was done without Welsh Government Minister sanction, is really not good enough, to be honest with you. When you build that tweet last night on the evidence that the external affairs committee brought to this Chamber with their report that said our offer had been patchy and incoherent when it came to inward investment, and then you also see the Welsh Government response to that report that does identify weaknesses in the offer that is out there to try and bring inward investment, I think it would be timely to have a statement from the Minister to this Chamber—an oral statement, so that she can be questioned on it. That might be beneficial for Members to understand how such tweets, shall we say, slip through the system, which promote the benefit of having wages that are 30 per cent lower than any other part of the United Kingdom. I would say that's a failure of economic policy, not something to be celebrated. And so I call on the Government to bring a statement forward so that we might be able to question the Minister on her potential new strategy and how she might seek to implement that with all due haste.

Thank you very much for raising that, and I think that the First Minister was more than clear during First Minister's question time that that tweet in no way represented Welsh Government's approach to trade because, obviously, we are a Government that supports business, we're welcoming of business, Wales is a fantastic place to do business. We work very closely with academia to ensure that businesses have that pipeline of skills that they require, and, of course, Wales is a wonderful place in which to live as well as work. So, we have a very strong marketing strategy, I think, in terms of selling our message to the world, but the Minister has indicated that she would be happy to bring forward a statement on our approach to trade.

We've heard in the news recently that there are strong suggestions that, during the miner's strike, the police, via the special demonstration squad—the same SDS that infiltrated the lives of many women here in Wales in campaign groups—in fact infiltrated the National Union of Mineworkers during the miner's strike and thus were breaking the law. And I'm sure that Members on your own benches will be equally as concerned about these covert operations and will want to know more about it. Every time we scratch the surface of this spy cops scandal, we expose another layer, and I've said in this Chamber many times how we do not know the extent to which this has affected Welsh life, be it in the groups that were infiltrated, how they were infiltrated, or the implications on our society now. So, I would call for and urge a debate in Government time on this, because people in our society need to be aware that, if they were involved in demonstrations, they were not infiltrated and not subjected to this type of operation, although we cannot be sure until we have more answers from the public inquiry, and therefore a debate coming up with a collective response from this Assembly would be welcomed. 

My second request is for a debate on asylum seekers. I would like for you, as a Government, to join me in condemning the deliberate policy of the UK Government in forcing refugees who come here for a better life into poverty. Once again, I've been made aware of a very difficult issue in my area, in Swansea, whereby a Somali woman, who is 24 weeks pregnant, has been made destitute. She can't claim for section 4 or make a fresh claim until she is 34 weeks pregnant. So, she's now living with somebody in Swansea, she has no money, she has no housing, and she's not able to work. It is absolutely appalling that a pregnant woman is being treated in this way. Can I urge you to look into this particular case as a Government, but also initiate another fresh debate on this particular issue? There is a mass campaign calling for asylum seekers to be able to work while they're here, so that we can ensure that Wales is making a statement of support, in principle, morally, for them, even if the UK Government is not.

Thank you for raising that, and we share completely your concerns about the way in which asylum seekers and refugees are treated when they do come to the UK seeking asylum. For our part, we've tried to open up the discretionary assistance fund, for example, to ensure that asylum seekers and refugees who are facing real destitution are able to access support through that. However, we have deep concerns, as I know you do, about the UK Government's approach to the provision of housing, for example. The standards the UK Government requires for housing are much, much lower than those which we would like to see and those which we would be satisfied to provide for people who live in Wales. So, we would expect no worse standards for people who are asylum seekers and refugee. So, it's a huge concern to us.

We did, very recently, have a debate on Wales as a nation of sanctuary in the Chamber, but I know that the Minister will be keen to address any questions that people might have. If you want to send me further information about that specific case, I would be happy to explore what representations we might be able to make there. 

With regard to the issue of the spy cops matter and the wider implications of that, we do liaise, as you'd imagine, with the UK Government over policing matters, although we have no power to investigate complaints. It is important that the inquiry that is going on does identify past failings and makes some robust recommendations to ensure that unacceptable practices are not repeated. We've welcomed the inquiry, and we're pleased that it is independent of the Home Office, although I understand that it won't be due to report until 2023. We are pleased that the Home Office established an independent public inquiry to look at all of the operations that you have described. We'd certainly want to build on the positive relationship that we do have here with the police in Wales. We do meet very regularly with the chief constables, the police and crime commissioners, and the director for Wales from the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

I’d like to request three statements if possible. First of all, I’d like a statement from the Government to update us on the discussions with the Rehau company as a result of their decision recently to consult on the closure of their plant in Amlwch. I and other local representatives have met with the company more than once to try and ensure that everything possible is done to avoid the closure, and it’s encouraging to hear that many options are being considered. But I’d also like an assurance that all possible support is being provided to the workforce there in their negotiations with the company. The workforce is a strong one and they deserve all possible support. The plant is a good one, too, and it deserves every opportunity to have a future.

Secondly, I’d like a statement on how the Welsh Government can work with us on Anglesey to try and push to ensure that investment in the rail line across the island is included in the Network Rail investment programme in the next control period. There are two specific reasons why this is particularly important now. A rail bridge in Llangefni was recently lost because of a collision with a lorry. We need a bridge back there and Network Rail needs to make that investment. And because of economic blows to the north of the island, that rail line is an opportunity to make important economic links.

Thirdly, I’d like a statement from the Minister with responsibility for the Welsh language on her expectations in terms of what banks should offer customers in Wales in terms of online banking. I know, in my own constituency, as in the constituencies of so many Members here, that branches are being closed. I’m opposed to those closures and I make that point clearly and strongly. But as the banks encourage us to move towards online banking, what that means is that, unless that online banking is available in Welsh, then customers who have been dealing with their banks in the branch through the medium of Welsh lose that link and ability through the medium of Welsh. Now, I’ve discussed this with a number of banks and I do think that we should see significant pressure from Government, through the language commissioner possibly, to ensure that we do move towards bilingual online services. I remember, as a campaigner for Cymdeithas yr Iaith many years ago, discussing with one bank the provision of cashpoints through the medium of Welsh and they said it was technically impossible. But now, 25 years later, all our cashpoints are bilingual, and we need to move very soon towards having online banking services in Welsh too, and I’d like a statement on that.

Thank you very much. I'll certainly ask the economy Minister to write to you with the very latest in terms of the support that Welsh Government is able to offer Rehau, particularly how we would seek to support the workforce and ensure that there is a viable future for that plant. I'll also ask him to include in that correspondence more information about the plans for investment in the rail line on Anglesey, reflecting on the particular issues that you've described.

I know that the Minister with responsibility for the Welsh language will take forward your concerns regarding the importance of the provision of bilingual services online for banking customers. 

Trefnydd, it was a pleasure to celebrate Commonwealth Day with other Assembly Members and indeed the Llywydd herself, who I believe sponsored the event, upstairs in the Oriel at lunch time. There were a number of organisations present—from Future Leaders Connect, Young Women Empowered movement, Sub-Sahara Advisory Panel—loads of organisations and it was a pleasure to go around and chat to them. One organisation that wasn't present that I've had a lot to do with, and I know the Minister for international relations has as well, was Love Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe, of course, is a former member of the Commonwealth and sadly not present in the organisation at this time. However, as well as telling us what—. Can I ask for a statement, I should say, from the Minister for international relations on what is being done to increase relations between Wales and other Commonwealth countries? I know you have met one of my constituents, Martha Holman, not so long ago in the Assembly, from Zimbabwe. She has recently been granted her British citizenship and only heard about that last week and is over the moon about now having that dual passport. So, perhaps the Welsh Government could consider sending her congratulations at this very exciting time in her life so that we know we're doing things for individuals as well as on the more national and international basis. 

Thank you very much. I certainly would pass on those congratulations to your constituent and agree with you that the Commonwealth Day celebration was an absolutely lovely celebration of our relationships with our Commonwealth family. I enjoyed some fantastic music, and I think it's only right that we should be celebrating the day in that way. 

Thank you, Trefnydd.

The next item is a statement by the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs on Welsh Government support for forestry in Wales. I call on the Minister to make the statement—Lesley Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Our natural resources policy sets out our plans to address the challenges our environment faces and I would like to update Members on the work we are doing within this to support forestry in Wales. 

Our forests are an important part of our natural landscape. They are a social, economic and environmental asset. We need large and small-scale diverse woodlands that include conifer and broadleaved tree species that can provide a wide range of services, such as recreation, natural habitats and a sustainable fuel and timber resource. Expanding woodland cover is a crucial element of helping us to meet our statutory emission reduction targets. It is therefore essential we increase our store of carbon through our woodland-creation activities.

We have used rural development programme funding for a range of schemes that facilitate delivery of our forestry strategy objectives, and our sustainable management scheme is one of them. The scheme provides support for a range of proposals that will improve the management of our natural resources and will contribute to the well-being of our rural communities. Six forestry-related projects have been approved for funding through the scheme, which will contribute to the delivery of many of the objectives in our strategy and policy priorities in the natural resources policy.

Following a recommendation by the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee’s inquiry into forestry, we refreshed our woodland strategy. The fundamentals of it remain the same but it is no longer just a policy document. It is a practical document that provides direction for those who sustainably manage woodlands to maximise their benefits. 

The Welsh Government is committed to accelerating woodland creation, and our refreshed strategy gives guidance on the kinds of trees and woodlands we need in Wales and clear direction to woodland managers. To complement this, we are currently preparing woodland creation guidelines for land managers, businesses and NRW as the regulator in order to help them make better and quicker decisions on which trees to plant where.

In order to progress the Welsh Government’s plans to increase the area of new woodlands in Wales, as well as the First Minister’s commitment to create a new national forest for Wales, a further round of Glastir woodland creation will open on 1 April. There is also funding available for planting trees in areas that continue to be grazed as part of an agriforestry system.

We have already committed £480,000 towards our co-operative forest planning scheme specifically for people and co-operatives to work together and plan woodland creation at a significant and strategic scale. The Welsh Government recognises that, by supporting joined-up, collaborative action at the right scale, we can maximise opportunities to improve the services our natural resources provide.

Of course, it is not just the planting of new trees that is important, but also managing, preserving and developing existing woodlands. Ancient and veteran trees are irreplaceable natural resources, some of which have significant landscape, biodiversity and cultural value. I am therefore delighted our new 'Planning Policy Wales' edition 10 guidance strengthens their protection, as well as advocating compensatory planting for any woodland losses incurred as a consequence of development.

It is important to recognise that there can be some real challenges for landowners in managing existing forestry especially if, in a changing climate, there is a rise in tree diseases that could have a devastating impact on their woodlands. For this reason, I want to ensure we support private landowners and managers who are currently faced with the disease of Larch phytophthora ramorum. Therefore, we will open a new window for Glastir woodland restoration applications from 1 April. Members will be aware the disease has been an unprecedented challenge on the public estate, but Natural Resources Wales has responded well. Where trees have had to be felled, we are replanting with more resilient species in order to develop healthier and more varied woodlands. These will provide a greater variety of trees to produce high-quality Welsh wood and forests, as well as reducing their vulnerability to disease in the future. 

Forestry is not just good for our environment and our well-being, it is also good for our economy. Well-managed woodlands can provide a continuous, sustainable supply of timber, which is why we want to encourage better management of our existing woodlands across Wales. We've already committed £5 million of rural development plan funding towards our very popular timber business investment scheme, and we've committed a further £2 million towards a fourth round of funding, which we opened for expressions of interest on 1 February. The scheme provides capital funding for improvements that add value to forests for woodland management activities, timber harvesting and timber processing.

The high-quality timber we produce will be put to many uses. I am delighted, therefore, that 20 out of 24 developments accepted into the Welsh Government's innovative housing programme last year have a timber element. We expect to see more timber-based innovation in the programme this year, not just in building the social and affordable homes of the future, but championing innovation relating to Welsh timber in the supply chains that support house building here in Wales.

Increasing the use of timber will drive up demand and encourage new woodland creation and better forest management in Wales. Looking ahead with this increase in mind, we've been working with stakeholders from the forestry sector to examine the skills and recruitment needs required to support an increase in demand for timber, and we've introduced a two-year pilot scheme for up to 30 forestry apprenticeships.

I recently met with representatives of the Confederation of Forest Industries. They told me they are willing to work with NRW and Welsh Government, and are confident there are clear solutions to the concerns they've expressed in the past. As a result, we will be in a stronger position to see the forestry sector deliver even more value to the Welsh economy, and the industry can make a greater contribution to protecting and enhancing our natural environment.

Clearly, Minister, you're the Minister on point today, with two statements coming before the Plenary, so we'll be seeing a lot of each other as the afternoon progresses. Sadly, the forestry sector hasn't got a brilliant track record here in Wales. It should have a brilliant track record, because it is a huge industry—it employs 10,000 workers and has a turnover of £520 million. That, by any measure, is a substantial industry, especially in a rural economy that is crying out for new opportunities. But, regrettably, because of failed initiatives from successive Welsh Governments, we haven't seen the initiatives come forward to reinvigorate the sector. I think maybe the last paragraph of this statement indicates that by the recent meeting that you had with the industry, which says that they are 'willing to work with', which is something to be commended, but doesn't offer any comment on past performance, on which the silence most probably tells its own story.

The Welsh Government have had various initiatives over previous years, i.e. establishing 100,000 hectares between 2010 and 2030. As we know from the work that has been undertaken, instead of hitting the 5,000 hectares per year target, in the total run only 3,700 hectares have been planted in that time. In 2016, only 39 hectares of productive forest were planted here in Wales. Really, we've just got to get this right, and in particular you, as the Minister, now need to take the business by the scruff of the neck and work with the industry so that we can build on those numbers that I touched on—on the 10,000 workers and the £520 million turnover. Because it is an industry with a future—this isn't an industry that is looking to be managed into decline. There are many good examples in Scotland, for example, and in England, where the forestry sector has moved onto a more sustainable footing. Regrettably, we can point to, obviously, the reports into Natural Resources Wales's handling and the assimilation of the Forestry Commission's assets into NRW and the contracts that were brought forward from various commercial deals that have deprived the sector of income, because, as the auditor general has highlighted, and, as the Public Accounts Committee in its investigation has highlighted, that has arisen through bad practice and a loss of income into the sector.

I do appreciate the difficulties around larch and the dieback, and the unforeseen circumstances where, say five or 10 years ago, when structural plans were being put in place, these types of instances wouldn't have occurred to planners at that particular time. But that's not to say that there haven't been missed opportunities. I would call on the Minister to look at—if she could answer this question directly—making greater flexibility into the applications that could be allowed for woodland planting. In England, for example, instead of having windows of bidding and applications, it's a continuous process, because, obviously, via the planning route, companies, obviously, and farmers, in particular, who might be looking to convert their land, can't be constrained by some administrative window. They need as a great a flexibility in the scheme rules as possible, and I'd be grateful to understand will the Minister be considering that flexibility within the new scheme that she announced, obviously, that she's making available as of 1 April.

Equally, the lack of planting on behalf of NRW—as I understand it, the deficit now is some 6,000 hectares of replanting on the NRW estate, and whilst in the statement the Minister does point out her confidence around NRW and their ability to put a more mixed estate and mixed planting opportunities in place so that the commercial realisation in 10, 15, 20 years' time can be achieved, it is a fact that replanting rates aren't where they should be. If NRW was a private company, action would have been taken against them for not replanting those areas. So, again, I would like to understand from the Minister, with her deliberations over the last couple of months, has she confidence that this deficit will be addressed and that 6,000 hectares to date will be reversed and, actually, replanting will gather pace?

Also, there is the issue about managing our woodlands as well, and, under the current Glastir model, there isn't an opportunity to get money for management, as I understand it, in the scheme. At the moment, of the 300,000 hectares of Welsh forests, 60,000 hectares are unmanaged. There is an opportunity to look at managing to a far greater degree the forests that we have and the woodlands that we have so we can maximise their potential. And, again, I would be grateful if the Minister could indicate whether she or her officials have given any consideration to supporting bringing that 60,000 hectares of unmanaged forestry into some sort of scheme that could best utilise that area that is available within the forestry estate.

It is obviously very heartening to hear of apprenticeships being created. That is a vital route into the industry, and whilst I identified recently the lack of agricultural apprenticeships—less than 1 per cent of all apprenticeships, regrettably, are in agriculture—I would suggest the numbers are even poorer in the forestry sector. In her discussions with the industry, has she identified ways of bringing in new apprenticeship opportunities? Again, I identify that within the statement, but 30 apprenticeship opportunities over two years in an industry that's worth in excess of £0.5 billion—it's a welcome start, but it isn't going to change the world, it's not. When we look at the opportunities, especially in construction, for using timber products, there is a great opportunity here to open up new avenues for young entrants into the industry. Thank you, Minister.

I thank Andrew R.T. Davies for that series of questions and observations. You are right—it is a huge industry, and I think it's one that we need to value and care for. I mentioned about my meeting with Confor and NRW specifically because the difficulties are very well rehearsed. We had a long debate on the Grant Thornton report and, clearly, things have been said publicly that I wanted to ensure would not be a barrier for what we were planning to do around the forestry industry. And I'm very pleased that Confor and NRW, who I met separately, have now had the opportunity to meet together and are going to work together to make sure that we do now start to see far more trees planted. I'm absolutely in agreement around the target that we set. We have not seen the delivery of the number of trees we would want to, and, whilst I appreciate this is a long-term aspiration, I think we need to take a range of measures to make sure that we do make some progress in the short term, and that's what we'll be doing with our strategy.

You are right—we have had various initiatives and we've certainly got many schemes, and you referred to the schemes and the way that they are funded. I'm very happy to look at if there's an opportunity to deliver those schemes in a different way. I certainly think, post Brexit, agriculture—so, 'Brexit and our land', for instance; you'll be aware that we are bringing forward payments in relation to public goods. Those are areas where there isn't a market at the moment, so we can certainly look at how that's funded, for instance, in the way that you referred to.  

Around targets, Government can't do this on their own; there's a great deal of forestry that is privately owned. I think we all have to work together on it. When I was out in New Zealand last year, looking at primarily agriculture schemes, I did have a very long conversation with the Minister there who's responsible for forestry, and their target is, I think, incredibly ambitious, but, when you dug down again, it wasn't just Government doing that on its own—it was working with land managers, farmers. Lots of forestry in New Zealand is owned privately and, when I found out about 5 per cent of land in Wales is also owned privately, I think it is about all coming together to make sure we make the very best of it. I agree with what you say about apprenticeships. I'm very pleased to see that we have 30 over two years, but, again, in my discussions with Confor, I think they too accept that we need to be looking at increasing that number significantly.  

NRW do have significant land bank for trees—where they've had to fell trees due to disease you referred to, but for other reasons. I met with the chair and chief executive just a couple of weeks ago and they are certainly committed to reforesting that land—I think by 2022 was the year they were hopeful for. I'm certainly looking to see if I can give some additional funding to NRW to support that because I do think that is absolutely the way forward and it will help us reach our targets.

Of course, there’s no doubt that the lack of tree planting, the Government’s failures and NRW’s failings in more recent years have undermined and reduced the capacity of Wales to tackle climate change, to manage flood risk and to give a boost to habitats and biodiversity and all the benefits that come from successful forestry policy. Clearly, we’re not delivering what we would all wish to see delivered at the moment. So, it is about time for the Government to grasp the nettle in this area and to look anew at ensuring that what is a Government ambition is fit for purpose, and, more importantly, that that is deliverable in a meaningful and realistic manner.

Now, if I’ve understood it correctly, NRW manages 80 per cent of woodland in Wales directly and regulates the other 20 per cent. You state that you want to create guidelines for land managers, businesses and NRW to make better decisions and to make swifter decisions. That’s to be welcomed, but are you confident that NRW has the necessary resources to deliver that effectively? Because, clearly, I’ve raised on a number of occasions the concern that there are more and more requirements placed upon them and that the increase in their budget doesn’t reflect that; indeed, to the contrary, in real terms, the budget is shrinking. I’m still concerned that there isn’t sufficient experience on the NRW board to give the necessary guidance and leadership in this sector.

Also, there’s demand—. I would be interested to hear whether you, in the context of setting targets or trying to reach the targets that we want to reach over the next few years, would be willing to commit to creating a strategic environmental assessment to run alongside those targets in order to support the strengthening of biodiversity in those forestry areas. Because there are major opportunities, not only in terms of woodland management, but also in terms of creating new woodland—that they could be created in a way where you have an appropriate mix of species in order to create habitats and strengthen biodiversity.

You’ve mentioned the creation of new rounds of Glastir woodland and the restoration of Glastir woodland. Now, of course, Glastir schemes have been criticised in the past for being too prescriptive and too complex. Do you therefore intend to make any changes, or are you going to continue with the plans as they have existed?

Also, of course, RDP funds pay for much of this. We all know—or don’t know, perhaps—what will happen in that context. So, I don’t know if you have considered what post-Brexit funding source you will use, or are you simply relying on this pledge that we will be no worse-off financially? Because this is a more long-term sector than most and therefore having continuity and long-term commitments in terms of funding is crucially important. I would call on you to incorporate targets that take us to 2050 or even to 2100, because that's the long-term measure of the work that's happening in this sector and that's what we need in order to give the confidence to the sector for it to develop here in Wales. Now, we’ve heard reference to the failings of NRW in this area over the past few years, and I would encourage you to do everything you can to rebuild that relationship between the sector and the Government and NRW.

One of the things that I've called for is an independent review to establish whether it is still appropriate for NRW to continue to manage the commercial forestry estate in Wales. I would echo that demand today, and if there were a conclusion that that isn't appropriate then I would certainly wish to see that inquiry considering potential alternative models. Now, the public forestry estate in Wales should be managed in a way that is an exemplar in terms of sustainable forestry, showing how biodiversity, climate change, social factors and economic factors can all come together and also how some of those tensions can be managed appropriately, but, to date, NRW has failed in that regard. Do you therefore recognise that there's a long way to go before we reach where we want to be?

Diolch, Llyr Huws Gruffydd, for those questions. In relation to NRW, as I said in my response to Andrew R.T. Davies, obviously, we've had a very long debate in the Chamber about it, and you'll be aware that I disagreed with you that an independent review was necessary, and I still hold that viewpoint. Obviously, Grant Thornton went in, they did a report, NRW have accepted the recommendations that Grant Thornton made in relation to their part of the work. We had one as a Government, and I've fully accepted that recommendation. I have full confidence in the new chair, chief executive and board—you'll be aware we replaced half the board members—to take this forward, but I do think you are absolutely right in saying that the relationship has to be rebuilt. And that's why I was so keen to get Confor in and NRW in and then making sure that they meet together. My officials have been monitoring it, my officials have been meeting with Confor separately to ensure that that relationship can be rebuilt, and, as I said in the opening statement, Confor have said they're very pleased to take that work forward. However, I will be keeping—I meet every month with the interim chair and chief executive, and I will be keeping a very close eye on it, because I think you're absolutely right: we should be an exemplar in this area, so it's very important that relationship is a fruitful one.

Again, you mentioned in that debate, I think, that you were concerned about the lack of forestry experience on the board. As I mentioned, we replaced six members back in November. One of the members on the board, I think, has the skills around the governance and the business aspect of forestry, so I do think we do have the right mix of people on the board, but, again, it's something that I'm also very keen to keep a very close eye on.

You mentioned the mix of trees, and this is something—when I came into portfolio initially, I was told by a variety of people that we were planting the wrong trees in the wrong places, and by other people that we were planting the right trees in the right places. So, I remember getting everybody in a room together to say, 'Right, I need to know what trees we need to plant in which place to make sure that we always plant the right tree in the right place.' And I think that, when we bring our strategy forward, and it's obviously very linked into our post-Brexit agricultural policy, it's really important that we ensure we get that mix right.

Because it's such a long-term sector, I think a 2050 target would be good, and I mentioned in my answer to Andrew R.T. Davies, that I talked to the New Zealand Minister about this, and their target was for the same—I think it was 50 years down the line, and I can see the benefits of doing that because I think it would be for everybody to understand. Certainly, when I speak particularly to farmers about how they could perhaps help us achieve our targets, one of the things they say is that, because it's such a long-term initiative, they're sort of reluctant to plant trees on agricultural land, because they know they've lost it for 30 years. But, again, in discussions and certainly in many of the responses we've had to 'Brexit and our land', I think that perhaps is changing a little bit and farmers do want to help us reach our forestry targets.

In relation to the RDP, you're right, we are sort of holding the UK Government to that pledge that Wales would not lose a penny if we left the European Union, and I think that it is absolutely right that we hold them to that, but, clearly, we will always need to put funding into this part of the portfolio. But, obviously, a replacement for the RDP we haven't looked at in great detail because we expect to have the funding that we receive from Europe now.

I welcome the Government's statement. I just can't understand why everybody else doesn't believe in the importance of forests, because I actually believe it's one of the most important things we have. I don't believe you can actually have too many trees, and it always pains me when I see a number of trees being chopped down. In Rebecca Evans's constituency, a giant redwood has been chopped down in Penllergaer. That's a matter of massive local concern, and it's also a matter of concern—the number of trees in that area that are being removed. So, I think that we really do need to protect trees more than we do now. Tree preservation orders are very good. They give more of an illusion of protection than actual protection, but when they've had an accident and they've knocked a tree down, you can't un-accident the removal of a tree. I'll tell you what, if there are two things I know: grade II listed buildings spontaneously combust, and people driving around trees have accidents at fairly regular intervals, which ends up knocking down trees that have tree preservation orders on them. Both of those I find amazing, and it must be serendipity that causes them.

Can I welcome the co-operative forest planning scheme, specifically for people and co-operatives to work together and plan woodland creation at a significant and strategic scale? I support the planting of mixed forestry as opposed to a monoculture of conifers. There's been a number of tree diseases, such as Dutch elm disease, ash dieback, and the one the Minister pronounced earlier, which I'm not going to take on. Does the Minister accept that mixed forests provide some protection against tree diseases, and that such mixed forests should include broadleaved trees? Does the Minister accept that we need annual regional forestry targets? We tend to have long-term targets, but the long term, as people involved in financial planning will tell you, is made up of a lot of short terms. So, if you want to do something in the long term, you have to successfully deal with a number of short terms to get there.

Finally, something I've never understood, and it used to exist under the old county plan where land was identified for a whole range of uses: why cannot local development plans identify land for forestry in such a way that people know that that land is suitable?

Thank you, Mike Hedges, for that list of questions. I agree with you: I don't think you can have too many trees. I'm not aware of the reasons why the trees were being taken down in my friend Rebecca Evans's constituency, but I have to say, one of the most deep experiences I've had lately was I was very fortunate to visit Muir Woods in San Francisco when I was there last September for the global action climate summit, and I have to say, the air that you could breathe in that redwood forest was truly incredible. It made me realise how fortunate they are to have that type of tree out in California.

I think you're right about the mix of trees, and as I said in my response to Llyr Huws Gruffydd, it's really important that you plant the right trees in the right places and, so, whether that be conifer in some areas or broadleaved in others, it's absolutely vital that we get that right. I'm very pleased you welcome the co-operative forest planning scheme. I mentioned in my opening statement we've put £480,000 into that. We've had two rounds, and it really does encourage planning for woodland creation at a very significant and strategic scale that we haven't seen before.

I think the long-term target is very necessary for the industry, but, of course, if you have an annual target, it's much easier to monitor it, which is what we had and where we realised that we weren't planting the number of trees that we would all want to see. Around ancient, veteran and heritage trees, the woodland strategy does acknowledge the importance of ancient woodlands and, obviously, our natural resources policy sets out a commitment to very carefully manage those trees and woodlands that have such a high environmental value, and I mentioned, again, that 'Planning Policy Wales' has certainly given guidance to strengthen that aspect. 

Can I thank the Minister for her statement today on this very important subject? The Minister will be aware that Clifford Jones Timber in Ruthin is one of the largest producers in the UK of wood and timber posts. And I know that you visited Clifford Jones yourself to talk about some of their concerns about timber supply, particularly levels of conifer planting in terms of that coming through into the timber supply, and their concerns have been long held regarding that particular issue. So, I'm pleased to see that the Welsh Government is aiming to increase the supply in future years and to incentivise landowners to actually do more planting in the future.

Can you tell me, though, Minister—? In terms of the work that Natural Resources Wales is doing, I appreciate its focus must be, more widely, on the benefits of its land, not just in terms of developing a crop and then harvesting it and bringing that crop into use in terms of supply, but in terms, also, of recreational opportunities on its land. Again, Minister, I know that you've been to the forest around Llyn Brenig—Clocaenog forest in my constituency in the past, and you will have seen the wealth of opportunities that there are there for recreation. I don't think we're exploiting those opportunities enough; I think the same could be said, also, for parts of Llandegla forest with some of their cycle trails and carriage trails as well. So, I would be interested to know how you intend to ensure that those things are not overlooked as part of the forestry management plan.

And secondly, can I ask whether the Government has considered updating the provisions in the Forestry Act 1967, particularly in relation to felling licences? The Minister will be aware of my keen interest in the red squirrel population here in Wales, and some of the concerns that have been expressed by those who are involved in red squirrel conservation have surrounded the felling licence regime that currently prevails in Wales at the moment, which, as I understand it, cannot refuse a licence for the purpose of conserving or enhancing flora or fauna under the provisions in the 1967 Act. That is a concern to any wildlife enthusiast, not just those who are concerned about red squirrel populations.

Now, clearly, in Scotland, as I understand it, some action is being taken to update the provisions of the Act so that there can be some conditions attached to licences that look after the interests of wildlife, and I think that it's probably time that we started looking at opportunities to do the same here in Wales. I'm sure that Natural Resources Wales and that your Government's intentions are to do what they can to conserve wildlife. I wonder whether we can take this opportunity now to have some sort of commitment from the Government in terms of looking at these provisions going forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, I certainly had a very informative visit to Clifford Jones Timber in Ruthin, where they were particularly helpful in explaining the barriers that they certainly have, and clearly, the day I went there, their yard was probably half full, whereas normally, it would be 100 per cent storage. So, again, they were very helpful. I took along officials and people from NRW so, again, we could understand the very difficult concerns they had.

I think you make a very important point about recreation and health and social inclusion, and certainly, again, I visited Brenig forest to see the work that was being undertaken for the public to enjoy, but also, the people who were volunteering and working in the forest, you could see the benefits to their health and well-being too. And of course, Llandegla is very close to my home; I visit there very often, and I think that is an example where they have absolutely maximised the benefits from that forest. You couldn't even get into the car park, let alone anywhere else, because of the mountain biking, the walking and the cafe that serves the best bacon sandwich in the country, apparently.

In relation to your issue around felling, I think it is acknowledged that the Forestry Act is limited in the nature of conditions that it can apply to and subsequently enforce upon a felling licence. I am aware of the work being undertaken by Scotland, and I have asked officials to look at this for me. I mean, my briefing refers to grey squirrels and deer, but I'm sure that red squirrels are affected in the same way.

I'd like to thank the Minister for her statement because it's very important, particularly highlighting the point that NRW took with the phytophthora ramorum disease, and particularly the devastation we saw in the Afan valley as a consequence of that. We're still seeing a large proportion of that valled felled and not replaced. And I welcome a comment in your statement, talking about a mixture of leaf regarding replacement, but there are also some areas, and some of my constituents are actually saying they like to see the trees gone because they have a wider view and more light, as it happens—. But we need to look at if there are areas that are not going to be replaced, for whatever reason—it could be financial as a possibility—we have a strategy as to what we do with those areas so we know what's going to go on that land, but can we look, also, at how we can use—? I agree with Darren Millar that that the leisure activities are huge, the opportunities there. If you want to go to another place, come to the Afan valley and see the mountain biking there. We might not have the best bacon butties, but we'll definitely give you a very warm welcome. But these opportunities are huge for local communities and ex-mining Valleys that are now seeing the change from the industrial past to a tourism future, and I think it's important we look at and address that aspect. 

But, secondly, can we also look at—you haven't talked about it—waste wood and contracting for timber, because we have biomass plants that obviously benefit from some of the woods that exist? In my constituency, we have two biomass plants, one for contaminated wood and one for virgin wood, and clearly, the contract for virgin wood was with NRW, and we need to look at how we can continue to deliver virgin wood, which is no longer needed but can still be used for a beneficial purpose. You haven't discussed that in your statement. Perhaps we can look at how we can see how that aspect of the work can also be maintaining the forestry, because it helps to maintain the forestry. It talks about replanting, but it also uses scrub wood that is left on the land when many trees are felled. 

Thank you, David Rees, for those questions. I'm very aware of the area in your constituency that has lost a significant number of trees due to disease, and I mentioned in an earlier answer that I know NRW, through my discussions with the chief executive, have some significant—. I think they're over there; I think they keep about 4 per cent of land available for forestry, and I think they're running at 4.75 per cent at the current time, and that's why I'm looking to see if I can give them some additional funding, because, clearly, everybody's budgets are under pressure. So, I would very much like to see if I could support them to do some reforestation in the very near future.

I am aware of the leisure development that's been proposed in your constituency. I know my officials are working closely with Neath Port Talbot local authority in relation to that. NRW has a timber marketing plan, which runs from the period of 2017 to 2022, and that explains their approach to the harvesting and marketing of timber from the Welsh Government woodland estate. They will continue to supply timber in line with that plan, and I'd be very happy to ask them to look at the point you raised. 

Thank you, Minister.

The next item is withdrawn.

Therefore, item 5 is a statement by the Deputy Minister for Economy and Transport on apprenticeships and investing in skills for the future, and I call on the Deputy Minister to make the statement. Lee Waters. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I am pleased to be able to inform the National Assembly that the Welsh Government is on track to meet our manifesto commitment to deliver a minimum of 100,000 all-age, high-quality apprenticeships by the end of this Assembly term. Thanks to a remarkable effort from employers, providers and advice services, we have delivered 56,635 apprenticeship starts between May 2016 and July 2018. As we promised to do, we have focused on raising the quality of apprenticeships, and are aligning them with the needs of the Welsh economy, putting us in a stronger position to deal with the impact of globalisation, developments in automation and the fallout from Brexit.

There have been criticisms that we are not following the approach of the Government in England, but the emerging evidence is showing we have been right to take a strategic approach. Our apprenticeship scheme is on track. The English scheme is in free fall. The number of starts in Wales has increased. Last week, the National Audit Office reported that instead of rising as they had hoped, the apprenticeship starts in England are 25 per cent lower than they were two years ago, and it said the UK Government is 'very unlikely' to meet its target. We have taken a fair amount of stick from the opposition on this, and the evidence at this stage shows that we are right and they're wrong.

Welsh apprenticeships are being designed differently, to improve productivity and meet strategic skills needs. Our investment is being tailored to the needs of employers in each region, based on the recommendations from the regional skills partnerships, labour market information and sector reviews carried out by Qualifications Wales. The needs of the businesses that power our economy are central. We have created the Wales apprenticeship advisory board to provide robust challenge on skills content, and advice on the scope and range of apprenticeship frameworks. It is chaired by the Confederation of British Industry, and includes large employers and SMEs from across Wales.

We are not providing vouchers for courses that employers would run anyway in many cases, but providing clear skills progression, so that Welsh workers can move into higher value and better rewarding employment, with better life chances. We've looked at the evidence from other European countries and we are prioritising the expansion of higher apprenticeships in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and technical subjects to create a new generation of professionals to drive innovative practices, create new products and boost productivity levels. This means we are focusing on apprenticeships at level 3 and above, where returns on investment are high. As we develop our approach to nurturing the foundational economy, we'll continue to reflect on the needs of grounded firms and essential services.

We are committed to skills progression across the board, and continue to work closely with our social partners in trade unions and in industry. We are creating better jobs closer to home, through extending and expanding shared apprenticeships in the Valleys taskforce area to support small business in accessing training. We are encouraging SMEs to use apprenticeships by offering an incentive of up to £3,500 to recruit a young person, providing that employer hasn’t previously offered an apprenticeship. All this is aimed at creating a culture in Wales where recruiting an apprentice is normal business practice.

This is the key point to our approach, Dirprwy Lywydd. In Wales, you don’t need a voucher to get apprenticeships that deliver for the strategic needs of your business. We say to any of the estimated 700 or so levy-paying employers, 'If your needs aren’t being met, come and talk to us.' We've established a team of advisors to support levy-paying employers, engaging closely with representative employer bodies, and published factual guides for both levy payers and other employers on how they can access the programme in Wales.

We have introduced digital apprenticeships to fill skills gaps identified by regional skills partnerships, initially in information and communications technology, and, soon, in the advanced engineering sector. And, as the evidence emerges, we hope to extend provision into other sectors too. If I may, Dirprwy Lywydd, I'll just run through a couple of the initiatives we are doing in this area.

To unlock demand, we have been working with employers under skills clusters, in areas such as health, forestry, engineering and digital. This work is driving improvement in public services as we partner with local authorities, the health service and other public bodies to share expertise. To complement this, we are working closely with the Federation of Small Businesses, to understand how we can cluster delivery around certain sectors, so that SMEs can better access the programme.

We are reviewing and strengthening the quality of commissioning, developing and issuing apprenticeship frameworks in Wales to meet the changing needs of our economy. This will ensure that our frameworks remain relevant and portable across the UK, whilst also serving the specific needs of Wales. We are strengthening the regulatory oversight of the system too, and will be launching a consultation shortly on the content of apprenticeships, with a focus on technical occupations.

For young people, we'll be launching a new IT platform to make the apprenticeship journey clearer and more user-friendly. Our programmes, Junior Apprenticeships, Preparation for Apprenticeships and Have a Go, operate in schools and are each preparing young people for vocational education. We'll be supporting people into apprenticeships via the Working Wales and the Job Support Wales programmes, providing a path to a career and life opportunities.

Last year, we published a comprehensive equality toolkit to support providers and employers, which includes modules on gender identity, stereotyping and unconscious bias. And more recently, we launched our disability action plan, developed in consultation with disability bodies, which sets out an ambitious agenda to broaden training opportunities for disabled people.

So, in conclusion, Dirprwy Lywydd, in the first half of this Assembly term, we have strengthened the relevance, quality and effectiveness of our apprenticeship offer. We all know that the pressures on Wales will increase in the coming years—possibly in the coming weeks. Brexit, new technologies and automation all demand that we have a resilient training system. Our commitment to the foundational economy and to filling Wales's missing middle of medium-sized firms requires us to focus on apprenticeships, lifelong learning and on-the-job training. Delivering relevant, high-quality apprenticeships will help us meet all these challenges. Diolch.

I'm grateful to the Minister for his statement here today—at the third attempt. Last week was National Apprenticeship Week. National Apprenticeship Week represents an opportunity to highlight the benefit apprenticeships can bring to individuals, employers and to the economy as a whole. An apprenticeship gives someone the chance to get new skills, to earn while they learn, and get on in their career, while making sure businesses have the skilled workers they need to grow. It is important, therefore, that the training provided is relevant to meet the needs of both apprentices and employers.

Last September, Estyn produced a report that claimed that most providers of higher level apprenticeships did not manage them well and that many courses are outdated. Estyn went on to say that a failing among providers saw workers in Wales having to travel to England to get training. Could the Minister advise what progress has been made in implementing Estyn's recommendations to ensure people receive quality, up-to-date training here in Wales?

Good-quality career advice is essential to promote the benefits that apprenticeships can bring to students at an early stage. Concerns have been expressed about the quality and the availability of careers advice, citing the shortage of trained career advisors and lack of knowledge of apprenticeships and vocational training by school staff. Could the Minister advise the Assembly if he is content with the availability of career advice in Wales and the accuracy of advice on vocational and educational training?

In Wales, women made up 60 per cent of apprentices in 2017. However, women are often guided towards apprenticeships in which they are paid less than men. In construction and engineering programmes, there was only one woman for every 23 men. Also, getting disabled people access to apprenticeships presents a considerable challenge. Less than 2 per cent of those on apprenticeship programmes are disabled people. How will the Minister tackle gender prejudice and the under-representation of disabled people in the apprenticeship system? Ethnic minority representation on apprenticeship programmes remains static, at around 3 per cent of the total. How will the Minister ensure that apprenticeships reflect more accurately the diverse population of Wales?

The Minister will be aware of the vital importance of farming in the Welsh economy. Only 1 per cent of the total number of apprenticeships available in Wales for the last two academic years were in agriculture. What action will the Minister take to ensure young people are getting the skills they need to ensure Wales has a competitive and productive farming industry?

Finally, Minister, last November, the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee expressed its disappointment at the lack of transparency surrounding the funding and operation of the Welsh Government's apprenticeship programme. Concerns were expressed about the criteria used to make decisions about allocating funding, the amount of funding available for each level of non-degree apprenticeships, and the 10 per cent fund seemingly reserved for lower level apprenticeships. In your response, Minister, please could you commit to providing the greater transparency requested by the committee? Thank you.

I think I counted five questions there. I will try to answer as many of them as I can.

Your first point, about the report done by Estyn into training providers: last year, Estyn found that two of the three providers that were inspected were 'good' and the other was 'adequate'. Clearly, adequate is not good enough and we are reviewing the position about the quality of standards. And as well, I am aware that the economy committee and the Welsh Government are also reviewing the regional skills partnership.

You asked about careers advice. You'll be aware of the announcement of the Working Wales advice service, which is rationalising many of the programmes that we already have: Jobs Growth Wales, ReAct and so on. Some of that support will be delivered by Careers Wales once the procurement exercise is completed. We're certainly not complacent about the quality of careers advice, and we are taking active steps to improve that. 

You asked about disability and equality, and I believe I addressed that in the statement, with the publication of the toolkit.

And you asked, finally, about agriculture, which I have to confess I will have to write to you about.FootnoteLink

Thank you for your statement. There has been some success in this area, so I’d like to welcome the headline figures, but the statement does give us a very idealistic picture, which masks some of the problems that are developing in this area.

The first thing that I have to ask is: could we have a better delivery system in terms of learning in the workplace? At present, money will be procured by training providers, which, to a certain extent, have created a false market, because they’re sustained by Welsh Government funding. Do you think it would be better to tackle apprenticeships by having an education system for individuals and funding apprenticeships in a way that reflects that? Have you considered alternative models that would see new partnerships with local authorities and FE colleges, for example, and linking employers directly, or through non-profit organisations, rather than private training providers? In Denmark, for example, apprenticeships and training based in the workplace are funded by the central Government and the regional Government, working directly with employers and ensuring that apprenticeships, and those who receive training, are funded through public education services. This gives more flexibility and portability if, for example, someone would like to change their apprenticeship while staying in that education system. So, I’d like to ask you whether you’ve looked at alternative models.

Could you also outline briefly the decision that was made to exclude the current procurement exercise for the employment support programme Wales Working? I tried to ask a question last week, but it wasn’t chosen, but the sector found that this procurement had been excluded, but Assembly Members hadn’t had the statement until the end of last week. If this is a new strategy with a new agenda, how is continuing with the old system going to achieve that? I’d like to understand the Government’s thinking on that.

Moving on to Welsh language apprenticeships, a number of us are very concerned about the figures that I’ve seen from Cymdeithas yr Iaith from 2017 to 2019. Only 230 out of the 58,665, or 0.39 per cent, were Welsh-medium apprenticeships. If we are really serious about reaching the million Welsh speakers that we discuss here every day, then we need a variety of different skills through Welsh-medium apprenticeships. How are you going to expand this number significantly and ensure that appropriate areas of Wales can have more apprenticeships through the medium of Welsh? For example, if we have housing associations in areas where Welsh is very strong, shouldn’t apprenticeships have more access to that kind of apprenticeship through the medium of Welsh? What are you going to do about that?

As has been stated earlier, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission has said that we need to do much more work to get women into apprenticeships and not just in those apprenticeships that women are often linked to historically. There are a number of opportunities in the building and manufacturing industries, but it’s men, chiefly, who are having access to those and then getting better pay because of that. So, what are you going to do to ensure that that inequality comes to an end?

I’ve brought this issue to you before in terms of the potential to give free transport to those who are undertaking apprenticeships, if, perhaps, they live a long distance away from where they want to get to. I’ve had people in my area saying that it’s impossible for them to travel to their apprenticeships because they can’t get there to do that apprenticeship. So, what are you doing about that?

Finally, I met with Universities Wales yesterday about degree apprenticeships, and they said that they are quite frustrated about the very narrow confines through which people can access that money in relation to the Welsh Government's priorities of digital, and they're telling me that people are going in their droves to England to take part in these apprenticeship opportunities at a degree level. That means we're losing our brightest and our best to England for these degree apprenticeships. So, you said you were potentially going to be expanding the areas through which people could access degree apprenticeships. When are you going to do that? Because Universities Wales is not a body that usually gets quite het up about things, but they seemed very animated about this yesterday. If they are feeling confined by what they can offer here in Wales, then, surely, we need to be addressing that.

Thank you. I think there were six questions there—I'll try my best to briefly answer those. 

Your first point about private training providers and was there an argument for a mixed economy and moving to a different provision—I think that's a very interesting idea. I'd certainly welcome the opportunity to see more social enterprises and co-operatives providing training, and I'd be interested in discussing that further and receiving any ideas that Bethan Jenkins has. 

Your question about the procurement exercise for Working Wales—that has been delayed because of a concern about the evaluation methodology that was used and, based on legal advice, we've decided to rerun the framework. That's why there was the delay.

On the question of the Welsh language, the figures I have is that in 2016-17, just over 4 per cent of apprenticeships were formally assessed in Welsh, and an additional 8 per cent used Welsh in some part of their training. And I think one of the challenges we have is the number of people who are willing to do the whole of their apprenticeship though the medium of Welsh. But we are working with Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol in seeing what more we can do, and a plan was published in December, setting out some steps. So, we're certainly not being complacent about that.

The question on the women apprenticeships was well made—I certainly agree with the sentiment. There are a number of different initiatives in this area already, but we can certainly do more, and I'd be happy to write and set out some of the activity we currently have in place, and if you have suggestions for more that we can do, we'd certainly welcome the opportunity to discuss that too.

You mentioned the case for free transport. As you know, we have a White Paper currently under consultation for the future of transport in Wales. It's tempting to look at different groups and suggest that free transport would be beneficial for them, as undoubtedly it would, but I think we need to take a more strategic judgment about how we structure the future of public transport in Wales, and whether or not there's a role for free transport for the whole population or sections of the population as part of that. Certainly, there are no options off the table on that, as we look at strengthening our public transport sector.

And, finally, on degree apprenticeships—I'm sure universities are angry, because, in England, as I mentioned, the programme has wildly overspent, and one of the reasons for that is employers are classing things like MBAs, for example, as apprenticeships. So, they're spending merrily on such programmes, blowing the budget as they go. So, universities are doing extremely well out of it in England. You'll forgive us for not following in that—what we think—hedonistic manner, and that we instead take an evidence-based approach on what we think is the right strategic fit for the Welsh economy. We've started with digital as a degree apprenticeship, we're about to launch engineering, and we're looking at other areas. But we think we're right to be taking a more methodical and strategic approach rather than simply recategorising degree courses as apprenticeships to deal with this voucher system they have in England, which I'm sure universities would like us to do, but we're going to take a different approach in Wales.

Thank you for your statement. I think it's really important that we look at this with a very hard-nosed approach, because there's been a lot of concern recently about young people being encouraged to go into university education, which doesn't actually give them the sort of skills they need to get a decent job, and that all it does is load them with a lot of debt. So, there's quite a moral hazard there in terms of what universities may be doing in the case of some young people who, actually, are not going to get what they need out of university education. And it seems to me that apprenticeships are a way in which we somehow re-engineer the UK economy, which is far too overbalanced by the emphasis on what goes on in the City of London and the financial services industry, as opposed to what needs to be going on in manufacturing, particularly in new industries as new technology changes and evolves.

I have a particular concern about the numbers of women going into higher paid areas of the economy. Obviously, there are quite a lot of women going into apprenticeships, but they tend to be in the lower paid jobs like childcare and hairdressing. Whilst, obviously, childcare is a fantastically important career, it's not where the money is to be made. In the meantime, there's a huge need for precision skills in construction and engineering. It doesn't require you to be physically strong, it requires you to be precise and have good design skills. It's noticeable that there are only 360 female apprentices, compared to 8,300 men. That's one woman for every 23 male. You get the opposite story in healthcare and public services. 

So, I just wondered if you agree with the suggestion that there could be positive action, such as reserving places for protected groups who are under-represented in particular fields, or whether ensuring that, where there are equally good candidates, we take the one who is under-represented. Equally, I think it's of concern that there's a really small number of people with disabilities registered as doing apprenticeships, because it seems to me that they may have a disability but that doesn't mean they aren't very well qualified to do a lot of different types of apprenticeships. Only 1.5 per cent of those on apprenticeships are, I believe, disabled. 

The area that I'm particularly interested in, as well as the construction and engineering industries, where I think new ways of construction require those precision skills—there's also the need for new skills to enable us to add value to the food industry. We're very good at being primary producers of food, but we're not so good at actually processing it here in Wales to enable us to add value to the Welsh economy rather than to somebody else's economy. I just wondered if you could give us any indication as to how we could improve the numbers of apprenticeships going into new forms of irrigation, understanding how computers can be tracking what the soil balance is, and additives—these are all things that require precision skills and certainly don't require you to be necessarily physically strong. 

I'd like to thank Jenny Rathbone for her comments. She's certainly right—and this is why we're putting the emphasis on apprenticeships at level 3and above—that the evidence is quite clear that higher level apprenticeships deliver higher value skills and improve the life chances of the people doing them, which is why we've taken the decision to prioritise skills at this level. That's clearly not without its difficulties and its critics, but the emerging evidence is suggesting that we are right to do that.

Balanced against that is some of the comments you made at the end, Jenny Rathbone, about the need to support people in foundational industries who traditionally have had lower skills. We need to create a pipeline of skills so that people can progress up the ladder. The examples you gave are well made because they show that, even in areas like food production and care, there is still higher value added activity. The development of precision agriculture, for example, does require more technical know-how. 

This is something that we're keeping under review. The first cohort of degree apprenticeships are focusing on digital and engineering, which would certainly be open to some of the approaches that you've discussed. That is something that we'll be keeping an eye on as the evidence emerges. And that's a key point of our approach in Wales—this is evidence led. We're taking the evidence from the regional skills partnerships, from labour market information, and from employers in keeping our offer under review, which is not something that's happening to the same extent in England.

The points on disability and reserving places for protected groups are well made. We recently launched our disability action plan, as I mentioned, which we've done in consultation with disability bodies, which sets out an ambitious agenda to broaden training opportunities for disabled people. But this is an area across the board that we're not doing well enough in, and I certainly would be interested in any ideas you have for things that we should be doing that we're not currently doing or consulting upon. But you were right to challenge us on that. The same stands for the gender issue. We are acutely aware of the gender imbalance. We have, as I said, as part of our equality toolkit, produced modules on gender and on bias, and you're right to identify the issue. We have taken some steps; I'm sure there is more that we can do, and we would certainly be interested in any suggestions Members have. 

Can I thank the Deputy Minister for his statement today? Deputy Minister, UKIP welcomed the announcement from the Welsh Government in February 2017 that you were committed to establishing 100,000 apprenticeships over a five-year period. It has for far too long been a neglected element in economic growth. We also believe that focusing on apprenticeships above level 3 was a well-founded decision, as benchmarking has shown that this is where we get the highest returns on investment. It was also stated at the time that there would be better performance measurement, clearer pathways, more awareness, increased numbers taking science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects, and an increased integration between apprenticeships and further education. Could the Deputy Minister confirm that these aspirations are also being achieved, as well as the increase in numbers?

Deputy Minister, those brought up in the 1960s and 1970s benefited from apprenticeships that lasted over five years. It taught participants not only the working skills, but also how to behave in the workplace and gave them a sense of responsibility. Indeed, it could be said that it made those involved more aspirational, empowering them to become involved in management and higher posts within their working environment. The net result of this is that it gave added value to society as a whole.

It augurs well that 31,360 apprenticeship learning programmes were started in 2017-18—an increase, I believe, of 30 per cent compared to 2016-17—and 56,635 since the target of 100,000 was introduced. But I notice that the highest take-up has been in healthcare and the public sector. Whilst these are, of course, to be welcomed, it would be gratifying to see a comparative increase in apprenticeships in the private sector. Again, it is gratifying to note that this programme is proving to be so successful, in that it is exceeding its original targets. However, we understand that this success is now bringing a strain on funding. But, surely, Deputy Minister, this programme is so important to our economy and the apprentices engaged in it that it is essential that funding is made available. This is not simply about the present, but also the future of Wales and those who choose to live and work here. The rewards are there to be realised. The test comes, of course, at the end of these apprenticeships, in seeing how many go on to full-time jobs and within the disciplines of their apprenticeships. 

One question I must ask is: does the figure of 56,635—over 50 per cent achievement—contain those who were already in apprenticeships prior to the scheme and hoovered up into the new scheme, or are they completely new?

Also, does the Minister not agree there cannot be equality of esteem between vocational qualifications and those in the so-called academic sphere unless apprentices are funded in exactly the same way as those in universities or colleges?

Well, I'd like to thank David Rowlands for his comments. On the question of funding, there has been something of a conjuring trick taking place by the UK Government on the funding of apprenticeships, because we were not given additional funding to reflect the levy. The levy is, in fact, a tax on businesses and we've not had the funding passed on—£120 million or so was cut by the Government in England on public sector apprenticeships, and, lo and behold, £120 million appeared in our budget to fund this scheme. So, the overall funding has not increased, and, as I outlined at the beginning, while our approach has shown itself justified in the way that our scheme is on track, the English scheme is over budget and 25 per cent under target. So, I think we are confident that our approach is the right approach. And, as David Rowlands asked, it's not simply focused on the numbers, but it's part of a broader economic approach where we are tailoring our apprenticeships to support the Welsh economy, to deliver higher skills that are focused on the needs of regional economies, to offer better routes through from education into employment and also to encourage a greater employer contribution. It's not just for the state to provide apprenticeships; this is something that businesses must do. We're happy to work in partnership, but, too often, some employers are looking to shift their costs onto the Government, and that's something that we need to be confident in pushing back on.

On the specific question of whether or not the figure of 56,635 included people already in employment, I can confirm that that figure does exclude people who have left early or who have transferred onto them, so that is a standalone figure.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, for bringing forward this statement to the Chamber today. Apprenticeships are crucial, and I'm a big believer that today's apprentices are the leaders of tomorrow. We heard earlier that last week was National Apprenticeship Week. To mark that, I had the great opportunity to go back to my roots as an apprentice engineer. I was shown around DRB Group on Deeside industrial estate, where I served my time as an apprentice, and I was able to see how the company has changed, evolved and progressed since my time there. I also had the opportunity to meet a university graduate from my constituency, Joel Thomas, who has now gone on to go back to study as an apprentice support analyst to gain those valuable skills that you pick up on the job in the workplace.

We just heard in David Rowlands's contribution then of the opportunities growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, so I do welcome the Welsh Government's ambitious plans for the future of apprenticeships to address the skills gaps and opportunities, because we still feel the effects from a Thatcher-led UK Government back in the 1980s on this issue.

I want to begin by making the points that I've made before in this Chamber—I'm aware I've made them to previous Government Ministers with apprenticeships and lifelong learning in their portfolios. It's similar to Bethan Sayed's contribution, surrounding the training of apprentices and how we train them. 

Deputy Minister, do you agree with me that it is crucial and very, very important for the future of apprentices and future apprentices to have fellow work colleagues with the necessary skills to transfer their knowledge across to the apprentice? We know that many of those who are currently training apprentices will be reaching retirement age in some industries, just as my mentor has retired recently. Therefore, Deputy Minister, it is my belief that we need to train recent graduate apprentices to become coaches, which will enable them to deliver the results we need for the future.

So, with that in mind, what plans has the Government got to try to deal with this issue? Will the Deputy Minister commit that the Government will work with further education institutions, colleges and industry, for example, to create a package for graduate apprentices to pick up the necessary skills to transfer their knowledge to future apprentices?

Also, on the issue of ensuring that we have a different range of apprenticeships, which is also a very important thing to make sure that we have a diverse economy, my constituency is rightly hailed as the home of engineering, manufacturing and technology, and I speak heavily on that because that's my background. However, there are opportunities in many other sectors of the economy, and we need to do more to create those opportunities in the sectors people wouldn't traditionally think of for having an apprenticeship.

Deputy Minister, I know you already do, but will you continue to work to ensure that people have a diverse range of opportunities to create and gain apprenticeships in markets that aren't there now? We should never forget that apprenticeships are an investment in our future. We're giving current and future generations a chance to prosper, we're giving members of our community the chance to retrain and upskill, and we must do all we can to support them, to support industry and to support apprenticeships. Diolch. 

Thank you, Jack Sargeant, for those comments, and I must say that having the first-hand testimony of somebody who's fairly recently come through the apprenticeship system adds greatly to the depth of the discussion we have in our National Assembly. And I know from first hand, having attended meetings with Jack with Tata, that he's able to draw on his own experience to inform that discussion, and I think that adds enormously to our Senedd.

On the point of the ageing workforce and the knowledge being lost, I think he makes a very strong point about the value of coaching that graduate apprentices could provide, and I'll certainly take that away and discuss that with officials and write to him with our response.    

Thank you very much, Deputy Minister. 

Item 6 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs on flood and coastal erosion risk management, and I call on the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs, Lesley Griffiths. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The landscape and coastline of Wales have been shaped by powerful and inspiring natural forces that continue to influence where and how we live. One of the challenges we face is how best to mitigate the risks and adapt to change as individuals, across communities and as a nation. Within this context, I am pleased to have this opportunity to update Members on the important work we are doing to underpin flood and coastal risk management activity in Wales.

Flooding can have a devastating and lasting impact on the lives of those affected, which is why it remains a priority for this Government. Last autumn, Storm Callum was a reminder of why our continued work and investment in this area remains vital. As a result of that storm, over 270 properties across Wales were flooded, with further damage across the country to homes, schools, roads and shops—the things we all depend upon and often take for granted in our daily lives. Such events serve as a reminder of why we need to be prepared, why it's important we are all aware and well-informed of the risks faced, and why we must continue to build resilience in our communities.

We continue to invest in flood-risk mitigation and coastal defence work right across Wales. To benefit those living most at risk, we prioritise our investment on the protection of properties. This year we've seen schemes at Borth-y-gest in Gwynedd, Mochdre in Conwy, Roath in Cardiff, Porthcawl in Bridgend and at Pontarddulais, which the First Minister and I will officially open later this week. These works alone have reduced risk to over 960 properties, meaning many families and communities are now safer than they were and not living with the same worries brought by severe weather.

Today, I will share an overview of the flood and coastal defence programmes for the next financial year, and highlight some of the key areas of work we will be progressing. They include consulting on a new national strategy for flood and coastal erosion risk management and the establishment of a new statutory flood and coastal erosion committee for Wales. This coming financial year will see the start of a three-year construction window on works to better protect our coastal communities. The coastal risk management programme will deliver investment of over £150 million across Wales, reducing risk to over 18,000 properties. Coastal schemes starting this coming year include east Rhyl, Aberavon and y Felinheli.  I've also set aside funding from this year’s capital budget for the design and development of future schemes. I encourage local authorities to now move forward with this work, recognising the unique opportunity this programme provides. 

In addition to the coastal risk management programme, over the next 12 months we will invest over £50 million into flood and coastal erosion risk management across Wales, prioritised on reducing risks to properties. This includes a capital programme of £27 million on new schemes, maintenance of existing assets and the development of future schemes. This funding will, for example, support the completion of schemes at Beaumaris and Talgarth, as well as commencing construction works at Llansannan, Llanmaes, Newport and Welshpool. On completion of schemes within the programme, over 1,200 properties, including over 850 homes, across Wales will benefit.

Also important is the development of future schemes, for which we will provide over £2.8 million- worth of funding to local authorities and Natural Resources Wales. This will support the development and design of important new schemes for future years, increasing protection and resilience in places such as Llangefni, Cwmbach, Cardigan and Newcastle Emlyn.

I will also continue to set aside £1 million for the small scale works grant, which allows local authorities to undertake minor schemes and maintenance works to benefit communities. Over the past four years, we have invested over £5.8 million this way, and it has made a real impact, helping more than 2,200 properties across Wales.

Wales has already set the benchmark in terms of its approach to sustainable drainage systems, or SuDS, for new developments. This complements our approach to managing water in a more natural way, and I am pleased to see this coming through in the flood programme.

In the coming year, we will support schemes incorporating natural flood management at Betws-y-Coed and Abergele in Conwy and at Cwmaman in Rhondda Cynon Taf. I am also encouraged to see a number of schemes not just looking at the issues in one location but taking a whole-catchment approach, tackling risk across a wider area. This is something I want to promote and I will be setting out our thinking in our new national strategy for flood and coastal erosion risk management. 

As we look wider, opportunities are opening up to work in partnership with others whose assets will benefit. Seeking contributions from such sources is vital in these times of challenging budgets, maximising our investment and building wider resilience. I am encouraged to see such thinking is already starting to happen, with housing associations, transport and utility providers being identified as potential partners. We need to ensure this continues.

With significant investment happening across the country, I want to see the benefits of this funding realised. A key part of this is showing the impacts of new and improved assets in our flood maps and online information. This helps us realise the economic and social improvements that come with making a community safer. It also allows the people of Wales to understand the risks they face, make informed decisions about the places they live and know how to support themselves should flooding occur. In our new strategy, I am asking NRW to focus on these improvements and ensure updated information is provided on an annual basis to show the impact of our continued investment. To support this work, I am once again planning to maintain NRW’s revenue budget this coming year, recognising the important work this supports, including the provision of information, awareness-raising activities, maintenance of assets and investigation work.

I will be consulting on our new national strategy this spring, which will have a strong focus on information and delivery. It will clarify roles and responsibilities, provide updates on policy, including the encouragement of natural flood risk management, and incorporate recommendations from recent reports. The strategy will stress the importance of flood risk mapping to inform decisions around where we invest and complement our planning policy to direct development away from high-risk areas. To support this, new flood risk maps will be made public on NRW’s website before the end of this year.

I would like to finish, Deputy Presiding Officer, by announcing the recruitment for the new flood and coastal erosion committee is complete. The committee will provide high-level strategic advice to Welsh Ministers and promote best practice, helping ensure we continue to lead the way in this area and learn from good work happening elsewhere.

Today's statement sets out how this Government will put the sustainable management of our environment at the heart of decision making to further reduce flood and coastal risk to homes and businesses across Wales.

Minister, thank you for your statement this afternoon—part 2 of out interaction this afternoon. Anyone who's dealt with any constituency work knows the trauma that flooding brings. What was once a living room is, in essence, once it's been flooded, a sewer. The devastation of personal, family items lost forever, basically, and then the financial blight because of the inability to raise a mortgage or to be able to sell the property and just move on with one's life are cataclysmic in any circumstances.

So, the ability for NRW and its partner agencies, along with the Welsh Government, to make resources available, is a critical demand, if you like, that people place on Government to make that resource available. But it is a huge responsibility when you think of the coastal responsibilities that we have here in Wales, along with the inland waterways as well as the spontaneous flooding that we see. Only today, coming into the Assembly on the A48, because of the flash flooding there, a car had aquaplaned out of control. You could argue that the drainage system wasn't suitable to handle the volume of water that hit at that particular moment, you could, then. So, I don't envy some of the decisions you as a Minister have to take or indeed the sponsoring bodies that you obviously fund, such as NRW.

But it is vital that we do get this right, and I'd be keen to understand the Minister's take on this: is there any withdrawal from areas of Wales that, potentially in 20, 30, 40, 50 years' time could succumb to coastal erosion or chronic flooding? Because only three or four years ago, there were reports that there was a serious train of thought that, actually, we would, from a strategic point of view, withdraw from certain areas because they would just prove too costly to prevent and to put money into to prevent that flooding happening. And I think an assurance that that isn't part of the mainstream thinking, not just from the Government but from its sponsored agencies, would be most welcome indeed.

I also note from the statement that you talk about the new flood and coastal erosion committee being completed. It would be interesting to understand how that committee might work differently from what's happened before, albeit earlier on in the statement it does talk about there being consultations on the new strategic flood and coastal erosion risk management and the establishment of the new strategic flood and coastal erosion committee for Wales. Now, I might have misread that, but it seems to confirm later on in the statement that the committee's already established, yet earlier in the statement it talks of consulting on its way of working and the way it might undertake its duties. So, I'd be grateful for any understanding if there is to be further consultation, even though everyone's been appointed to that committee. But, more importantly, it would be good to understand what new capacity that will bring to the Minister and the planning for flood prevention across Wales.

Importantly, it is vital to understand how the planning system is being used to obviously assist and help in flood prevention matters. You only need to drive around Cardiff, for example—the First Minister here in his own constituency—and many hard-standing areas are introduced into residential environments that, historically, would have been gardens or areas that would have acted as a drainage pond for that particular property. And that is a common cause of flash flooding instances in many communities, where the water just simply doesn't have anywhere to go, basically. You talked about the SuDS and the new regulations that have come in. That has made a difference, but we're still seeing a constant deterioration of, in particular in the urban environment, some of that natural drainage that existed when a lot of these estates were developed 30, 40, 50 years ago.

I'm very pleased to see that you're advocating improvements in the mapping and understanding of the use of maps. As a Member in this institution now for some 12 years, I've dealt with various flooding matters in communities from Roath Brook to Llanmaes and Llantwit Major, and Barry as well, and when you do start going into these maps—I like to think I'm a reasonably educated person, but even people in society, the general public, would struggle to understand exactly the demands that are placed on how decisions are made. So, any simplification of that has to be very welcome indeed.

Finally, if I could press the Minister to maybe enlarge on how she seeks to share responsibility and costs. Many assets around Wales are joint assets. This doesn't just fall—I do have an element of sympathy with the Government when they're constantly being asked for money to go into flood prevention when, in fact, if you take the A55 and the north Wales coast railway line as well, there surely is a joint gain and joint benefit there from other public bodies and private companies coming to the table with some resource and some asset that would help projects come forward to realisation.

So, I thank you for your statement this afternoon, but I'd be most grateful for some substantive answers on the questions that I've put to you, please.

Thank you very much, Andrew R.T. Davies, for those questions, and I think you opened with and articulated very well the devastating impact flooding has on individuals, not only the financial, but also the sentimental, and I don't think we can underestimate the impact that that could have on an individual.

Difficult budget decisions do have to be made, but I think by investing over £350 million in the lifetime of this Assembly, it shows Welsh Government's commitment to this. You asked whether we were going to retreat from our coast because of flooding difficulties and things that we could experience further down the line. Nothing has come past me on my desk, certainly, to give that impression, so I think it's absolutely right that we continue to put funding into our businesses and homes where we can to protect them.

I mentioned the new flood and coastal erosion committee. This takes over from the flood risk management Wales committee that we had, and we've been recruiting for this committee. We announced the chair back in September—no, he actually took up post on 1 September 2018, and we've taken our time to get this committee together. It's going to be an advisory body that's going to advise myself and colleagues from Welsh risk management authorities on all sources of flooding and coastal erosion. It will have a really important role to play, but I did also say that we are preparing a new national strategy for flood and coastal risk management, and we've been doing that over the past year. We've been working very closely with our stakeholders, and that includes NRW, it includes local authorities and other policy areas on content on the potential measures that will be needed as we take on this.

We're also going to consult on the new planning advice in relation to technical advice note 15, and you referred to that and to the flood risk maps that will be available for people to access. You raised a point about simplification, I think that's absolutely right. It's really important that we give individuals good flood risk information and that we have strategic planning. So, the draft document, the draft strategy, will really set out the future direction in managing flood risk. It will encourage collaborative catchment approaches to addressing flood risk and it will work with others. I'm very keen to see more done about natural flood management.

You referred to our new legislation around SuDS—the sustainable drainage systems—and I think the commitment to managing water in our environment better is a vital foundation for achieving prosperity for all and delivering our long-term well-being goals for the people of Wales and, certainly, the SuDS regulations we brought in have been very welcome. You mentioned—just today we had that heavy rain, probably as we were all coming to work this morning, and the impacts of surface water flooding, again, can be devastating. You referred to a car, but it can certainly be devastating on citizens and communities. And, again, the cost to the Welsh economy can be significant. So, we had storm Callum back last autumn and the impact of that demonstrated the risks to properties of surface water flooding, and I think those risks are obviously increasing due to climate change and urbanisation.

I think you made a very pertinent point around responsibilities and costs, and there's a very good example of that—and you referred to the A55—in Darren Millar's constituency. The scheme that the local authority are bringing forward there: the main beneficiaries of that are the promenade, the sewers, the railway line. So, I think it's really important that it's not just Welsh Government that contributes, that we all need to contribute. So, my officials are working with Clwyd County Borough Council. We're having discussions also with Ken Skates's department here and the key beneficiaries I mentioned: Network Rail, Dŵr Cymru, because I do think it is important that it's not just Government that has to put the funding in.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement. I'll start on that point, I think, because, really, we've been talking about these other people coming to the table for the best part of a decade, and it's still pretty vague, I have to say. There's been talk of insurance companies. You mentioned Network Rail, and, yes, clearly, the north Wales coastal rail line is susceptible to erosion and flooding, and the Conwy valley—how many times has that line been closed because of flooding and erosion there? But we're still talking about how 'opportunities are opening up' and 'potential partners'. This is 10 years down the line. So, really, what I'm asking is—. You can give us a bland statement, but tell us: what levers are you using to bring these people to the table? Clearly, finances in the public sector are contracting, but they're contracting—. The private sector isn't awash either, and corporate social responsibility isn't going to give us the transformational change that we want to see in that respect. So, what is it? Is it planning? Is it regulations? Give us something specific that you're using as a tool to bring these people to the table and not just these platitudes that we've now been getting used to over the last 10 years. So, that was the negative bit. [Laughter.]

There is much to welcome in the statement, and I don't want to characterise it by being totally critical of everything that is there, although I do find it interesting, actually, that you say a number of schemes don't just look at issues in one location but take a whole-catchment approach. Surely, all schemes should take a catchment approach, albeit with different, sort of, answers and mitigating measures, because, otherwise, it's just sticking plaster, isn't it, to try and address a wider, more fundamental flooding risk. And whilst you give us a good picture, really, in terms of the geographical breakdown of investment, I'm just wondering whether you could provide us, not necessarily in your answer, but maybe in written form, some sort of indication of the split in funding that you're articulating here between hard flood defence and softer mitigation measures. What proportion of this funding is actually going to be spent on concrete bunds and what proportion is being invested in tree planting, in peat bog restoration and those softer measures that, of course, will have a longer term benefit than mixing more and more concrete?

And if we want to pan out to an even more holistic view, then, clearly, what other additional benefits can we enjoy from those investments? There was mention of the rain earlier—I never complain when it rains because it's free hydro fuel. It's money falling from the sky, and we need to harness it. So, how are we looking to utilise and implement, through these flood management projects, opportunities on hydro for example? And, of course, we know that the tidal lagoon proposals offer huge benefits, not only in terms of renewable energy, climate change and job creation, but also in terms of mitigating flooding along the coast and coastal erosion as well. So, how do those fit in to some of the things that you've been telling us here today?

You say that you're maintaining NRW's revenue budget this coming year; maintaining is one thing, but, of course, if you only maintain it, then there is actually a real-terms cut. So, is it fair to expect that they maintain the existing level of activity if there is a real-terms cut? And I'm coming back again, as I always do when NRW comes up, to whether it's properly resourced in order to deliver its functions in a way that we would wish and we would expect.

Finally, you say that your planning policy is going to direct development away from high-risk areas. That's great. Does that mean, in a tangible sense, that you're updating planning guidance? Technical advice notice 15 hasn't been updated since 2004, so is it time to do that? And the new flood risk maps that you say will be made public, well, if it's found that land will now, according to these new flood risk maps, be susceptible to flooding, if that land is allocated for development, will you therefore ensure that it's de-allocated? Because if not, then, clearly, it's just storing up problems for future generations.

Diolch, Llyr Huws Gruffydd. So, we'll start with Old Colwyn, and again, you see, you're saying to Welsh Government, 'When are you going to bring these people to the table?' This is a matter for Conwy County Borough Council. They're the ones who keep coming to us, asking for money, and they're the ones who need to be talking to these partners. My officials have spoken to the local authority, they have spoken to Network Rail, they have spoken to Dŵr Cymru, but, again, this focus on Welsh Government being the enabler all the time has to change. So, those conversations are going on. I took the decision not to include this scheme for funding through this capital programme because it doesn't meet the objectives of the programme, I feel, to reduce risk to properties, and that has to be the priority—to reduce the risk to properties and business. But I do recognise the challenges that obviously important local infrastructure, like the A55, have to withstand. So, my officials are continuing to work with other parts of Government—I mentioned that my colleague Ken Skates' officials are also involved in this, from a transport point of view—and the external parties to look at how we can jointly fund these coastal defence works.

I think you're quite right about harder and softer defences. I can't give you the percentages, but I can take a very good guess that the harder defences will be much the higher priority because, unfortunately, you think of flood defence and people think of concrete. So, this is why I'm very keen to pursue these untraditional flood risk management defences. They can reduce the risk of flooding, and through the national strategy, I do want to encourage much more of the natural flood risk management methods. It could be a stand-alone scheme, it could be part of a hybrid scheme. I think it could complement engineered works. Obviously, SuDS is much more about using natural resources, and as I said in my answer to Andrew R.T. Davies, those regulations have been very much welcomed.

You mentioned the tidal lagoon, and certainly when the UK Government was looking at the Swansea bay tidal lagoon as a pilot scheme, we were obviously looking at others, and the one in north Wales had a lot of flood defence capacity and capability within it. So, certainly, it's not just about renewable energy, is it? It is about the additional benefits that it could bring.

You'll be aware of the 'Brexit and our land' consultation, and certainly, I think, under the public goods schemes, I want to see much more peat bog restoration, flood storage areas, grass buffers. I think we can manage hill slopes in a much more appropriate way. So, I think, again, the post-Brexit agricultural policy will give us opportunities there too.

I will be working very closely with my colleague Julie James, who is the Minister with responsibility for planning, around TAN 15. Obviously if we do realise that there are areas that have been allocated for housing developments that we realise are at a very high risk of being flooded, that's something that we will need to look at, as to how that land is then treated.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement today. Flooding is one of the most frequent types of major disaster, and moreover it can be a particularly traumatic one. Numerous studies reveal significant increases in depression, anxiety and distress amongst those affected by flooding. It's also one that's affected many people in my constituency. I'm sure you'll remember that, last year, Aberdare was described as the town hardest hit by storm Callum, with roads closed, trains cancelled, one train having to be evacuated by the fire service after being caught in flood water, and—perhaps more importantly—residential and commercial properties being flooded as well. I certainly have assisted a number of residents who have attended my surgeries and shown those symptoms of trauma that families do experience after floods.

I welcome your comment about supporting schemes incorporating natural flood management, including at Cwmaman in my constituency. Schemes such as this can have a tremendous benefit, both to the ecosystem and protecting our green spaces as well as alleviating flooding. So, I would welcome some additional points if you'd be able to expand on that, and what could be done to engage with the local community as part of this work.

I also welcome your comments about working with local authorities. I note, as part of the RCTinvest programme, alleviation works have and will be carried out in Mountain Ash and Abercwmboi. However, I know previously that EU funding has been used to protect hundreds of properties across Rhondda Cynon Taf from the risk of flooding, and responding to storm Callum brought particular financial challenges both to the local authority and to Welsh Government, who then stepped in to give additional financial assistance. So, what long-term plan do you have to ensure that if we leave the EU there is not a funding gap moving forwards?

Finally, in light of your earlier statement on forestry, what role does afforestation have to play in preventing the risk of flooding?

I thank Vikki Howells for those questions, and you, too, articulated, I think, very eloquently about the impact on people who experience flooding. And even just being evacuated from a train, I can imagine how stressful that could be. And of course we are aware of what happened in your constituency with storm Callum.

I think it's absolutely vital that individuals have the latest information and are able to access information very quickly around flooding risk. Obviously, with NRW, you can sign up and you can have information, and we are looking at updating that going forward.

You referred to local authorities and the small-scale works grants, and I've certainly had many discussions with local authorities about the very positive impact this grant has had. Over the past four years, we've provided about £5 million to local authorities to undertake small-scale works to reduce flood risk. I think, altogether now, it's protected about 6,000 homes and businesses, which again, I think if—. There are much wider benefits to be got from the small schemes, but I think local authorities, before we had this much more simplified application process, weren't applying, because they were looking at the big picture and not seeing the benefits that these very small schemes brought forward. So, I think that funding has been very welcome and I'm very pleased to be bringing forward another £1 million in the next round. Twenty-one of the 22 local authorities have applied and been successful in accessing that funding, so I think it shows that the simplified process is working.

I mentioned afforestation in my answer to Llyr Huws Gruffydd, and I think this is one of the benefits of having our own agricultural policy here in Wales, and I think, under the public goods scheme for things that haven't got a market at the moment, we will be able to encourage farmers, for instance, to look at having more woodland on their farms.

Around EU funding, yes—what's the European Union ever done for us? I think you're absolutely right. It's a huge sum of money that comes into Wales from the European Union. You'll be aware that, before the referendum, we were promised that we would not lose a penny, and everyone on this front bench is ensuring that we hold the UK Government to that, because it would create a massive gap.

Can I thank the Minister for her statement? I do welcome much of what she has said today. Can I thank in particular the Minister for the Welsh Government's investment in Mochdre, in Llanfair Talhaiarn and in Abergele, all of which have been outlined in the statement? Can I welcome as well the investment that has taken place in places like Colwyn Bay and in Kinmel Bay in the past, in my constituency, too? And indeed in Ruthin. As you can tell from the long list of names, my constituency's particularly prone to flooding, particularly along the coastal belt, and one of the things that has been alarming in recent years is that we've got recurrent problems along some parts of that coast. So, Sandy Cove, for example, is particularly prone to overtopping when onshore winds combine with high tides. That's a situation that isn't going away. There's been some resilience that's been put in place, with some secondary defences, but it needs some significant investment if we're ever to resolve that problem once and for all.

Now, I hear what the Minister has to say in terms of the formula, if you like, that is used to assess and determine the priority in terms of spend, and quite rightly that is focused very much on the number of homes and businesses that will be protected. But of course many parts of the coast there that are prone to flooding are caravan areas—they're holiday homes—but they don't meet the same criteria as a permanent residential home. I do think that some of these nuances need to be considered perhaps a little bit more appropriately when the funding is distributed in order that those can also be afforded some protection, particularly as we have 12-month licences for many of the holiday homes along that part of the coast. There are areas of Abergele and Pensarn where there's erosion taking place along the sea defences, and I'm very concerned about their vulnerability going forward. 

Obviously I've listened very carefully to what you've said, quite rightly, about the need for other partners to come to the table in order to address the concerns around the Old Colwyn area. That again is a place where it's transport infrastructure and sewerage infrastructure in particular that are vulnerable, but not many homes. Yet the reality is that, because of this current impasse, the likelihood of anything being delivered there anytime soon is pretty dim, and pretty low. I do think, Minister, that it is going to take the sort of leadership that you've been able to provide elsewhere in Wales in order to knock heads together and get the right people and decision makers around the table in order to make things happen. I wonder whether the Welsh Government could call a summit of decision makers, of Welsh Water, Network Rail, Conwy County Borough Council and anybody else with an interest in that particular part of the coast in order that we can try to get a timetable together and get the investment on the table that needs to take place in order for that work to be done. Because I can't stress this enough: I've seen parts of the railway embankment washed away in storms in recent years. They've been repaired, yes, but they're patch repairs and unfortunately, at some point, there will be a catastrophic failure.

I lived in Tywyn at the time of the Tywyn floods, and there we had a sea defence that was designed, really, to protect the railway, which, once it gave way, caused thousands of people to have to be evacuated and thousands of homes to be flooded. It was because of the negligence, really, of what was British Rail at the time, which was responsible primarily for that asset. I don't want to see that sort of catastrophic failure of an important flood defence asset take place again, and I do think it's going to require, I'm afraid, some leadership, some sort of summit arranged by the Welsh Government, in order to move things forward. And I wonder whether you would consider that as something that you could perhaps do in order to inch that project through to completion.

Thank you, Darren Millar, and, yes, I'm very aware of the difficulties several parts of your constituency has experienced with flooding. I certainly remember the floods in Towyn, probably nearly 30 years ago. Around Old Colwyn—I explained why it's not part of this programme. Certainly, a caravan park is a business, so I think we need to have a look at that, perhaps, in a more imaginative way, and I will certainly ask my officials to do so. I think we have brought everybody together, but perhaps we need to bring everybody together again, and I will certainly write to the chief executive of Conwy County Borough Council to see if he can arrange for a meeting, and I'm sure you would be invited to attend also.

I'm not going to repeat anything that's already been said, so you'll be pleased or know that, but I think there's one thing in all of this that can't be denied—although there are those here who will—and that is the fact that we're experiencing an awful lot of climate change. We've had the hottest February ever on record, and a consequence of very high temperatures in the winter will be storms that will follow. And the consequence of the storms, of course, will be areas subject to being flooded. So, we're seeing more and more areas that have never experienced flooding before experiencing it now for the very first time. And it makes it virtually impossible to predict where that flooding incident might happen. So, I welcome your different approach about not putting concrete down just as way of combating what we don't know, really, we're looking at.

So, in terms of thinking differently, I wonder if you would consider, when we have large-scale developments, in terms of the car parking arrangements, that we don't have non-permeable car parking arrangements, but we actually move now to the different solutions that are already happening in smaller scale developments. Because I think it's hugely important that, if we're talking about towns that are experiencing flooding, and we're putting down some development, we need to really think about the consequence of what we're doing, and I think that that would be hugely beneficial.

I do thank you for your statement and I am really pleased to welcome £150 million for a nationwide programme of flood protection works. And I do also welcome money to complete two important Powys schemes—one in Talgarth and one in Welshpool—because Welshpool town centre has been specifically hard hit in the past, as has Talgarth. So, I know those people in those areas will really welcome this fund.

But I suppose my overall plea today is that we will need to think—and it's evidenced already by your statement—differently, and that here, definitely, prevention will be much better than cure, since we don't know what those weather patterns are going to be, and we don't know when we're going to experience extreme, heavy downpours. And unlike some in this Chamber, I do recognise that we are going through a period where the weather patterns are changing rapidly.

Thank you, Joyce Watson. And you're absolutely right—climate change is obviously having a massive impact on our weather and you referred to the hottest February I think we've had. And you could see this morning from the flash floods that we had that this is going to become ever-occurring, I think, as we go forward.

I'm very pleased you mentioned two schemes in your area, and you also made a very important point—we cannot defend all parts of Wales from flooding, but I do think there are opportunities for a much more sustainable and natural form of coastal management in certain areas. I think salt marshes, for instance, dunes and coastal vegetation can dissipate wave energy and reduce coastal flood risk. So, I really do want to encourage the use of natural flood risk management techniques as a measure for reducing risks to homes and businesses, and this position will be set out in our new national strategy.

Natural flood risk management should always be considered, I think. You referred to large-scale schemes. I think natural flood risk management should be considered when appraising any flood scheme. It may not always be the best solution—you know, we are going to need hard defences—but I think effective land management at a catchment area may be able to reduce the need for larger defences, for instance. So, I think they always should be considered.

Thank you for your statement, Minister. The RSPB's state of nature report highlighted the fact that erosion results in the loss of 2 million tonnes of topsoil each year in the UK. The loss of topsoil goes beyond the impact this has on the availability of fertile land for agriculture. The degraded land impacts the soil's ability to hold onto water, which can lead to increased flood risk. So, Minister what action is your Government taking to tackle soil erosion in Wales?

Farmland has an important role to play in mitigating flood risk. Post Brexit, we will have an opportunity to reformulate our financial support for agriculture. Minister, what consideration have you given to introducing a payment scheme for farmers to maintain natural flood management schemes, such as planting new flood plains, or creating new ponds, ditches and embanked reservoirs?

We are facing increased flood risks in the coming decades as a result of our climate changing. Minister, how does the Government intend to change planning policies to ensure that all new developments and any new infrastructure projects make sufficient provision for water capture and reduce the amount of run-off? I have attended several meetings within my region where flooding has left constituents devastated. 

Finally, Minister, with regard to coastal erosion, my region has suffered huge erosion as a result of Welsh Government policies to allow the removal of millions of tonnes of sand from the Bristol channel, which resulted in the loss of sand from our beaches. Minister, will you rule out any future licensing for sand dredging in the Bristol channel in order to protect the beaches of South Wales West from coastal erosion? Thank you.

Thank you, Caroline Jones, for those questions. You articulated how climate change is affecting our wildlife and our biodiversity, and you referred to topsoil. I go back to what I was saying about natural flood risk management: I think it's really important that we look at all management techniques as a measure for preventing such things occurring. I've mentioned our national strategy, which is currently being drafted, and that will look at how we need to look at innovative and natural flood risk management solutions, alongside the more traditional defence schemes, which, as you will have heard me saying to Joyce Watson in answer to her questions, we will always need. But it is really important that we look at new innovation.

I think in Wales we're really ideally placed to integrate such approaches—we've got established engineering schemes—and I think that's because we work very closely with risk management authorities and NRW. I do think there are so many opportunities for a more sustainable and natural form of coastal management and it's really important that we bring those forward. I mentioned I will be working closely with my colleague Julie James, who has responsibility for planning, looking at planning policy. Obviously, 'Planning Policy Wales' 10 was brought in in December, and the Minister will also be bringing forward the national development plan. I think it's really important that we look at those two in relation to flooding. 

Thank you, Minister.

The next item, therefore, is the legislative consent motion on the Trade Bill. I call on the Minister for International Relations and the Welsh Language to move the motion—Eluned Morgan.

Thank you very much. I move the motion. Thank you for the opportunity to explain further the background to this motion on legislative consent on the UK Trade Bill. The objective of the Trade Bill is to ensure that our trading relations can continue and that procurement markets remain available to us. It’s worth noting that the Bill will achieve four things. First, it will provide regulation-making powers to Ministers of the Crown and devolved authorities in order to put the World Trade Organization trade agreements in place. Secondly, the Bill will provide regulation-making powers to Ministers of the Crown as well as devolved authorities, and this will mean that international trade agreements with third countries that already have trade agreements with the European Union can continue. Thirdly, it will establish a trade remedy authority to provide a new trade remedy framework for the UK. And finally, it will be a gateway for data sharing between the HMRC and other private and public bodies.

I want to be clear from the outset that the main purpose of the Trade Bill is to ensure the continuity of trade and to safeguard the membership of the UK in the Government procurement agreement. It doesn’t relate to the process to agree trade deals in future. We have stated clearly to the UK Government that no process or lack of process that relates to trade continuity programmes will set a precedent for the role that we wish to play in negotiating new trade agreements. And it is worth highlighting that the relationship between Wales and the UK Government in terms of new trade deals isn’t included in the scope of this Bill, and we will deal with this separately.

Despite that, I welcome the amendments passed in the House of Lords, and these make it clear that when future trade agreements are discussed, there will be a role for the UK Parliament and for devolved authorities too, so that they too can participate in negotiations on trade agreements for the future.

We have explained clearly in our policy, our trade policy, what our requirements are in terms of participating in these negotiations. And I’m pleased to say that the discussions on the establishment of a ministerial forum on international trade and a concordat on the issue are progressing well. Of course, I will provide an update to the Assembly on these negotiations at an appropriate time.

Now, I have put in place two legislative consent memorandums for this Bill. The supplementary memorandum tabled last week notes the latest information on the matters that require consent.

I think it's fair to say that when this Trade Bill was first introduced, we had a significant number of concerns. Some were within the scope of our legislative consent, and some were not. And as a result, we made clear in our first LCM that we would not at that time recommend legislative consent. Now, these concerns were echoed by the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee and the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee. Now, at the time, the Welsh Government was locked in a wider dispute with the UK Government about the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill and the potential threat it posed to the exercise of devolved competence. Now, the resolution of that dispute through the conclusion of the inter-governmental agreement, endorsed, it must be said, by a significant majority of this Assembly when it gave its legislative consent to that Bill, paved the way for progress on this Bill. 

Now, overall, we're pleased with the progress that has been made on the Bill because of the amendments, in addition to the non-legislative despatch box commitments that have been made since its introduction. In particular, and with our agreement, the UK Government tabled amendments to reflect the amendments made in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. Now, in respect of our other proposed amendments, we secured despatch-box commitments for—again, the exact same nature pertains to these as were made on the EU Withdrawal Bill.

Now, the UK Government have made a commitment that they will not normally use the powers in the Bill in areas of devolved competence without the consent of the devolved administrations. The UK Government has also committed to consulting with Welsh Ministers before extending the sunset clause.

Finally, although outside of our competence and, therefore, the scope of this consent memorandum, the UK Government has made a number of commitments on the new trade remedies authority. Whilst we fully accept that the TRA is an independent body, we believe there is a need to ensure that the Welsh Government has a clear means to engage with the TRA, and I'm pleased with the agreement that we've reached over the TRA, which goes beyond our initial ask of the UK Government.

Now, in relation to the non-legislative commitments, I would, of course, have preferred these to be on the face of the Bill. However, the approach we've taken mirrors the hard-fought agreement that we reached with the UK Government in respect of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. I have every expectation that the UK Government will deliver on its commitments.

I realise the Bill has been controversial as it's passed through Parliament, and that, with opposition amendments still being tabled, there's a possibility further changes could be made to the Bill. Should this be the case, I will, of course, make the Assembly aware. However, the Bill is now nearing its final stages in Parliament and I would urge Members to support this LCM.

Chair of the External Affairs and Additional Legislation Committee, David Rees.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank the Minister for her contribution this afternoon, because it has clearly set out some of the points that are important? It is important to stress that this is not about future trade agreements—this is about the trade agreements that are currently in place between the EU and other nations and how they're transferred over to the UK.

The external affairs committee has been following the developments of the UK Government's policy for international trade, and we've taken steps as a committee to develop expertise and understanding of the possible implications for Wales of the UK's approach. We've also started work to scrutinise the implications for Wales arising from those international agreements that are being carried over, having considered around 20 in the past fortnight—and several of these will rely on the Trade Bill being approved.

As a committee, I will start by saying that we do recognise that the Trade Bill, or at least some other form of legislation along similar lines, is needed to ensure that we have a smooth transition from the trading relationships we currently have through our membership of the EU to any relationships we have when we leave the EU. Acknowledging this, we also have a range of outstanding concerns, however, regarding the drafting of the Bill insofar as it seeks to legislate over devolved areas.

A year ago, we published our first report on the Trade Bill, and we were in agreement with the Welsh Government not to approve consent on similar lines, but we actually had a few extra concerns to add. That was very much—I think we saw the Bill being written very much in the same vein as the EU withdrawal Bill at the time, and those changes that were in the EU withdrawal Bill hadn't been transferred to the Trade Bill at that point in time.

The amendments to the Bill addressed some of our concerns—not all. Concurrent powers is a clear one that we have concerns about, because we believe that, actually, the Bill has exacerbated the use of concurrent powers under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018; I'll focus my contribution on that today.

Members will know that the external affairs committee, the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee and the Llywydd have all expressed concerns over the Welsh Government's approach to legislating for Brexit, insofar as much as the primary and secondary legislation related to Brexit is being routed through the UK Parliament more than the Assembly, and that's mainly at the Welsh Government's request. Now, I understand that the Welsh Government often states that it's a capacity issue, but it is still a fact.

We have previously opposed the granting of concurrent powers in devolved areas in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, because we were concerned that it would diminish the role of this Assembly in the process of legislating for Brexit. We've taken the same position in relation to the Trade Bill, so we are consistent in our concerns. We took this position last year, we've had the opportunity to observe how the EU withdrawal Act powers have been used and we've seen significantly more of the correcting statutory instruments that engage the Assembly's competence being made in London rather than Cardiff. The CLA committee has reported that some of these instruments have made substantive policy changes and that they've not just been used to make technical changes.

Further, since the original LCM was laid, the new devolution settlement for Wales, set out in the Wales Act 2017, has also come into force. Under this settlement, the Assembly is restricted from removing or modifying UK ministerial powers in devolved policy areas where those powers are concurrent with the Welsh Ministers' powers, or where the Welsh Ministers need the consent of or to consult with UK Ministers before they can exercise those powers. Therefore, every time a new concurrent power is created, or a Welsh ministerial power is made subject to consent or consultation with UK Ministers, future Assembly legislative competence is restricted. 

Now, these three developments—the use of concurrent powers to limit the Assembly's role in legislating for Brexit, the use of concurrent powers to make substantive policy changes, in contradiction to the Welsh ministerial commitments and inter-governmental agreement, and the change to the devolution settlement, have led to a continuation of our concerns around the granting of concurrent powers in the Trade Bill. We concluded that our original concern about the provision of concurrent powers was well founded and still stands in relation to this Bill.

Now, we did read the legislative consent memorandum from the Minister and the amendments to that Bill, and we concluded that perhaps the Minister found herself in a similar place to us: observing relatively unsatisfactory progress against some of the demands for changes to the Bill, yet having to acknowledge the need for legislation if we are to exit smoothly from the EU—we acknowledge that.

I think it's important to highlight that where we have greater concerns is far more on the role of this institution as the Assembly, and ensuring the ability of this Assembly to scrutinise the processes and decisions being taken. We've continually reported against those concerns, and we will continue to do so if we see them. And our consideration of the Trade Bill illustrates the often unsatisfactory balancing act that is required when considering questions of legislative consent, because we can't actually change something; it's a simple binary decision on an LCM—we either approve it in its entirety or we reject it in its entirety. So, that is one of the concerns. That's nothing to do with this Bill, but it's still an issue we have. 

There has been progress made; we recognise that. Some of the amendments sought by the Welsh Government have been agreed by the UK Government—some of them based upon commitments rather than actual text at this point in time, because, as you said, they're despatch box commitments. But they're still not actually on the face of the Bill. So, we do have deep concerns. 

I hope, in closing, that the Welsh Government has heard our concerns about the use of concurrent powers and the gap in scrutiny that's being created as a consequence of that, and will ensure that we do a lot more scrutiny here rather than pass them on to Westminster.

Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, Mick Antoniw. 

Thank you, Llywydd. We reported on the Welsh Government’s first LCM in respect of the Trade Bill on 16 March 2018, and in October 2018 we also reported on the regulations to be made under the Bill. We considered the supplementary legislative consent motion at our meeting last week. We were, of course, not in a position to take evidence from the Minister due to the tight timescale for reporting. We laid our report on the supplementary legislative consent motion yesterday, and there are a number of points that I wish to highlight.

We have noted the comments of the Welsh Government regarding the exercise of concurrent powers in clauses 1 and 2 of the Bill, and the commitments it has obtained. These commitments do, as the Minister has commented, appear to mirror the principles set out in the inter-governmental agreement on the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill. We would welcome a commitment from the Minister to either publish a document setting out these commitments in full, or to secure an appropriate amendment to the existing inter-governmental agreement.     

We do, however, draw the Assembly’s attention to the concerns that we have expressed on the differences of interpretation between this committee and the Welsh Government about the inter-governmental agreement. In particular, our concerns centre on a difference of opinion with regard to what constitutes new policy and to potential unintended consequences arising for the legislative competence of the National Assembly, some of which have already been identified.  

There are also concerns about the application of the Sewel convention as it applies to the consent of devolved legislatures in respect of UK Government Bills. The status of Sewel and the reliance on it in legislation that intrudes on devolved areas of competence is a matter of concern to which the committee is paying increasing attention. The Sewel convention provides that the UK Government will not normally legislate in devolved areas. It is our view that there is a need to clarify what this means and the extent to which it can any longer be relied upon to protect devolved competences.

For that reason, we would welcome clarification from the Minister on whether there are any exceptions to the commitment that UK Government Ministers will not normally use the powers in devolved areas without the Welsh Ministers’ consent. We ask this because such an exception is highlighted in similar requirements set out in Part 5 of the devolution guidance note relating to parliamentary and Assembly primary legislation affecting Wales.  

Standing Order 30C sets out certain requirements in circumstances where the Welsh Ministers consent to UK Ministers acting in devolved areas under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. In line with the principles that have resulted in the adoption of new commitments relating to the Trade Bill, we believe that Standing Order 30C should be amended to apply to the Trade Bill once enacted. 

We raised concerns about the scope of the regulation-making powers in the Bill in our report on the Welsh Government's original LCM and in our report on the scrutiny of regulations made under the Bill. Our main concern was that the Bill allowed UK Ministers to make regulations that amend the Government of Wales Act 2006. Any such regulations that amend the 2006 Act could modify legislative competence of the National Assembly. Further, such regulations could only be made by UK Ministers and would be laid before the UK Parliament only. Whilst such regulations would now be subject to the affirmative procedure, we do repeat the constitutional principle that the legislative competence of the National Assembly should not be modified by regulations made by UK Ministers.

While there have been assurances that regulation-making powers will not be used to modify the legislative competence of the Assembly, those assurances are, of course, not legally binding. We also note the non-legislative commitments obtained in relation to the activities of the trade remedies authority. However, there is a lack of clarity about the role of this new body and what information the Welsh Government will make available to enable the Assembly to scrutinise the activities of that authority. 

We note that the Welsh Government has not yet tabled a written statement announcing full details of the commitments secured and providing information about the operation of the trade remedies authority, and we do believe it should do so as soon as possible. Thank you, Llywydd.  

Plaid Cymru will be voting against allowing legislative consent for the Trade Bill today. Before I outline our reasons for this decision, I'd like to say that members of the public listening to this debate might well be forgiven for thinking its subject matter is quite abstract. Talk of LCMs, Standing Orders and conventions may seem like they're not accessible, but these principles and conventions could have very real, concrete consequences for our democracy and the relationship between this legislature and Westminster, not just for this Assembly but for Assemblies in the future. So, we have to get it right.  

But, to return to the matter in hand, the first reason we will be voting against allowing legislative consent is that we—as others have already expressed—have grave concerns regarding the Bill's potential impact on the Sewel convention. As drafted, it allows UK Ministers to make regulations that amend the Government of Wales Act 2006. The UK Government has already demonstrated it is willing to ignore Sewel by forging ahead with the withdrawal Bill against the will of the Scottish Parliament. We are not satisfied with the vague, non-binding assurances that have been provided that UK Ministers will not seek to alter the legislative competence of the Senedd without consent—normally. Plaid Cymru cannot vote in favour of a course of action without legal guarantees that the UK Government will not legislate in devolved areas.

Moreover, and secondly, we have concerns too that the powers proposed for Welsh Ministers have been framed too widely, giving them the potential power to make regulations wherever they deem appropriate. The international relations Minister's justification in her letter to the Chair of the external affairs committee that these broader powers may be useful in the future does not assuage our concerns, as a decision on whether to exercise such powers should be taken following consideration by the Assembly, not individual Ministers. That, after all, is how this legislature is meant to operate.

Thirdly, we find it unacceptable that there exists a possibility that UK Ministers could extend the time limit by three years, using powers conferred within the Bill, in perpetuity. They could do this without the Assembly having a formal role in scrutinising the decision to extend their powers again. A non-legislative commitment has been given, but once again this does not provide sufficient protection and it remains unacceptable. 

Finally, there is a serious lack of clarity in relation to how the proposed new trade remedies authority would operate in Wales and its potential impact on devolved policy areas, a point that has not been addressed by the Minister. Again, commitments have been made but they're non-binding. We don't believe that commitments promising a consultative role are sufficient and feel there should clearly be Welsh and Scottish representation on the new UK trade remedies authority.

To conclude, Llywydd, Plaid Cymru cannot consent to an LCM that has the potential to constrain this Chamber's powers and deny our nation a voice, and we will be voting against. Diolch.

The Minister to reply to the debate—Eluned Morgan.

Diolch yn fawr. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to discuss what is actually quite a complex Bill. It's quite difficult, I think—you're absolutely right—for the general public to be able to access this kind of debate. But you're absolutely right: these are important debates, and it is important that we get this right, because there are potential implications for us in the future.

I think, really, what we need to remember is that what we're talking about in this LCM is the trade continuity Bill. What we're talking about are agreements that have been made between the EU and other nations around the world. We want some of those to continue, and, if that's the case, what we need are technical changes. We need the UK Government to be able to transfer those over. They have promised us that they're not going to make any changes; it'll just be technical in nature. That's what we're asking, this is not about future trade agreements, and we've made it absolutely clear that that is a different conversation, that we are having that conversation—it's actually quite constructive, and they are agreeing to some very profound changes in terms of the way that we interact with them in future. So, I think we mustn't get the LCM mixed up with future trade agreements.

It's not perfect, because, actually, the constitution of the UK is not perfect. So, obviously, in particular at this time, we've got to be practical, I think, and understanding of the way things need to change. Of course I understand that the Assembly would want a role in scrutinising, and I think it's important that we look at ensuring that there's as much transparency as possible so that the Assembly can scrutinise what comes from the UK Government. The trade remedies authority is actually nothing to do with this LCM, but what's happened is that they've gone much, much further than they needed to. They've actually really interacted with us in an area that is not a devolved area of responsibility. But I would be more than happy to provide a written statement on where we've got on that.

On the sunset clause that was referred to, there's been an agreement—and, yes, it was a despatch box agreement, but I think we've got to understand that there is a precedent for despatch box agreements being things that you should be able to count on, and that was given in terms of any extension to the sunset period being extended. Now, if this doesn't pass, despite the fact that, actually, the UK Government has done everything that we ask them to, I think we have to think about what the consequences of that would be. We are less likely to be able to influence in future. And what we're talking about at the moment, when we are in this constitutional flux as a result of coming out of the European Union, is that, actually, we need to build some trust up between all the different parts of the United Kingdom. And we are starting to prepare for a post-Brexit world, and if we were to reject this, their having made all those concessions, I think it would potentially diminish our opportunity to influence on important matters like trade deals for the future.

The Sewel convention—we have to understand that, yes, of course, it is about 'not normally' legislating, but if this is going to work, and we understand the nature of the constitutional agreement on Sewel, then it's got to be one that is done on mutual respect, and it's got to be—an attempt for us to go against something where they've done everything we've asked them to do—. If we are to reject an LCM after they've done everything, then you've got to ask what does that relationship look like in future.

I don't think we need everything on the face of the Bill. I think it's absolutely right that what we've got to here is a compromise where the UK Government has gone a very, very long way in our direction, and I do hope that this Assembly will be accepting the LCM later today.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, the motion is not agreed, and I will defer voting on this item until voting time.

That brings us to the next legislative consent motion on the Healthcare (International Arrangements) Bill, and I call on the Minister for health to move the motion—Vaughan Gething

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am recommending that the Assembly consent to the legislative consent motion on the Healthcare (International Arrangements) Bill. As Members will be aware, I did not recommend that the Assembly should consent to the original legislative consent memorandum, laid on 15 November last year. This has been a prolonged and now positive engagement with the UK Government to bring this Bill to a position where I am able to recommend consent. Crucially, the UK Government has tabled an amendment to create a statutory requirement for consultation with devolved national Governments, and agreed a memorandum of understanding underpinning that amendment. The memorandum sets out how devolved national Governments will be involved in the development of future international healthcare agreements and regulations giving effect to them, and that memorandum has been shared with scrutiny committees.

The Welsh Government was the only devolved national Government to refuse consent early in the process as we wanted to see changes to the legislation. Because of our intervention and the changes we have led, I believe that this legislation is improved and the position of the devolved national Governments is better respected and reflected. That is why I am now recommending consent to the Bill be given.

I'm grateful to both the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee and the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee for their robust scrutiny of the Bill and the original legislative consent memorandum. This scrutiny has helped to inform the Government's position in our negotiations with the UK Government. I've written to both committees in response to their recommendations, and I shared with them the outcome of the negotiations. While I regret the time that has been taken to secure the hard-won concessions from the UK Government, it has meant that there was no time available to refer the supplementary legislative consent memorandum. I hope that, despite that, members of both committees and Members generally will share my judgment that what we have achieved is a significant step forward.

This Bill forms part of the UK Government's response to the potential exit from the European Union. However, the Bill could also be used to give effect to international healthcare agreements with other third countries, albeit there has been an amendment passed in the Lords on that this afternoon.

Current reciprocal healthcare arrangements with the European Union benefit Welsh patients and citizens in a number of ways. These include the use of the European Health Insurance Card system for individuals travelling overseas in the EU and access to healthcare for pensioners living within those countries. Welsh residents also are currently able to access planned medical treatment in another EU country via the S2 route, and, of course, patients can purchase healthcare in other countries and apply for reimbursement using the cross-border healthcare directive. These arrangements provide a great deal of security for a number of individuals. I think all of us, regardless of our party, would agree that we should look to continue reciprocal healthcare arrangements wherever possible.

Inevitably, however, in a 'no deal' Brexit, these rights will not be universally preserved—another argument why, as this Chamber has said repeatedly, a 'no deal' Brexit should be ruled out. The Bill seeks to provide the domestic legislation to give effect to these healthcare arrangements in the future, whether the UK leaves the EU with a deal or not. It can be considered as part of a suite of legislation that includes secondary legislation that would make transitional provision in the event of a 'no deal' exit.

This Bill provides powers to fund and arrange healthcare outside of the UK, to give effect to international healthcare arrangements, and to make provision for data sharing to enable a new reciprocal healthcare system to take place. These powers will be used to give effect to the new reciprocal agreements beyond any transitional arrangements. The powers can also be used to pay for overseas healthcare for individuals for humanitarian reasons where reciprocal agreements are not in place.

There are a number of complexities when considering the devolved aspects of reciprocal healthcare agreements. Whilst it is for the UK to negotiate international agreements, it is clear that the provision of healthcare is devolved. The UK Government has recognised this, and acknowledges the provisions within the Bill require the consent of this Assembly. As I've said, there has now been considerable progress over the course of our discussions with the UK Government, and I'm pleased that the UK Government tabled amendments to the Bill last week. These amendments address the concerns that I raised upon the introduction of the legislation. In particular, we pressed for the requirement that the UK Government would gain our consent to regulations made under section 2, as recommended by CLAC. However, as I explained when I appeared before the two committees, we concluded it would be equally if not more valuable to press for upstream engagement in the negotiations themselves, to ensure that agreements did not result in demands for unpalatable demands for change to legislation within devolved competence and unsighted implications for NHS Wales.

I am, therefore, pleased that in the memorandum of understanding, which underpins the Government amendments to the Bill, we have secured commitments that the UK Government will consult the Welsh Government on the negotiation of healthcare agreements, with a role in the initial scoping, through to the concluding of a draft agreement; be consulted on initial development and subsequent drafting of regulations under the Bill, which implement these agreements with the UK Government making every effort to proceed by consensus with devolved national Governments, but to not normally make regulations without securing agreement from Welsh Ministers beforehand. And if agreement is not possible, then an exchange of ministerial letters will be made available to both Houses of Parliament, setting out the position.

The Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee—Mick Antoniw.

Thank you, Llywydd. We reported on the Welsh Government's legislative consent memorandum on the UK Government's Healthcare (International Arrangements) Bill in January 2019, making seven recommendations, and we are grateful to the Minister for his subsequent response to that report. And whilst we had no time to report on the supplementary memorandum, my remarks will reflect on its contents and the related correspondence from the Minister, including the Minister's letter that was received yesterday. But before I discuss the legislation itself, it is important to highlight our concerns that the Welsh Government was only made aware of the Bill just before its introduction to the UK Parliament. At a time of such constitutional upheaval, the need for Governments to work together in the spirit of trust and co-operation is, indeed, paramount.

The UK Government's initial approach on this Bill has not been as helpful as it could have been and reinforces the concerns that we raised in our 2018 report 'UK governance post-Brexit'. That being said, the letter from the Minister yesterday highlighted amendments tabled to the Bill by the UK Government, which sunset regulation-making powers in clause 2(1)(a) and 2(1)(b), and to remove the consequential Henry VIII power in clause 5(3). This is, indeed, a very positive development, and I welcome the proposed changes. And as the Minister has said, they do represent a very significant step forwards.

Turning now to our report on the LCM, our first recommendation sought a requirement on the face of the Bill for the Welsh Ministers' consent to be sought where UK Ministers exercise the functions of the Welsh Ministers in devolved areas. It's disappointing that the Welsh Government rejected our recommendation. It did so because it felt it would have greater influence over healthcare arrangements by being involved at an early stage of UK policy development. What the Bill will include is a duty to consult the Welsh Ministers, backed up by a memorandum of understanding. That memorandum of understanding provides that the UK Government will make every effort to proceed by consensus and with the devolved administrations, and that the UK Government will not normally make regulations without securing agreement from the devolved administrations. Ministerial letters should be exchanged where agreement cannot be reached and placed in both Houses of the UK Parliament, although it would appear not in the National Assembly.

We would therefore ask whether the Minister could confirm that the approach adopted could potentially allow the UK Ministers to act in devolved areas without agreement from the Welsh Government. If that is the case, and it were to happen, I would ask if the Minister could explain the implications for both policy and the Assembly's legislative competence in this area. It would also be helpful if the Minister could explain why it was not possible to secure an early engagement in the policy development and a statutory duty of consent. It would seem an appropriate safeguard to have both and be more in tune with the need for Governments to work together constructively as we leave the EU.

I also note there is no commitment, either in the memorandum of understanding or in the correspondence to us from the Minister, to provide the National Assembly with the exchange of correspondence, where agreement is not reached.

We also note that the Minister rejected the third recommendation in our report. It sought to ensure that the Welsh Ministers notify the National Assembly when they give consent to UK Ministers, exercising the functions of the Welsh Ministers in devolved areas. This is important to ensure that the National Assembly is in a position to undertake its scrutiny function, including the exercise of the relevant functions by UK Ministers in devolved areas. This recommendation was intended to reflect existing practice as regards consenting to regulations made under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. The recommendation was not dependent on that consent being a statutory obligation in the Act. It also applied where consent is provided through a non-statutory agreement. I'd ask the Minister, in his closing remarks, to confirm that it is the Welsh Government's intention to provide consent, in some form, to the UK Ministers acting in devolved areas and to commit to notifying the National Assembly when it provides that consent, as it currently does now under the 2018 Act; to commit to making available to the Assembly correspondence where agreement cannot be reached by the Welsh and UK Ministers; and to clarify over what time period he expects the arrangements to last. Our report also dealt with some important constitutional principles, namely the statutory instrument consent memorandum process. We also raised our concerns in our progress report on scrutinising Brexit regulations, and having received a response to that report yesterday, we will be considering this issue further over the coming weeks.

I rise to advise this Chamber to oppose this legislative consent motion, and I do not do that lightly. We do appreciate the urgency of the situation, and I think it's absolutely appropriate to acknowledge that the Minister has made some real progress in improving what was initially, but we believe still continues to be, a bad and dangerous piece of legislation.

I want to turn briefly, to start my contribution, to why we don't feel that the amendments set out in the Minister's letter yesterday fully address the concerns, though they do address some important concerns. They don't go far enough. The Government amendment to remove the power of the UK Government to repeal or revoke primary Welsh legislation is welcome, and so is the sunset clause, but the sunset clause in itself does not address the very wide scope of the power in clause 2, and a UK Government that was disposed to do so could do a considerable amount of damage in five years if they put their minds to it.

The Minister will be aware of the views of the House of Lords's Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee that the powers given to Ministers in this legislation—UK Ministers, that is—are excessive and out of proportion with the stated outcomes. I'll just remind the Chamber of some of the examples of that: there is no limit to the amount of payments that can be made; there is no limit on who can be funded worldwide; there is no limit on the type of healthcare that can be funded; regulations can confer functions to anyone anywhere—and I could continue. The Minister will be very well aware of these concerns.

We've raised concerns about the breadth of these powers and the powers that this Bill could give to UK Ministers to, for example, provide full market access to healthcare service companies from all over the world. Again, I'll quote from the House of Lords debate, where a Member raises concerns that the Minister's assurances missed the point that was made, and then asked again for clarification that the Minister needs to address.

'The scope and powers of this Bill enable the Secretary of State to arrange contracts with providers to our NHS from anywhere.'

Now, we cannot see what is in the new set of amendments that would protect Wales automatically from those potential uses of powers by the UK Government.

We welcome the amendments that the Minister has secured, but I want to specifically ask him if he's prepared to look at some of the other amendments that I understand have been tabled as backbench amendments. I'm advised that there are some backbench amendments tabled that could deal with this issue of that very broad scope of powers, effectively granting UK Ministers just the power to replicate existing EU arrangements. Surely that would be preferable to this very wide-ranging scope of powers, which the House of Lords's committee has stated, and we believe, goes beyond the stated aim of the Bill. I would urge the Minister to take a look at these and see if there's any capacity, even at this late stage, to further negotiate with the UK Government to get them to accept some of those amendments, so we bring this Bill back within the scope for which it was originally intended.

I briefly want to turn, before I close my remarks, to the issue of memorandums of understanding. So, for example, the memorandum of understanding shared with the health committee on 28 February—and, again, I'm grateful to the Minister for doing that—and annex 2, section c, paragraph 19:

'UK Government will make every effort'—

who defines what 'every effort' might be?—

'in the making of regulations to which Section 5 of HIA Act applies to proceed on the basis of consensus'—

well, I should jolly well hope so, too—

'and will not normally make regulations that have not been agreed with Ministers from the devolved administrations.'

Now, the Minister may be able to reassure me today that the amendments proposed will deal with that. I don't think that they fully do. I just would like us, Llywydd, to look at the word 'normal'. I mean, whatever these are, they are not normal times. Ministers in this place frequently tell us how shocking and dreadful the Conservative Government is, how they can't be relied on to do anything very much, and yet, in the next breath, they're saying that they believe on a case-by-case basis that they have achieved agreements with these shocking individuals that they feel they can rely on. Both things cannot be true. It cannot be possible that these people are badly disposed and are likely to behave improperly and that their memorandums of understanding can be trusted. I sincerely hope that I am wrong, and perhaps the Minister can provide us with further assurance about that process. [Interruption.] I'd be very happy to take an intervention if the Minister wishes to make one. Or, indeed, if anybody on her backbenches would like to make that in her place. 

But I do think we have to ask about what 'normally' means. Can we rely on memorandums of understanding that can be changed? I appreciate what the Minister said in the previous debate about the normal procedures around what is said in the Chamber of the House of Commons needing to stand, but I think we all know, as I say, that these times are not normal.

Now, obviously, most of us wish that we weren't in this position. Most of us wish that the Minister wasn't in the position of having to proceed as quickly with what is an important matter, and I would agree with him, of course, that we don't want to find ourselves in a situation where those reciprocal arrangements are not available. We do appreciate the urgency, and we also appreciate that there has been some movement in the right direction. I, for one, don't put much faith in memorandums of understanding. I prefer to put my faith in legally binding laws. These are very difficult circumstances, but difficult circumstances are not an excuse for making potentially bad law, and I urge the Chamber to reject.

The Minister to reply to the debate. Vaughan Gething. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank both Members for their contributions to the debate. The Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee asked a series of highly detailed questions that I won't be able to properly answer at this point in time. I don't think I'd be able to do them justice. I will, however, write to the committee to pick up the points that are on the record to make sure that they are properly dealt with.

But it's worth reflecting that, alongside the memorandum of understanding, the amendment laid on 5 March puts on the face of the Bill that requirement for the Secretary of State to consult Welsh Ministers before making regulations under section 2 that contain provisions that are within the legislative competence of this place. The Bill has been amended to remove the power to amend, repeal or revoke primary legislation, including Acts or Measures of the National Assembly.

It is worth reminding ourselves that the Bill as originally laid secured the consent of Scottish Ministers. The reason why we're in a different position is because this Government took a different view, and we negotiated and secured real and material change that does better safeguard the position of not just this Government, but of every devolved national government within the United Kingdom. As Mick Antoniw referred to, the recently tabled amendments to introduce a sunset clause limit the power to make unilateral provision to five years after exit day, so the UK Government won't continue to be able to make regulations to give effect to healthcare agreements beyond this date.

I do need to try and address the tone and the tenor and some of the content of the remarks made by Helen Mary Jones, because I don't agree with her assessment that this Bill should be described as a bad and dangerous piece of legislation. It is a necessary piece of legislation for international reciprocal healthcare agreements to continue—those that Welsh citizens and others benefit from as we are today. The risk is that, if we are not in a position to do this, and the Bill is not passed, then if we leave without a deal at the end of March, our citizens that we're responsible for in other parts of Europe will not have their entitlement to reciprocal healthcare. It is a necessary piece of legislation, and the purpose of the Bill simply does not stretch—

Will the Minister take an intervention?

Let me finish this point. It does not stretch to all the scenarios of concern that were raised in the contribution by Helen Mary Jones. I don't want to return to being a lawyer again, but you do need to look at the purpose of the Bill while understanding its provisions and any action taken under it, especially when that counts as secondary legislation. I'll happily take the intervention.

So, do you dispute the view of the House of Lords committee that said that this clearly goes beyond—the drafting of the legislation, even with the amendments that you've mentioned—clearly goes beyond the stated intention of the legislation when it was first tabled? And do you not have any concerns about that?

Look, I'm not here to try and say this is a piece of perfect legislation. The choice we make is whether to give our consent for the legislation to go ahead given the impact that it will have on our citizens if we do consent, or do not. If I were drafting this piece of legislation it would look differently, and I know the House of Lords has had concerns about the scope of the legislation, and one of the amendments passed by the House of Lords today limits the scope to the wider European Economic Area rather than our wider international agreements. I would prefer that to be the end shape of the Bill, but even if it isn't, I still believe the right judgment is for the Assembly to consent to the Bill as it has been presented, because it does provide further safeguards for this place and our powers, and actually, much more importantly, it safeguards the positions of our citizens that we have responsibility for. I've previously made clear that the Welsh Government does not wish to block reciprocal healthcare arrangements. But we do need to be appropriately involved in the development of any future reciprocal healthcare agreements, and that has not happened up to this point in time. So, we have an agreement on enhancing our role in the future agreement and positing of reciprocal healthcare arrangements. And the legislative and the non-legislative assurance provided by the UK Government bring this Bill to a position where I can and do recommend that consent is given.

So, we've maintained a strong negotiating position with the UK Government that has resulted in positive amendments to the Bill and a memorandum of understanding that makes clear how we will be involved in the development of future healthcare agreements, and I do note for the Chamber that Scottish Ministers have indicated their support for the approach negotiated by this Government. Reciprocal healthcare agreements provide assurances to many individuals and it is right that the Welsh Government should play a positive and active role in ensuring that appropriate provision is in place for Welsh residents in the future, and I therefore ask Members to support the motion.

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

That brings us to our final item, the motion to allocate committee chairs to political groups, and I call a member of the Business Committee to formally move the motion.

I move.

Darren Millar formally moved. Neil Hamilton.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. It's a sad day, I think, for the National Assembly, that this motion is being brought before it, because we were all elected on the same basis two and a half years ago, and we are all proxies for the people here, and the Standing Order that establishes the distribution of Chairs of committees, in the aftermath of the last election, I think, did properly represent the results of the election in May 2016. What we're going to do today, if this motion passes, is actually make a very considerable disturbance in that situation.

One of the things that's impressed me since I've been here is the non-partisan way in which committees operate, and I believe that every single Chair of a committee, even those with robust views that are very far from mine, like Mick Antoniw, have used their position as committee Chairs with scrupulous impartiality, and I think that that is very much to the benefit of this institution—that we can have violent arguments across the Chamber, but in committees, we can work together and co-operate and be collegiate as well.

In the course of the last couple of years there has been a change in the numbers in different groups: my own group has lost three Members, Plaid Cymru has lost two Members, the Conservatives have gained a Member, and others have become independents. So, the position is, at the moment, that Labour's got, according to the figures produced by the research staff, 29 Members and it has six Chairs. That's 48 per cent of all Members and it's got 50 per cent of the Chairs. That's a rough equality. That's quite acceptable. UKIP has got four Members, 7 per cent of the Members, and it has 8 per cent of the chairs—almost exact proportionality. Plaid Cymru on the other hand has got only 17 per cent of the Members, but 25 per cent of the Chairs. The Conservatives have got 20 per cent of Members and 17 per cent of the Chairs. So, yes, the Conservatives are slightly under-represented and Plaid Cymru are significantly over-represented. So, if, as the Standing Order says, the Business Committee should have regard to the need to ensure the balance of Chairs across committees reflects the political groups to which Members belong, it's quite clear that Plaid Cymru should be losing a committee Chair if the Conservatives are to gain one.

There is no argument in principle, whatsoever, for UKIP to lose its Chair, because let's just look at the Standing Order. How could the Business Committee and the Assembly ensure that the balance of Chairs across committees reflects the political groups to which Members belong when UKIP is a group, the implication is that we are entitled therefore to one committee Chair? It certainly does not in any way reflect the balance of groups to deprive one group of a single Chair so it has no representation amongst the Chairs. That is, I think, a fundamental undermining of the Standing Order. What we are seeing here, I'm afraid, today, is a shabby and squalid smash and grab by the Cardiff Bay consensus—the three bigger parties combining together in order to take away the Chair that I believe rightly belongs to us under the Standing Orders that we all voted for at the start of this Assembly. So, this is a case of the tyranny of the majority. We often have debates in this place where people make political points about bullying. This is in fact an instance of bullying. We're a small group. You've got the numbers. We haven't got the numbers. You are determined to take away from us that which is rightfully ours.

Would you take an intervention?

I give way.

Thank you for taking it. Do you agree that Chairs are allocated—not two Chairs to one person? What you had was David Rowlands a Commissioner and also head of the Petitions Committee. Michelle Brown was totally left out. So, I think there would have been more sympathy with the UKIP group had Michelle Brown been allocated a Chair. 

Well, it would have been up to the Assembly to decide whether the Chair would have been allocated to her. That is not the issue that we are currently debating this afternoon. This is about the allocation of Chairs to groups. That has nothing to do with the individual holder of the Chair. I'll come to David Rowlands in a moment. If we really do belive in respecting minority rights, which is another matter that we often hear from the Members who are presumably going to vote to take away the minority's rights today, then that's a position that ought to be respected.

I believe that David Rowlands is indeed a respected Member of this place. He has conducted himself as Chair of the Petitions Committee with the same scrupulousness that other Chairs have in their own respective committees. He has ensured that more petitions are debated in the Chamber than I think has been the case in recent times, and that is a very good thing. So, I think we are actually doing violence to the foundational principle of representation in this place if we pass this motion this afternoon. A precedent is being set here, and I think it's a dangerous one, because any minority in future is at risk of having its rights violated in the same way that ours may well be today. I know that there are Members of the Tory group who have a deep respect for constitutional rights and for fairness and for the principle of fair representation in many contexts. So, I hope that there will be some Members of the Conservative group who will vote today with their traditional views very much in the forefront of their minds. 

I come lastly to Plaid Cymru, which is frequently to be heard lamenting the unfairness of society and much of Government's legislation, and, of course, deeply believes in the rights of small nations. Well, if you believe in the rights of small nations, I think you should believe in the rights of small parties also. The two things are, to all intents and purposes, indistinguishable. There are many Members in this place who like to think that the way we do things here in this Assembly is different from the way it's done in Westminster, and indeed is better than the way it's done in Westminster. Well, I'm afraid, today, that what we are intending to do, if this motion passes, is just the same. It's the same sort of grubby, brutal, tyranny of the majority, which I remember very well from the days when I was in Westminster.

I believe that those who vote for this motion today should have a deep sense of shame about what they're doing and they should reflect upon the constitutional precedent they set and the danger for the future. I do hope that somebody from the Conservative group today, perhaps the business manager, will rise in a moment in order to justify, on principle, the decision that he put forward in the Business Committee and which is the subject of this motion this afternoon.

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

That brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to our first vote. The first vote is on the legislative consent motion on the Trade Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Eluned Morgan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 43, no abstentions, five against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on the legislative consent motion on the Healthcare (International Arrangements) Bill, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Vaughan Gething. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 42, no abstentions, five against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

That brings us to our final vote on the motion to allocate committee Chairs to political groups. I call for a vote, and as is required under Standing Order 17.2D, this motion cannot be passed unless at least two thirds of the Members voting support the motion. So, open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 44, no abstentions, four against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

That brings today’s proceedings to a close.