National Assembly for Wales

Welcome to this Plenary session. Before we begin, I do want to set out a few points. This meeting will be held in hybrid format, with some Members in the Senedd Chamber and others joining by video-conference. A Plenary meeting held by video-conference, in accordance with the Standing Orders of the Welsh Parliament, constitute Senedd proceedings for the purposes of the Government of Wales Act 2006. Some of the provisions of Standing Order 34 will apply for today's Plenary, and these are noted on the agenda. And I also remind Members that Standing Orders relating to order in Plenary meetings apply to this meeting, and apply equally to Members in the Chamber and those joining virtually. 

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

Llywydd, action has been taken across the Welsh Government to mitigate the impact of coronavirus on young people. New investments in training, apprenticeships, further and higher education, and mental health services are amongst the responses mobilised to address the challenges young people face.

First Minister, thank you for that. We know that the pandemic has had a huge impact on children and young people, and I very much welcome the commitment in the COVID reconstruction plan you published today that you will make sure that our young people do not lose out educationally or economically, and that you will support all of our young people to stay in education. 

Many young people who travel from Torfaen to Hereford college for their post-16 education are being prevented by Transport for Wales from boarding trains, despite holding season tickets to travel, and are instead being made to travel on buses, without social distancing, while other passengers are being prioritised for socially distanced train seats. Some young people have been left stranded or are arriving at college late. Do you share my concern, First Minister, that young people are being treated differently to other passengers, and what steps will the Welsh Government take to ensure that young people are not disadvantaged on public transport?

Well, Llywydd, of course I agree with Lynne Neagle that young people should not be disadvantaged for the sake of being young people. But I do know that it is the case that there are trains that can appear to have spaces on them, but those spaces are necessary in order to comply with the regulations that have to be observed by Transport for Wales on both sides of the border. Transport for Wales is providing 70 different bus services to help those young people who otherwise would be unable to go to college or to school in the normal way. An additional carriage has been added to a train arriving in Hereford at 08:53 in the morning since last week, in order to assist some of the young people that Lynne Neagle has referred to. But, travelling by bus, while it is often not as convenient as a train journey, for young people who are cohorting and who are together in a bubble for education purposes, it can be a way that allows those young people to travel safely together.

So, we continue to work on the issue, and while I absolutely agree that young people should not be treated differently for the sake of being young people, Transport for Wales, in very challenging circumstances, are working hard to make sure that Lynne Neagle's constituents, and young people in all parts of Wales, have the transport they need to be able to access their education. 

First Minister, a report by Barnardo's earlier this year highlighted the crisis that's facing fostering, with a 45 per cent rise in children needing foster care within Wales, and yet, conversely, a 51 per cent drop in the availability of foster carers because of the pandemic. Obviously, we can all appreciate the issues that this has thrown up for being able to find foster carers for young people desperately in need of them. Can you please outline what the Welsh Government is able to do to help to bring more parity back in this situation, to increase the number of foster carers we have, so that these children are able to get the support, within a family environment, that they so desperately need?

Llywydd, I thank Angela Burns for that. I think, earlier in the summer, when the Barnardo's report was published, we were able to correct some of the misreporting of those figures, because those figures do not reflect the position of foster care in Wales, where we've actually had quite a healthy recruitment of foster carers during the pandemic and where we have been able to go on making foster care places available to those young people who need them. Now it is, as Angela Burns will know, a constant effort to make sure that we are recruiting the people we need to offer foster care, sometimes to young people who've got some significant issues in their lives—sometimes those are physical disabilities, sometimes they are the legacy of their own histories. And we will go on to create a national fostering network here in Wales, to make sure that opportunities for people who wish to become foster carers, and young people who need foster caring, do not end at the boundaries of their own local authorities, mirroring some of the success we have had in the national adoption service. So, the position in Wales is not quite as the reporting of the Barnardo's report might have led some people to believe. It's been reasonably sustained in this very difficult period, but there's always more we want to do.

It's an issue of grave concern to me, in terms of the impact the pandemic and the restrictions are having on the well-being of young people—and people of all ages, for that matter. I hear anecdotal evidence from people working in medicine and related areas of an increase in suicide and self-harm. Will the Government as a matter of urgency gather and publish data on that so that we know what the situation is, and draw up a strategy on how to deal with issues of well-being, and provide clarity in terms of how they balance the need to deal with COVID with the need to ensure the well-being of people in considering which restrictions to introduce and which to lift, and so on?

Of course, these issues go hand in hand. We do know that the period of coronavirus has been an extremely difficult period for a great number of young people here in Wales. That is why we have strengthened the services that we have to support young people—more funding for higher education and further education to support the well-being of young people as they study, more funding for our schools so that we could have more people to assist within the services that we already offer, and also more support through Meic. As I'm sure Rhun ap Iorwerth knows, Meic is a telephone line where young people can speak to others up to midnight. We have also given more funding to Meic, so that those services will be available throughout the current financial year. And, of course, we are collecting data in the programmes that we run and we publish that data. If there is anything specific that Rhun ap Iorwerth wishes to see, of course I'd be very happy to discuss that with him and to give him that information if it's available.

Question 2 [OQ55631] has been withdrawn, and so, question 3, Caroline Jones.

Llywydd, we keep all aspects of our regulations under continual review, including our approach to fixed-penalty notices. We are currently considering whether the regime needs to be adapted to address specific issues, such as the holding of street or house parties. 

Thank you, First Minister. It is blatantly obvious that the carrot approach is not working and the fines imposed aren't much of a deterrent either. Most of the population of south Wales are once again in draconian lockdowns and all because of the actions of a selfish minority. We have had our liberty curtailed because a few people wanted to have house parties. We are not allowed to visit loved ones because some people thought the rules did not apply to them or that £60 was a small price to pay for a bit of fun. Rules apply to everyone, from Government Ministers to governance students and it is high time we cracked down on rule breakers, and I'm fed up of seeing social media littered with people flagrantly and unashamedly breaking the rules. First Minister, do you agree that we need far steeper penalties and stricter enforcement if we are to avoid more local or even national lockdowns? Diolch.

Well, I agree with aspects of the Member's supplementary question. I agree with her that the vast majority of people in Wales continue to observe the rules and to be scrupulous about it, and that breaches of the rules are carried out by a small minority of people when those breaches are deliberate, flagrant and repeated. When I spoke with the chief constable of Gwent last week about the position in Gwent, where local restrictions have been in place for a number of weeks, she told me that 95 per cent of the population there were complying with the rules and working hard to do so. So, I don't agree with some of the things the Member said, which seemed to imply that there was wholesale non-observation of the restrictions that we've had to put in place.

Where there is a need to increase penalties, we have done so. Back in May, we added to the multiplier of people who repeatedly break the rules so that the maximum penalty in Wales went from £120 to £1,920, and we moved quickly, in advance of August bank holiday, to make sure that £10,000 fines were available in Wales for people who seek to organise illegal music events. Now, we continue to discuss with the police whether they would find it useful to have extended penalties, as I say, in a number of specific areas, including for people who organise house parties and people who flagrantly refuse to observe self-isolation, and if the case is there, then we will do it.

In the end—I'll just make this final point to the Member, Llywydd—this only works if we have a trust-based system, if people are willing to play their part and are convinced of the need to do so. Enforcement has to be a last resort, not a first resort, but where that last resort is needed, we won't hesitate to use it in Wales. 

I live in the largest population crossing a national boundary in the UK, with close relatives nearby on both sides of our invisible border. In this context, what penalties for breaking COVID-19 rules do you believe should apply were an anaesthetic junior doctor at Ysbyty Gland Clwyd to meet his fiancé, undertaking a clinical fellowship at Christie hospital in Manchester, when each has to live locally to these hospitals, each has been at the front line of the coronavirus pandemic since its beginning here, which led both to contract COVID-19 in the course of their work, each has worked additional hours without additional pay, and each lives alone. They persevered with physical and mental exhaustion by supporting each other. However, your latest announcement on lockdown restrictions in north-east Wales means that their primary outlet of support is now illegal because they can't visit each other. 

Well, I've no doubt, Llywydd, that they will understand better than the Member why those restrictions are necessary. On the Welsh side of the north-east Wales border, the rates of coronavirus are still below 100 per 100,000 in the population. In Manchester, today, they are reporting over 500 per 100,000 of the population. And people who work in the health service will undoubtedly understand why it is not sensible for people from very high coronavirus areas to be able to travel to and mix with people who live in areas where the virus is not in such vivid circulation. Those members of the health service will also know, even if the Member doesn't, that the impact of coronavirus at community level is now being felt in our hospitals as well. In the last week, we had 453 beds in our NHS occupied by people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus; two weeks ago, that was 203. Now, if the Member does not understand the need to take action and to take action now to prevent the impact on our NHS returning to where it once was earlier in the year, then I can assure him that people who work in the health service understand that very well. 

Questions now from the party leaders. Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. On Monday, First Minister, it was reported that there were 596 new positive COVID cases identified in Wales following a lab test—the highest figure, I believe, since the pandemic began and SAGE has said that cases overall in Wales are likely to be increasing on a daily basis by between 1 per cent and 5 per cent a day.

Over the past fortnight, I've raised with you the absurdity of people in lockdown areas of England being able to travel to Wales to areas where community transmission is low. The UK Prime Minister's dismissal of the prospect of such travel restrictions should not have come as much of a surprise, perhaps, given the general contempt with which his Government repeatedly demonstrates towards Wales. We've called for action consistently on this issue since the summer. Can you say whether and when you intend to take action yourselves independently as a Government, and, in addition to looking at introducing quarantine as a solution, is consideration being given to making non-essential travel into Wales from a lockdown area illegal and subject to enforcement by the police?

Well, Llywydd, I thank Adam Price for that. I share his sense of disappointment at the Prime Minister's apparent conclusion—and I say 'apparent' because although he gave an interview in which he opined on this matter, he is yet to reply to my letter to him of Monday last week, and I think that is deeply disrespectful, not to me but to the Senedd and to people here in Wales. I do expect to see a reply to that letter and I expect to see a rationale set out in that letter that explains why the Prime Minister appears to have come to his conclusion.

What I asked for in my letter was not a border solution, it was a solution that would have prevented people living in hotspot areas in England from travelling to other places where the virus was not in the same place, whether that was in England, Scotland or in Wales. That's the solution that we have in Wales: people who live in high coronavirus areas in Wales aren't able to travel to England to take the virus with them. And I still think that that is the right answer and I pressed that again with the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in a meeting held with him yesterday.

In the meantime, Llywydd, we have to prepare against the day when the Prime Minister continues to refuse to take this straightforwardly sensible course of action, and there are a range of ways in which we could act. Quarantine is one of them, Members will remember the five-mile rule we had in Wales, or the five-mile guidance, at least, we had in Wales earlier in the summer, and the possibility that Adam Price has set out is another possibility that we could use within our own powers. I think that is the second-best way to do it. I've put the best way to the Prime Minister. I expect to get a proper answer from him. If he refuses to do that, then, of course, we will think about what we can do, and we are actively exploring what we can do, with the powers we hold ourselves.

The Scottish Government, First Minister, has confirmed that it will be imposing far tighter restrictions in the coming days. You yourself have received advice from the technical advisory cell saying that the earlier additional measures are introduced, the more effective they will be. The kind of additional measures that we could be talking about in our context could be, for example, closing pubs indoors completely in areas of high infection, as Paris has done for two weeks starting from today, backed, of course, by suitable and sufficient industry support packages. What active consideration are you giving to the possibility of introducing a brief period of tighter restriction—a so-called 'circuit breaker', as it's become known?

Well, Llywydd, of course we do give consideration to that, and I had an opportunity to discuss that too yesterday with the First Minister of Scotland. Llywydd, we aren't discussing two sets of measures. The figures that I have seen, the most recent ones, which will probably be in the public domain later in the day, show that the local measures we have taken in parts of south Wales are having some success. So, I am working with officials to see whether it may be possible, provided that successes is sustained, to be able to lift some of the restrictions that we have placed on people in that part of Wales, provided the measures we are taking so far demonstrate an ability to do so. At the same time, we have to prepare, in the way that Adam Price has suggested, for the fact that things could get worse, not better, over this winter. There are a series of measures set out in the plan we published in August for health protection area restrictions. We have not used them all by any means, and if we did need to draw on them further, then we would have to do so—whether we would have to do so for a brief period of time I think is, in my view, slightly optimistic. What we are learning from the measures that we've already put place is that it does take a matter of weeks for those to be able to turn the tide of coronavirus around. But we work on both possibilities—both being able to lift restrictions where the data demonstrates it is safe to do so and on further measures we may have to take if that turns out not to be the case.

I agree with the First Minister that a short-term set of policies is no substitute, really, for a long-term strategy. But the technical advisory cell's report, which has just been published, actually, within the hour, is very sobering reading. The R rate that it quotes now for Wales is between 1.3 and 1.6, and that contrasts with early September when it was said to be between 0.5 and 1. It says the incidence in Wales now is growing—the infection incidence is growing overall. It goes on to say:

'Unless measures bring R back below 1, it is possible that infection incidence and hospital admissions may exceed scenario planning'.

And it's previously said that if the current measures don't bring R below 1, then further restrictions will be needed to control the epidemic in Wales. At what point do you think we are now? Are we going in the right direction or the wrong direction, First Minister? And would you accept as a general point that every Government facing a second wave is having to choose between going early and hard in tightening restrictions, or later and lighter, and probably longer, because those measures would be less effective? There are no risk-free options, in a sense, to any Government, but isn't the greatest risk of all dither and delay?

Well, Llywydd, I thank Adam Price, other than for the final part of his sentence, because I thought up until then, he was making a very important contribution to this discussion. I think the Welsh Government's approach has been early and hard, so our thresholds for action are lower than across our border. Our threshold is 50 cases per 100,000 before we take action. It is 75 across our border. Our positivity rate thresholds are lower than they are in the United Kingdom. And he will be aware that the Welsh Government was very much criticised last week by Conservative Members of Parliament, and I think, disgracefully, Conservative Members of the Senedd, when we took action in north Wales, because we hadn't yet reached those 50 thresholds, although it was absolutely obvious to anybody who studied the figures that north Wales was on its way to that threshold—and sadly, today, is well past it.

So, we have taken early action, and action that is hard for people. I really do understand that people faced with these local restrictions are being asked to make a contribution that bites into their daily lives. But we've done that because we think, as I think Adam Price said, that if we take action early, then those actions are likely to have to last for a shorter period of time before we can restore freedoms to people. The early indications from south Wales are that we're having some success in doing just that. And while the TAC report is very sobering in what it says, and ought to be a real warning to anybody who thinks that somehow the Welsh Government is acting precipitately or imposing restrictions where they are not needed, that TAC report would surely be important for them to read. But balanced—. And there in the TAC report as well is the evidence that the actions we are taking are making a difference, and that is, as Adam Price said, the very difficult balancing act that faces any Government attempting to respond, proportionally but seriously, to the latest flare-up in figures.

Leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Paul Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, it's been reported today that the list of people waiting for routine surgery in Wales is nearly six times longer than a year ago, and one orthopaedic surgeon has warned waiting times for things like knee and hip replacements could be three years. Is he right, First Minister?

Well, the Member is right to point to the fact that coronavirus is having and has had a very serious impact on the ability of the health service to carry out activities that, at any other time, would have been central to the work of the national health service. That, I'm afraid, is inevitable, it's inescapable. And while the heath service is working very hard to create the conditions in which as much activity as possible can be safely carried out while the coronavirus crisis continues, there's no escaping the fact that there will be longer waits for some procedures in Wales than we have seen for some time. 

Well, quite clearly, First Minister, the Welsh Government therefore needs to redouble its efforts, because a number of professional organisations have expressed real concern about the resumption of services over the last few months. Over the summer, the Royal College of Surgeons warned that delays to surgery will already have resulted in an increased need for complex surgery; the British Heart Foundation warned that as services remain unavailable, the urgency of these procedures is increasing, creating a significant cohort of patients who need urgent treatment; and the British Medical Association Cymru have said that they are concerned at the prospect of managing routine care alongside a second peak. First Minister, these delays will continue to stretch the capacity of the NHS, and these organisations have been warning about this for some time. Now, the Royal College of Surgeons has called on the Welsh Government to ramp up the development of so-called green zones or COVID-light areas in hospitals. Therefore, can you tell us what action the Welsh Government took in response to these warnings to help expedite treatment for those people waiting across Wales? And can you also tell us what work the Welsh Government is doing to accelerate the development of green zones in Welsh hospitals? 

Well, Llywydd, the Member would find the answer to his questions in the quarterly plans that the NHS in Wales is required to publish. Plans for quarters 3 and 4 were published only recently; they demonstrate the actions that are being taken by health boards right across Wales to accelerate a return to the sort of activity that the health service would have been carrying out this time last year, before the coronavirus crisis hit. And that does include the creation of more green zones—it's not always possible in Wales to create whole hospitals as green zones. It's inevitable, given our geography and disposition of services that, in some places, hospitals will have to be divided into zones that deal with coronavirus patients and green zones that are COVID-free. But that work is going on, and our colleagues in the health service, who have had such a torrid time over the last six months, are working as hard as they can in order to be able, both to deal with the rising number of coronavirus patients who are coming into our hospitals—I quoted that figure earlier to Mark Isherwood: over 200 more beds occupied by coronavirus cases today than two weeks ago—. The health service is having to cope with all of that, and it is, at the same time and with the same staff, doing its very best to make inroads into the delays that have inevitably occurred in more routine treatments for other patients.

First Minister, I can't emphasise enough that behind the Welsh Government's figures are real people desperately waiting for treatments and surgeries. Even in areas that are not in lockdown measures, like Pembrokeshire, there are examples of extortionately long waits for treatment; for example, last week, I highlighted an 81-week wait for dental treatment for an 11-year-old autistic child in my constituency. I've also been contacted by a couple desperate to resume their fertility treatments and waiting for news on when their family-planning journey can resume. People right across Wales, from north to south, are still waiting for treatments and surgeries on a range of matters. Those people need your help, First Minister, and the Welsh Government must now come forward with a strategy as a matter of urgency.

Therefore, will you commit to publishing a specific strategy for tackling Wales's rising waiting times? Will you also confirm that the next Welsh Government budget will provide sufficient resources to health boards across Wales to ensure that these waiting times do not continue to rise? What assurances can you offer to people across Wales who are waiting for treatment that they will be able to access NHS treatments and services, and that work is actually under way to accelerate the resumption of planned surgeries right across Wales?

Well, Llywydd, the Member has asked me three questions this afternoon. Each one of them has simply been a rehearsal of the difficulties that are well known and that I'm happy to acknowledge. He has not offered a single—not a single—suggestion as to how those problems might be addressed. And those problems are common right across the United Kingdom. Where his party is in charge, in March of this year there were 3,000 people waiting more than 52 weeks; by the end of July, it was 83,000 people. If there were easy answers to these very real dilemmas, they would be available here in Wales, just as they would be available elsewhere. There are no easy answers, and the Member's contributions this afternoon have not offered a single—not a single—idea as to how these real difficulties might better be addressed.

When it comes to saying to me, 'Will I guarantee that next year's budget will provide money?', let me remind him that we don't know what the Welsh Government's budget next year is going to be. Once again, his Government, having promised a budget in the early autumn, have decided that they can't manage to do that. We will not know until the end of November what money we have here in Wales for any of our public services. In that situation, how does he expect—how could he possibly expect—guarantees of how our money might be deployed when we don't know how much money we will have for any public purpose? His complaints would be better directed to those who could put that right.

Leader of the Brexit Party, Mark Reckless.

First Minister, could I caution you against describing people as disgraceful just because they—in this case, Conservative Members in north Wales—take a different view on coronavirus restrictions to that you have and ask questions about it?

Your Government has a stated long-term ambition for 30 per cent homeworking in Wales, even post pandemic. You say you'd achieve this by driving changes to Wales's working culture. First Minister, your deputy transport Minister says that we have an opportunity to push homeworking—others might call it exploiting the pandemic to push his own prior political agenda. What will the impact of this be on our city centres and the shops and offices there, particularly on independent businesses that can no longer serve commuters? Won't your target for homeworking be the final nail in the coffin for many of them? And why do you think Welsh Government can plan our society from the centre, as if you were all-seeing and all-knowing? Why is 30 per cent the right number?

Well, Llywydd, I used the term 'disgraceful' knowingly, thoughtfully, and it is a disgrace for this reason: that the letter that was published by Conservative Members of Parliament, and, as I say, Members of this Senedd as well, last week was an encouragement to people in north Wales not to abide by the law that is passed here in Wales. I do think that for lawmakers that is disgraceful, because it encouraged them to think that the restrictions that we have had to place on people in north Wales were unnecessary and unjustified. None of that was true, and it undermines the willingness of other people who want to make sure they are making their contribution from making that as well, and I think that that was a disgraceful thing to do and I'm very happy to stand by that description of it.  

Llywydd, the coronavirus crisis has been a dreadful experience for so many of our fellow citizens and continues to be so. But, from it all, we do need to find ways of thinking of things that we can take out of it and to help us to shape our future in a different way. The fact that we have all learnt to work differently, not to have to travel in large numbers to office locations when people can work just as satisfactorily and successfully from remote locations or even from home, is one, I think, of the positive lessons we can take from the last six months.

The Welsh Government wants to capture that positive experience and make it part of the way that we see Wales here in the future, and it will mean that businesses will have to respond to those changed patterns. It is not a matter of businesses being lost in the aggregate, because those businesses will relocate and be recreated in places in our towns, closer to where people live, where, using our remote working hubs, people will now be able to go and do those things that you can't do at home while spending part of the working week working from home as well. It will aid work-life balance, it will reinvigorate parts of our towns outside our large cities, it will have a beneficial impact on our environment. It is a legitimate and, I think, well-supported ambition for the way that we want to do things here in Wales.

So, for those independent businesses serving commuters, 'Tough.'

First Minister, when UK Government suggests it might pay for the M4 relief road, a project you promised but then said you couldn't afford, you and your colleagues react as if it's an assault on devolution, but you show little sign yourself of respecting the devolution settlement. You seek to enforce a border with England by preventing people who can travel legally within England from travelling to Wales. You have a Minister for foreign relations. You say, 'Devolve justice', which your backbenchers tell us could mean pardoning people convicted of attacking the police. You accepted devolution of income-tax raising powers without the referendum that was promised. You've even said that your support for the union is not unconditional, which the Plaid Cymru leader describes as 'indy-curious'. Now you follow him on border control between England and Wales. Might you next year take another step on that slippery slope to independence by voting for Adam Price to be our First Minister, or do you rule that out?

Llywydd, I remind the Member, as I've had to many times, that it was he who voted not to hold a referendum on income tax powers for the Senedd, not me. He was then a Conservative Member of Parliament. It was the Conservative Party that changed its mind about a referendum, and no doubt he went along with it at the time. It's rich of him to try to complain about it now or to suggest that somebody else is responsible. 

Llywydd, I will not be voting for a candidate of any other party other than the Labour Party to be First Minister here in Wales, and I look forward to convincing as many of our fellow citizens as possible to take the same journey.

I thank Alun Davies for that question. To date, a total of 199 micro and small and medium-sized enterprise businesses in Blaenau Gwent have been awarded funding via the economic resilience fund, totalling £3 million. In addition, we have awarded 62 start-up grants worth £155,000, and 1,420 COVID-19 non-domestic business rates grant awards, totalling £15.8 million in Blaenau Gwent alone.

I'm grateful to the First Minister for that answer, and I know that many businesses in Blaenau Gwent are also extremely grateful for the support they've received from the Welsh Government throughout the course of this pandemic. But we also know—and I welcome the publication of the statement this morning on how we will rebuild from this pandemic—we know that areas such as Blaenau Gwent will require continued and increased investment in order to maintain the viability of businesses in the Heads of the Valleys region. That investment will need to be holistic and comprehensive, investing in people and places. Will the First Minister confirm that the Welsh Government will continue to invest in the economy of the Heads of the Valleys, and Blaenau Gwent in particular, but will also continue to invest in areas such as superfast broadband and the rail network to ensure that we have the holistic industrial strategy that places like Blaenau Gwent will require in order to maintain business vitality and jobs into the future?

Llywydd, I thank Alun Davies for that. I entirely agree with him that our investment strategy has to be a combination of investing in people, in providing them with the skills, with the training, with the opportunities that they need to fashion their own futures, and investing in places as well so that those places are accessible and those places thrive. And through our transforming towns package, for example, which I know has proposals, practical proposals, in Blaenau Gwent, in Brynmawr, in Tredegar, in Nantyglo, those are places that people want to live in and recognise as being valued.

I was very interested, Llywydd, in what Alun Davies said towards the end of his question about the Welsh Government going on investing in superfast broadband and in our railway network. I read, over the weekend, an article by the leader of the Welsh Conservatives here, in which he said that, were he to be in charge at the Senedd, he would be bringing an end to expenditure by the Welsh Government on non-devolved responsibilities. Well, I remind him that, when it comes to superfast broadband, of the £200 million that has been spent in it by the public service here in Wales, £67 million came from the UK Government and over £130 million has come from the Welsh Government, on a non-devolved responsibility, specifically in order to make up for the market failures and the failure to invest of the Conservative Government in Westminster. So, I'm very happy to confirm to Alun Davies that this Government will invest in those things that make a difference to people in Wales, and, where we have to make good the failures of the UK Government, we will step in to make sure that people in Wales have the connectivity they need, whether that is by broadband, whether it is by public transport, that otherwise would be so shamefully neglected.

First Minister, businesses in Blaenau Gwent and other counties suffering from the effects of local lockdowns are able to claim support from you, from this Government's economic resilience fund, and that is very welcome. However, local lockdowns are having a serious and damaging effect on businesses in Monmouthshire due to a lack of people from surrounding areas who would normally, and obviously now cannot, travel there to shop, work and eat out. One small trader I visited yesterday told me they've gone from 200 customers a day to under 20. Tourism businesses are already reporting cancellations. Unless these businesses receive support, they're unlikely to survive, so can I support Monmouthshire County Council's plea to you and ask you, First Minister, to please extend the third phase of your £60 million economic resilience fund to traders in areas like Monmouthshire that are adversely affected from being surrounded by local lockdowns?

Llywydd, I thank Laura Anne Jones for that question, which is a proper and serious question that I know my colleague Ken Skates is thinking about and will have heard the representations from Monmouthshire. 

When I last spoke with Peter Fox, the Conservative leader of Monmouthshire, he was clear that local lockdown restrictions were not yet required in that county, and I hope that we will be able to avoid them altogether. Eighty million pounds of the phase 3 of the economic resilience fund—and I thank the Member for what she said about it—is, of course, available to businesses in Monmouthshire, as elsewhere, but I will make sure and I will ask my colleague Ken Skates to read what she has said this afternoon about the border impacts on neighbouring authorities where local lockdown restrictions are required.

Can I thank Hefin David for that, Llywydd? It is encouraging that the incidence of coronavirus has continued its gradual fall in Caerphilly borough over the last seven days. This is a reflection of the committed efforts of people who live in the area. Provided that fall continues, we will work with local authorities and others to plan for the gradual lifting of those restrictions.

Over the last few weeks here in Caerphilly, we've done our very best to get the community spread of COVID-19 under control, and, as the First Minister recognises, we've achieved that, and I welcome the fact that he recognises that. I also offer him the opportunity, again, to offer congratulations to the people of Caerphilly on achieving that.

Could he provide us with an outline of how the decision process is going to be made this week and every week? How does the decision-making process happen? Is it a meeting with the county borough council? Is the health Minister involved? If he can explain how that takes place this week, and, subsequently then, when will the public announcement be made, in what form and how? And perhaps with this last question I'm pushing my luck, but would he be able to give us an indication of where we may be this week?

Llywydd, can I thank Hefin David for those very proper questions? And, you know, I just want to say again that he is right that the technical advisory cell summary, to which Adam Price referred earlier this afternoon, says in it that there is an improving picture in Caerphilly, attributed to the introduction of local restrictions and the swift multi-agency response. And the mobility data for Wales—hard data—demonstrates that there are reductions in mobility in Wales, particularly around Caerphilly, compared to earlier weeks, which shows that people are, as Hefin David says, very actively playing their part in trying to bring the rise in coronavirus numbers in that borough under control.

The decision-making process goes like this, Llywydd: in the first part of the week, our public health experts and our scientific advisers will be scrutinising the data, the data on a seven-day rolling incidence number, the positivity rate in tests carried out in Caerphilly and surveillance data from the other more general data sources we have, through the King's College app, through the wastewater surveillance arrangements we have. That will then be reported on Thursday of this week to a meeting that will involve the Welsh Government—I will be there, the health Minister will attend; the leader of the local authority; local public health authorities; the local health board and Gwent Police. That meeting will discuss whether or not we have a reliable enough reduction in the figures and incidence in the Caephilly area to begin the process of lifting local lockdown restrictions. And, in the end, it's Ministers who have to decide, so the third and final part of that process, having been advised by all those local players, is that Ministers will make a decision and then we will communicate that decision as quickly as we are able, particularly to local Members, but, obviously, to the public at large.

My ambition is to be able to begin the process of lifting those restrictions as soon as it is safe to do so. I want to be clear that I don't believe that there will be an ability to lift all restrictions in one go; we will start with some measures and build them up over a period of weeks. Whether we will be in that position on Thursday of this week, I'm afraid I really couldn't speculate at this point, because I have to allow the process, as I've described, of expert advice, local knowledge and final determination to take its path on Thursday of this week. And then, we will do that every Thursday while there are any areas in Wales subject to those local restrictions.

First Minister, thank you for that answer to the question. You talked about data and the use of data, and, obviously, Caerphilly was the first county to go into a localised lockdown on a county-wide basis. I've been promoting, over the last couple of weeks, the use of as much localised data to have hyperlocal lockdowns as possible; the Welsh Government used some of that data to only lock down Llanelli instead of the whole of Carmarthenshire. How do you see, going forward, the use of that localised data helping inform your decision making so that greater use can be made of hyperlocalised lockdowns where the data supports that, instead of county or region-wide lockdowns?

Well, Llywydd, I think that is a very sensible approach, and it's the one that we will adopt as a Welsh Government. If it is possible to concentrate restrictions in the areas where the problem is greatest, that is exactly what we would aim to do. Sometimes the geography of an area makes that more difficult. Sometimes there is simply spread at a community level across a local authority area that precludes us from being able to use those hyperlocal methods. But, as Andrew R.T. Davies has said, we were able to do so in Llanelli, and when I answered Hefin David and said that I hoped we would be able to take the first steps out of local restrictions when it is safe to do so, then one of the ways that that might be possible would be to see whether, within a county borough area, the problem has become concentrated in one part of a council locality and to redraw the restriction boundaries within an area. If that is borne out by the data and can be delivered on the ground, then I think that we have absolutely not closed our minds to pursuing the lifting of some restrictions in that way.

Llywydd, I thank the Member for that question. In a series of meetings last week, I met with the leaders of 20 of the 22 local authorities in Wales to discuss these and related matters. Further meetings will take place this week.

Thank you, First Minister. You've obviously covered a fair amount of this with previous questions, so feel free to be brief. You've mentioned discussions with local authority leaders. In answer to Laura Anne Jones earlier, you reiterated that those discussions—. I spoke with Councillor Peter Fox this morning, the leader of Monmouthshire County Council, currently an amber authority, as I'm sure you're aware, regarding the possible use of hyperlocal lockdowns within that local authority area. Now, I fully understand that, in some cases, it might be easier to have wider lockdowns across a full county area, but could you tell us how you're going to ensure that you can look seriously at the hyperlocal lockdowns? If, for instance, an area in my constituency such as Abergavenny is particularly affected, but other areas in other parts of the county aren't, then it does make a lot of sense to only close down and specifically close down a certain area of the economy like a market town like that without affecting other areas of the county area. So, I wonder if you could tell us what discussions you've had with Peter Fox and with other council leaders about that.

Llywydd, I've had discussions, as I said in answer to an earlier question, with Councillor Peter Fox, and Nick Ramsay has just given us, I think, a practical example of the point that Andrew R.T. Davies made in the last question, and I said then that I thought that was a sensible way of thinking about these things. I'm happy to repeat that in relation to Monmouth. I study the Monmouth figures every day, and Nick Ramsay will be aware that the figures in Monmouthshire have drifted upwards over the last seven days. But this morning I also studied the report from the local incident management team, which tells me that those cases are well known, they've been identified by the TTP process, they are being contained in that way and there is no present case for introducing local restrictions in any part of Monmouthshire. If that were to change and there were to be a concentration of cases in any particular part of that county, then provided that the geographical segregation of that area could be successfully achieved, then we would certainly look at that as a hyperlocal response.

Llywydd, we meet local authorities and other partners, including the Older People's Commissioner for Wales, regularly to discuss a range of issues including care homes and care home visits.

I thank the First Minister for that answer. First Minister, the Older People's Commissioner for Wales, whom you just mentioned, has raised concerns about the impact that a blanket ban on visiting, in her words, could have on the health and well-being of care home residents. The need to prevent infections in care homes is of course of paramount importance, and I do appreciate that it's difficult to balance this against the emotional needs of residents. However, I fear that the trauma of prolonged separation from family members could have a devastating impact on people who rely on seeing members of their family. Visits could be facilitated through a combination of safety measures, including giving visiting families personal protective equipment and COVID safety training, allowing distanced outdoor visits where suitable, and confirming positive test results with second tests, so that 28-day care home lockdowns are only enforced when it's certain that they're necessary. So, First Minister, will you therefore consider the merits of issuing new guidance along these lines in order to resume some family visits?

Llywydd, the Member raises one of the most challenging issues that faces the care home sector, for all the reasons that she has set out: the harm that is done to residents when they are unable to see their relations, and balanced against that, as Delyth Jewell said, the need to prevent the introduction of coronavirus into homes, when we know from our experience earlier in the year that once it gets in there, there's a very vulnerable population, and the harm can be very considerable.

We do constantly update our guidance. The last guidance published on 28 August was followed up on 23 September with a letter from Albert Heaney, the head of social services here at the Welsh Government, and Gillian Baranski, the chief inspector of Care Inspectorate Wales, and again on 2 October, with further detail in a further update from Mr Heaney. Shall I, Llywydd, just briefly read the final paragraph of that letter, because it shows how we are trying to respond to the points that Delyth Jewell made? So, our advice to the sector, in the letter, says that the Welsh Government is keen to strike a balance between protecting people living in care homes from the very real risks posed by coronavirus and maintaining their well-being and contacts with family. It is important that we avoid an unnecessarily restrictive blanket approach and that visits to care homes are supported where safe and possible.

I will be meeting tomorrow, Llywydd, myself, with Care Forum Wales and a number of other bodies that are responsible for the way in which care homes are run. We will be discussing this matter along with other matters to do with the safe running of care homes during the coronavirus crisis, and the sorts of possibility that Delyth Jewell mentioned in her supplementary question will, I'm sure, form part of that discussion.

Llywydd, I thank Rhianon Passmore for that. The Welsh Government published our recovery plan today. We are committed to a reconstruction that works for all parts of Wales, including Islwyn, by addressing the issues that matter to people most: tackling unemployment, addressing entrenched inequalities, providing affordable housing, the revitalisation of our town centres, and supporting the foundational economy.

Thank you, First Minister. As the Member of the Senedd for Islwyn, I warmly welcome this publication by the Welsh Government of its policy and strategy paper. Within the 'Covid 19 Reconstruction: Challenges and Priorities' paper, the Minister states that

'The Welsh Government wants to be open to new ideas and to constructive challenge, so part of this work must be a national conversation. We want to know what matters to you. To start that conversation, we asked people to get in touch through OurFutureWales@gov.wales and tell us what they want our future Wales to look like.'

This is a positive and hopeful dialogue to build back better. So, First Minister, will you pledge to the people of Islwyn that the Welsh Government's first priority will be to reduce unemployment and give everyone the opportunity to find and keep work with decent long-term prospects? How will the Welsh Government take this message to all corners of Islwyn and Wales and give the people of Islwyn the chance of employment that they rightfully demand?

Llywydd, can I thank Rhianon Passmore for that? She is right: the Welsh Government is absolutely open to ideas. In fact, over 2,000 contributions came in to my colleague Jeremy Miles's first invitation to people to give us their thoughts upon how a different sort of Wales could emerge from this coronavirus crisis. We are absolutely committed to continuing that dialogue, and to include in our thinking the many, many ideas that come to us, particularly from people who are working at the front line of our communities—doing the jobs, providing the services, reaching out to other people who are vulnerable in those communities. 

Llywydd, I want to give the Member an absolute assurance that, beyond the health service and the coronavirus crisis, jobs are the very top of the agenda here in the Welsh Government, because we are entering a period in which the economic impact of coronavirus is going to be felt in many families and communities across Wales. As we allow the economy itself to recover, we will act as a Welsh Government, as we have through our economic resilience fund, to make sure that there are opportunities there, particularly for our young people, working alongside the Kickstart programme of the UK Government, to create traineeships and apprenticeships to support employers who are prepared to take on young people as part of their businesses. That will be as true in Islwyn as it will be in any other part of Wales. 

And finally question 9—Suzy Davies. 

Llywydd, we have published coronavirus-related guidance for people living in houses in multiple occupation, including guidance specific to students. It was last published on 28 September. 

Obviously, that's come in after I tabled my question. But I think we need some clarification, for students in particular, but not exclusively, on the difference between HMOs, which are houses with shared facilities but individual tenancies, and shared houses—flatmates, if you like. Because regardless of the legalities of it, both those groups of people will tend to treat their homes in exactly the same way. I'd be grateful, First Minister, if you could confirm that you will look again at this, despite the fact that we've got fairly new guidance, in order to clarify, particularly in non-lockdown areas, quite how the concept of the extended household and bubble works for the families of the individuals living in those houses, because at the moment, under a shared household arrangement, some of those individuals will be excluded from seeing their families. Thank you.

Llywydd, I thank Suzy Davies for that. Of course, I recognise that the guidance was published after her question was submitted. Alongside the guidance, we have published a series of frequently asked questions to deal with some of the complexity that there is in this area. And it is a genuinely complex area, with the intersection between the different living arrangements that students who live in Wales tend to occupy—but also other people, not simply students, who live in houses in multiple occupation, or live in flats in the way that Suzy Davies has described. I will, of course, ask my officials to study the record of today's proceedings, and if we haven't already been able to provide a clarification with our guidance on the specific question that Suzy Davies has raised this afternoon—that we will aim to do so as soon as we're able to get that to happen. 

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, Llywydd. There are no changes to this week's business. The draft business for the next three weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which is available in the papers made available to Members electronically. 

Can I ask the Trefnydd to schedule a statement on access to sports clubs and training in Wales please for young people, and, indeed, for adults too? Since the introduction of the local restrictions in the Conwy and Denbighshire areas, I've been contacted by many parents who are unable now to take their children to training facilities just over the neighbouring counties' borders. It's causing some angst for those parents in terms of the young people being able to access those training opportunities. 

Also, I've been contacted by people who are in the Welsh football leagues, and they are asking why they are not able to participate in second division games and matches for training purposes, in the way that other elite sports athletes actually are. I wonder whether we could have some clarity on these things going forward, in order that those individuals can participate fully in sport, which of course is an important part of our culture here in Wales.

Thank you to Darren Millar for raising those issues. Of course, next week in Plenary we will be debating the specific regulations to which Darren refers, so that might be an opportune moment to raise those concerns about the individuals involved in sport and training within the area that he represents. But of course, the Minister with responsibility for sport will have been hearing your comments. And if there is more that we can do in terms of the guidance on the phased return to sport, and the guidance that we're offering to those sporting clubs, then obviously we would seek to make that guidance clearer. So, I will ask the Minister to review your comments, to see if there's anything more that we can do in that area.

Can we have a statement outlining how the Government can further help the hospitality sector? In some communities, the pub, the club, the bingo hall is keeping the community together. They're more than a business; they're a community centre. Because of the restrictions, many are really struggling. So, how can the Government help to ensure that they have a future?

I'd also like a statement on testing. Last week, I asked about testing in the Rhondda and the Royal Glamorgan Hospital, and since then, people working in care homes have told me that they are waiting days for their results and that the time is lengthening. Now, care home staff and NHS staff need their results back as quickly as possible in order to stop the spread. It is possible to have an hour turnaround time. So, can we have a statement on the Government's testing plan and strategy? I want assurances that it doesn't rely on the private UK Government system that has let us down so many times so far.

Thank you to Leanne Wood for raising both of those issues. On the first, of course, we have recently announced the third phase of the economic resilience fund. The Minister will confirm later on today that the eligibility criteria for phase 3 will be available on the website of Business Wales later on today. So, I would certainly encourage businesses within the Rhondda, and beyond, to look to that, specifically I think for hospitality, because I know the Minister has been at pains to ensure that hospitality businesses are prioritised within that support, recognising the difficulties that they're experiencing.

We do publish very regular updates on testing. I know that the Minister for health has published an update on testing just today. I know that he'll be keen to continue to provide those regular updates in the period ahead.

Minister, could I ask for a debate or a statement on the situation facing the many thousands of people and families, not only in Blaenau Gwent but across the whole country, who are facing real difficulties now because local lockdowns mean that they're unable to take holidays or breaks or flights that they've already booked and paid for? The attitude of some travel companies has been, frankly, appalling, treating people really very, very badly. People who have tried to find a way of taking a family break over these months have found themselves a victim of a travel industry that doesn't seem to care much about the people who are affected by their decisions. I know that MPs have been taking this up in Westminster, and there needs to be an opportunity for us here in Cardiff to address some of these issues as well.

I would also like to ask for a Government debate on the situation facing our choirs and community music societies and organisations across the country. We've debated and discussed the position of singing in choirs and churches on a number of occasions. But as we head into the winter months, and particularly with some of the restrictions that are in place in different localities across the country, many choirs and many community musical organisations and societies and clubs are facing some real difficulties. Wales is a land of song and a land of music, and it's important that we're able to ensure that people can continue to be able to make music and that choirs are able to continue to function. The Welsh Government has already invested in some of the professional musicians and freelancers, and we also need to find a way of protecting the volunteers and the people who make Wales the land of song. 

Thank you to Alun Davies for both of those issues. He'll be pleased to note that there is a debate on the arts and culture and heritage sectors tomorrow in the Senedd. So that would be a great opportunity for him to showcase the fantastic musical communities that he has in Blaenau Gwent, which I know he's a great supporter of.

On the first issue of the impact of local restrictions on people's ability to take holidays, you'll recall that last week, in the Chamber, the First Minister updated on the response that he'd had from the travel insurance sector, which I think was broadly positive, certainly in words, but obviously now we'll be seeking to ensure that those words are turned into action in terms of being able to recompense those people who have been unfortunately unable to take their holidays.  

I'm going to ask for something very simple from the Trefnydd. I would like a phone call. I was given to understand that a new testing centre was to be established in Bangor, but that's still a fortnight away, and nobody is entirely clear of the details, including who will be allowed to go there for testing. There is a lack of clarity in my constituency as to where it's possible to get a test if you are COVID symptomatic, unless you travel to Llandudno or beyond. And as the number of cases increases, my constituents need this information as a matter of urgency. So, will you arrange that I can speak over the phone with the health Minister so I can have a full explanation, please? I have tried every other avenue of seeking this information so I can share it with my constituents.

I'll certainly endeavour to speak to the health Minister to get that information for you so that you're able to provide your constituents with the information that they're seeking with regard to the testing centre in Bangor. I'll get that to you as soon as I can. 

Trefnydd, eight months ago, the Prime Minister, in Parliament, openly stated that the UK Government would passport the moneys necessary to repair the flood damaged infrastructure in Wales, and, as you know, that is estimated, in my constituency in Rhondda Cynon Taf, at around £70 million. The Secretary of State for Wales has also confirmed that. There have been many such promises. It now appears that the UK Government is going to renege on its commitment to provide those funds to enable those important infrastructure repairs to be carried out. I wonder what discussions you've had with the UK Government on this. But I think it is a matter of such importance that it deserves an urgent statement in this Chamber, so we can actually discuss what the future is, what the implications are and how those infrastructure repairs are going to be financed in the future.  

Thank you to Mick Antoniw for allowing us this opportunity to reflect again on the Prime Minister's words in the House of Commons, when he did say that funding would be passported directly to the Welsh Government, in order to fund those repairs to the flooding damage. We've yet to see a penny of that funding, but we are still in dialogue with the UK Government. In the meantime, we've been at pains to reassure the affected local authorities that work should continue on the grounds of safety, and that the funding issues shouldn't prevent that work from starting. 

I listened carefully, Trefnydd, to Darren Millar's request and your answer, but if I could also request a statement, please, on the situation facing those who take part in the national football league of Wales. I'm aware that many Newtown AFC players work full time, play football part time, but they're still classed as elite athletes, meaning that, under the Welsh Government guidance, they can travel to play football. Last week, they visited, for example, Bridgend, which is currently in a local lockdown area, something that the management and many of the players were reluctant to do given the increased risk of travelling in that position. If they don't want to travel and attend, then they face a penalty. So, I do think this is something that the Welsh Government needs to bring guidance forward on, rather than just leaving it to the Football Association of Wales. 

Secondly, and related, many clubs won't survive through the winter without further financial support, so I would be grateful if you and your colleagues could outline whether or not you intend to follow the UK Government's lead in providing financial support, following the UK Government's announcement that the national league is to receive a £10 million rescue package.

Thank you for raising that. Of course, I will ask the Deputy Minister to also review your particular comments about the national football league, when he considers the comments made by Darren Millar also this afternoon, in terms of whether any additional guidance is necessary. You'll be aware that Welsh Government has already announced significant support for the sport sector. Much of that is going through Sport Wales, so I would encourage the teams involved to look at Sport Wales in the first instance to explore whether any support might be available.

Trefnydd, I would like to call for two statements from Government Ministers. The first is a statement from the Minister for health regarding cancer care in Wales during the pandemic. Whilst urgent cancer care continues, to an extent, cancer screening, like much of the NHS, is on hold while resources are focused on the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak—understandably so at the beginning of the outbreak, but not nearly nine months on. Many services are beginning to return, but nothing has been said of how the backlog will be dealt with. As a survivor of breast cancer, I was dismayed to learn that, according to Tenovus, 30,000 Welsh women missed out on screening, and that means as many as 300 women could unknowingly have breast cancer. As one of Wales's biggest killers, it is vital that we address this issue and that the Government outlines the action it will take in an urgent statement. 

The second statement I call for is from the Minister for housing on the homelessness crisis in Wales. Welsh Government assured us that actions taken during the peak of the pandemic would put an end to rough-sleeping. However, just a few days ago, I spoke to yet another veteran still sleeping rough, waiting for help. And I'm sure you will agree with me that this is unacceptable. Homelessness hasn't gone away during this crisis; it's just become more hidden. We need urgent action, and I call upon the Welsh Government to make a statement on how they will tackle homelessness, particularly within the ex-forces community. Diolch yn fawr. 

Thank you to Caroline Jones for raising both of those important issues. We have, of course, been working very closely with the health boards and trusts from the start of the pandemic to ensure that as much cancer care can continue as possible. I do want to reassure you that cervical screening in Wales restarted sending invitations in June to women who had been delayed an early repeat invitation for cervical screening, and also Bowel Screening Wales has restarted its bowel screening programme with a phased approach from July. And Breast Test Wales started to send out screening invitations to women at higher risk from July. So, those screening services are now resuming. And, obviously, clinicians and managers across Wales are working flat out and doing all they can, really, to mitigate the impact of the pandemic on those areas. But, obviously, COVID has certainly had an impact. 

I'll ask the Minister with responsibility for housing to write to you with an update on homelessness, with that specific focus on people who have left the armed forces and how we can ensure that people don't leave the forces and find themselves on the streets, but then also that those people who have formerly served and found themselves on the streets are supported into housing as soon as possible.

Organiser, can I identify with the comments of Alun Davies, the Member for Blaenau Gwent, around choirs and the ability for choirs in restricted forms to obviously try and come back together in some shape or form, because they provide a huge amount of enjoyment for the communities they serve and they are emblematic of Wales as a country? But could I seek two statements from you as well, please, one on the suspension of Qatar Airways flights from Cardiff Airport? Regrettably, in other parts of the UK, they are starting to re-establish themselves, in Belfast and Scotland—in Edinburgh, I think it is—but regrettably here in Wales they've chosen to cancel the whole winter schedule. I do not believe a statement has been forthcoming from the Welsh Government as to what actions the Government are trying to undertake, working with the airline, to establish flights, certainly for the next summer season, and it has been a major investment on behalf of Welsh Government to secure this airline to Cardiff Wales airport. So, an understanding of how the Government are going to engage with the airport and the airline would be beneficial for all.  

Secondly, could I seek a statement from the health Minister in relation to Velindre Cancer Centre and the development of the new hospital and facilities on the site? The Minister was in the health committee last week and, because he is determining the business case, he obviously had to absent himself from much of the discussion and contribution. But there are serious concerns within the community that this centre will serve that the proposals, as currently outlined, are not fit for purpose and that an inquiry, a review, which is independent and ultimately led by a cancer specialist from outside Wales to ascertain the best outcome for the development of cancer services in south-east Wales is the way forward, so that we can be sure that the £300 million investment is the correct investment for the next 40 to 50 years. A statement from the health Minister as to whether he would be prepared to construct such a review, and appoint an individual to undertake it, would be most welcome. 

I'm grateful to Andrew R.T. Davies for raising those issues. On the issue of Velindre Cancer Centre, I'm aware that the health Minister did receive a letter from clinicians about the clinical model for the proposed new cancer centre, which I think is what Andrew R.T. Davies is referring to. I know that advice is due from officials shortly on the proposed development, so it would be difficult for either the health Minister or me to say anything further at this point. But we do expect any advice from officials to take a close look at the matters that were raised by the clinicians, although the health boards in south-east Wales who commission tertiary cancer services from the trust have previously signed off the business case for the new cancer model, and that included the clinical model for the new hospital, which, in the case of acutely unwell patients, is the same clinical model that's currently in place for the region. But, that said, I know that further advice is on its way to the Minister regarding the proposed development there, and I know that he'd be keen to provide an update when he's able to.FootnoteLink 

And, on Qatar, I will certainly make the Minister for economy and transport aware of your request for an update on the implications of the decision on Cardiff Airport. 

I want to ask for two statements, Trefnydd, and the first one from the economy Minister about the Stadco car parts factory closure in Llanfyllin. There are 129 workers and their families who would urgently want to know what help and what support is available to them in the immediate future. And then, following on from that, I know that there will be wider public interest in what happens to that site given that it is the largest manufacturing site in that county.

The second statement that I would like is on the advice that is given to pregnant women who are at work in Wales. There is the all-Wales COVID-19 workforce assessment tool, and it does inform women if they are more than 28 weeks pregnant that they should work from home or in a non-public-facing role in a COVID-secure workplace. But that can put women—and I have been contacted by a constituent facing this dilemma—to oppose, sometimes, the workplace setting that they find themselves in, and to have to challenge their employer to make sure that that workplace is a safe setting for them. So, my question, really, is: rather than sticking to the 28-week-plus pregnancy rule, would it not be better that we were able to advise women who are pregnant to be able to choose, if it's best for them, to work from home, and to send that advice down to the employer, rather than adding in extra stress for women who are pregnant at this time when it's absolutely not necessary so to do?

Thank you for raising those issues. I will ask the Minister for economy and transport to provide you with an update on the Stadco closure, in terms of what support might be available for the workers and their families, and any potential future uses for the site. So, I'll ask that he provides you with that information directly.

And, obviously, the health Minister would have been listening to your contribution there with regard to the advice that we provide to pregnant women and the way it's communicated to employers, and I know that he will give due consideration to that suggestion.FootnoteLink  

Minister, I'd like a Government statement on repot NRPB-M173. It's a report that I've sent through to Ministers. It's a report that proves—it actually proves—that plutonium leaked into the Severn estuary for decades. I've sent the report to Natural Resources Wales and I'm still yet to get any kind of answer. It is a proven fact that plutonium leaked into the estuary from Hinkley Point nuclear power station. It's in black and white from a Government study in 1990, which is no longer publicly available. So, I'd like a statement as to when the Government will take action on this matter and ensure that an independent environmental impact assessment is carried out. Diolch yn fawr.

Well, we've had this discussion previously in the business statement, not very long ago, and at that point I did advise that the Petitions Committee was looking at a similar issue and that that would be an opportunity to hear from the Minister. And you'll see now, in the business statement, that that Petitions Committee debate has been tabled, so there will be an opportunity to discuss this in more depth in the coming weeks.

I thank the Trefnydd.

The next item is a statement by the Minister for Education on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development education review 2020, and I call on the Minister to make the statement—Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I'm very pleased to have this opportunity to update the Senedd on the OECD's new report, 'Achieving the New Curriculum for Wales', which was published yesterday. Timely advice and challenge from the OECD has been a key element of my and this Government's approach to education reform. Members will know that we have built new and strong international relationships over the last four years. We are providing life-changing opportunities at Yale University, student teachers from Massachusetts Institute of Technology are teaching science in our schools, and we're working with other systems to learn and to provide advice.

The OECD know and understand our system, and they can hold up a mirror to us as the Government, but also to our system as a whole, and they recognise that, unlike four years ago, Wales has a clear vision for its education system and for its learners. They acknowledge the Government's role in embedding co-construction across the system as a principle for curriculum development and education policy making more generally.

They used to say that Wales ignored leadership as a driver of reform and success. That is emphatically no longer the case. And they say that communication has been clear and continuous, with strong leadership from the top. They see that we have met the challenge from previous reports and that we have established coherence to the different policy components and clarity on the vision, establishing a strong basis for education professionals to make the national mission their very own.

The OECD knows that we have built strong foundations for the next step in our journey with the new curriculum. Foundations such as outperforming the other UK nations for our top A-level results, where we were once a long way behind, back in 2016; thousands and thousands more learners from disadvantaged backgrounds now achieving GCSEs in subjects such as science, directly boosting their life chances; and our Programme for International Student Assessment performance has improved in each domain for the first time ever, putting us back in the OECD main stream.

All of this means that we are able and we will continue to take a hard look at the OECD's advice. The report published provides helpful challenge and validation of the progress we're making, and I'm pleased to say there were no surprises. Next week I will publish an updated version of 'Our national mission'. This will take into consideration the OECD recommendations, it will review our collective efforts to date and the achievements made, and, crucially, map the next stage for the journey. Therefore, Presiding Officer, I am determined that despite COVID we will not rest on our laurels.

I'm going to focus on key themes from the report this afternoon, which offer us more challenge. The OECD are clear that the main theme for continuing with our success is being stronger in adopting a school's perspective. This means getting the balance right between system coherence and what that means in schools realising the curriculum. I have listened carefully to the comments from within the system as well as from the OECD on the issue of equity, and as we move forward with the curriculum, that is going to be even more important: equity in access to resources, equity of opportunity for learners and equity in professional learning for teachers.

Now, over the last four years, we have proven that we can address the aspiration and the attainment gap. Those achieving the expected level in core subjects at year 9 is now 20 per cent higher than it was a decade ago; 30 per cent more students on free school meals achieve a good science GCSE; and we have gone from only 37 per cent of our schools having access to superfast broadband to now having 100 per cent coverage.

The new curriculum is nothing—it is nothing—if it does not ensure that every single learner benefits from the broad and balanced education that we aspire to, bringing together knowledge, skills and experiences. Therefore, what are we doing, what are we going to do and what will we continue to do to support the realisation across all schools? Well, we are reforming our national network of practitioners. These will connect teachers and schools, gather intelligence, spot issues and work together in advising on implementation. Alongside this, new resources and materials will be available by next summer, specifically designed for the new curriculum. Now, we can be very proud of Hwb and the millions of log-ins that it achieves week in, week out, as well as the strong educational relationships we have nurtured with the likes of Google, Microsoft and Adobe, meaning free resources for families and teachers across the nation.

During the pandemic, we have delivered free equipment to learners from low-income backgrounds, but I acknowledge that we need to do more—more with teachers, schools and parents on how to make the most of the digital resources and of digital learning. This will be a priority as we continue to roll out our ambitious professional learning programme and publish new guidance for the curriculum. But I also know that we can be even clearer in what our shared expectations and roles are across the system. Very soon I will publish those shared expectations to support schools and the steps that they must take to prepare for the roll-out of the curriculum.

This is a big step forward for Welsh education, and just as we have all worked together during pandemic, it represents a renewed commitment from all partners to co-operate, to recognise roles and responsibilities and to support all of our schools with curriculum design and realisation.

It is clear from the OECD report that support is an important concept for successful implementation. I'm pleased that Estyn continues to evolve and will be a learning inspectorate with a clear remit in how it works with and supports schools, consortia and individual local education authorities.

Moving to teachers. We're currently spending the largest amount ever on teachers in Wales's education history. It has long been a priority for me, and recognising and supporting teaching excellence was one of the policies in the agreement that brought me into this Government. The OECD correctly points out that we need to do more to support teachers to be the main drivers of the curriculum in schools and to enhance their skills. This will be a big focus over the next few months, and looking at it so that we deliver the best support possible for all of our professionals, whether that be from initial teacher training, right through to whole-career support. Therefore, we are reviewing and re-planning teacher induction and early career support, alongside a national approach to coaching and mentoring. I'm particularly excited about our all-Wales Master's in education, which will focus on early career teachers and headteachers. I'm confident that it will become an international model of best practice, and I have been so pleased to see all of our universities working together on it.

Presiding Officer, in conclusion: as the OECD says, thanks to 'Our national mission', Wales has a clear vision for our system and for our learners. We have coherence, clarity, and are on the path to a transformation that will benefit both learners and professionals. Their advice on evolving the school perspective so that it holds to our national vision and getting that full, shared understanding is extremely valuable. I also know that systems across the world will also benefit from this report and the advice contained within it and that they will see Wales as a country that is moving forward with confidence. And I know that this confidence is shared across the system, and I look forward, whilst working together over the period, to deliver on our shared ambitions for each and every learner. Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch, Llywydd. Thank you very much, Minister, for your statement as well. There's quite a lot in there, which I'm sure I won't be able to cover completely today. Can I congratulate you also on getting this statement onto the agenda within hours of the report being lifted from under embargo? I hope you will use your magic powers with other Ministers so that they can lay regulations for debate more swiftly as well, because if you can manage this, I'm sure they can manage that.

As you say, there are no big surprises in the report, and some of that is to be something to be grateful for, I think. There's a lot in here about progress, which is to be welcomed and which we value, and I also thank you particularly for the comments you made on teacher support towards the end of your statement there. But, ultimately, teachers want to know how to do this curriculum, and the report is very clear that there's still an awful lot to do about this and there are still worries expressed about coherence—I know you were saying that there was a big tick for coherence, but there's actually quite a lot of concern about it as well—certainly about consistency, about standards, about the understanding of how to conduct assessments. The quote here that worried me was that 'little evidence exists on the effect of big ideas on learners' outcomes'. And so, as I say, while there's much to be welcomed, I think there is some worrying evidence in this report in support of its recommendations on your next step.

The report, of course, doesn't say anything about COVID and I appreciate, Minister, that you said you're planning to move on—not rest on your laurels, I think you said—despite COVID, and I don't think we can just leave it as 'despite COVID'. It is the big elephant in the room in the delivery of this curriculum. As the head of Pencoed secondary school in my own region said when notice of this statement was being made, 'It's completely lost in the fog of COVID-19'.

So, how will all the relevant parties, the stakeholders, in this get to grips with the recommendations at the same time as coping with the pressures of COVID, and, of course, the uncertainty of whether we'll have exams or not? Because I think if you can't answer that question, then we're really going to have to start thinking about when implementation of this can realistically take place.

The report is crystal clear, as you say, on adopting the school perspective, and this is very much about how schools turn the curriculum as a great idea into something that is operational, because teachers don't want to deliver something that's not as good as it could be, and it's something we've been saying for some time. So, apart from that time constraint, what else do you think that teachers are nervous about? Is the steer in this report, the recommendations in this report, enough to allay worries that all these next steps can be achieved?

The report acknowledges that the revised structures for school improvement are in place. You did mention that in some detail, but it still emphasises the need, still, to prioritise school improvement. And I don't blame you for drawing attention to some of the successes of the last couple of years, but the picture isn't quite as rosy as you say, despite all that sterling effort from our educators, because we agree with the OECD this still needs to be a priority. Despite £100 million being spent on school improvement in the term of this Senedd, we're still talking about less than half of our secondary schools being good or better, and a quarter of them either being in direct statutory intervention or under review in case they're about to go into that situation. Our PISA results may be a little bit nearer the OECD average, but that's in no small part due to the fact that that average itself has fallen. The free school meals attainment gap with other UK countries has narrowed a little, but not as much as you had hoped—I think you would say that yourself there, Minister—and it continues to open up as pupils get older, as we know. We also know that the attainment gap with other UK countries for our non-free school meal pupils, of course, remains huge. So, with the curriculum being just one part of the education reform programme, what is there in this report that points to measures that will crack this issue of school improvement, which is eluding you at the moment, I think?

The report speaks a lot about coherence and consolidation in order to achieve consistent standards. You mentioned, as you say, that there's some evidence of that already, but there's still a long way to go. How big is the risk that all this multiparty collaboration will just end up being too complicated, especially as it absolutely should involve more teachers, parents and the community? And if we stick to this time frame, will we be in a position where Government will find itself, despite its wishes, having to be more prescriptive on how to achieve consistent standards, just to get the train moving down the tracks?

And then finally from me—the issue of how this curriculum will look for years 10 and 11 and even the following two years, where the curriculum needs to be more than just broad and balanced, it needs to be deep enough to demonstrate at least high levels of knowledge in subject areas and analytical skills, which is not work that, as I've really picked up from this report, has had much attention. Who is co-constructing that bit of the curriculum between the ages of 14 and 16, and maybe even 16 and 18? Where do the FE colleges come into this, for example, because they're having to deliver some of this curriculum? I think it was quite striking that the OECD didn't say anything, really, about educators outside the school system, despite the fact that the curriculum will reach beyond the boundaries of schools. Thanks. Or if they did, I missed it.

Thank you to Suzy Davies for her comments and questions. I think what is crucially important to me, and I don't wish to be overly critical, but I've been in the Senedd long enough to have seen huge amounts of effort, time, energy and resources that have often focused on the establishment of very worthy policy statements and policy documents—legislation, indeed, often underpins such things—and then, perhaps, a suggestion or a feeling that once that is completed, the job is done. For the curriculum to be a success, we now need a relentless focus on implementation, and that's why we invited the OECD to review work, to put us in a place to ensure that implementation now follows the energy and effort that has gone into curriculum reform to date. And I'm very grateful for the comments and the recommendations from the OECD on how we can get this next stage, which sometimes I think in the past has been missing—we get it right. 

Suzy Davies asks about what steps we will take. Well, firstly, as I said in my statement, we will now publish an updated version of 'Our national mission'. The Member will be aware that, in the first version of 'Our national mission', we had a very clear map of expectations on what was expected on each part of the system, and when that work was to be completed. And our new version will build upon that, taking on board the recommendations from the OECD, and, as I said, outlining the steps that need to be taken, moving us forward to successful implementation. 

Suzy is right to focus on the issue of coherence. I think this is particularly important with regard to the middle tier in the Welsh education system, and having a clear understanding of what the roles and responsibilities are for each member of that middle tier in supporting schools to realise the new curriculum. So, that is everything from our individual local education authorities, our school improvement services, our National Academy for Educational Leadership and our Education Workforce Council. Schools need to know what help will be available and from whom they can get that help as they begin their own individual institution-based journey in developing their new curriculum. Key to that is the ongoing reform of our school inspectorate, Estyn, who are moving to a system of focusing much more on supporting schools rather than, perhaps, how the inspectorate has been seen in the past, as someone who comes along, passes a judgment and then disappears, and isn't there, actually, to support schools in addressing any concerns that the inspectorate identifies with an individual institution.

So, our expectations document will be very clear, and that has been developed in co-construction with our strategic education group. A crucial part of that will be our ongoing and deeply developing relationships with our institutes of higher education, especially those that have initial teacher education provision; that is a very crucial part of that in supporting schools, moving forward, and providing individual support for professional learning. The professional learning programme is having to be delivered differently because of COVID-19, but, even with all of the stresses and strains on the system, schools are still, wherever possible, engaging in that professional learning.

So, that brings me on to the issue of the impact of COVID-19 on our curriculum reform timetable. Clearly, at this stage, we believe it is possible to continue on the reform journey to the published timetable, although we are taking steps all the time to make sure that the information and support, and our expectations of schools, are being tested against the day-to-day challenges of running schools at the moment. So, we're not looking to overwhelm schools, but actually to get additional information and support out to them in a timely fashion.

Quite rightly, again, Suzy talks about the issues of raising standards. One of the very reasons for introducing a new curriculum, alongside our other education reforms, is all about raising standards—raising standards for all of our students, but, in particular, ensuring that we address the attainment gap that does exist. We have made some progress that I think it's right that we acknowledge, but there continues to be much more progress that needs to be made. That's why I'm keen not to delay the start of the new curriculum, because I think the curriculum is an important part of that raising-standards agenda. 

With regard to further education, obviously, the curriculum that we're talking about is a three-to-16 curriculum, but it has implications for post-compulsory education and training. Further education have been part of the co-construction process, with FE representatives on each of the areas of learning and experience groups that were convened to develop the 'what matters' statements and to develop the supporting documentation for the curriculum. So, I am satisfied that that has been part of the consideration in drawing up the curriculum that we currently have before us. Thank you, Presiding Officer.

It is true to say that the OECD report is useful and does highlight important and crucial issues; issues and concerns that are already being discussed by stakeholders in Wales. It's true to say that there are no surprises, as the education Minister said, but the report does underline the fact that there is a great deal of work still to be done, that the issues and concerns are very real and that we do need to hasten the process of focusing on those in order to avoid failure. Nobody wants to see the curriculum failing, of course.

The report does say that Wales has mapped out its policy plan successfully and that the vision is clear, and Plaid Cymru has supported that vision, but we have consistently argued that that vision does need to take root properly within our schools, and the report endorses that and states that the next steps need to explain the vision and what the objectives of the curriculum will mean for students learning in our schools, namely to explain what we're trying to deliver through the new curriculum, what are our expectations of the new curriculum, and how can we convey those to students, parents, employers and to the wider community here in Wales. The way the OECD puts it is:

'To ensure the intentions of the new curriculum translate into practice, it is essential for Wales to address several issues, including a lack of deep understanding of what successful realisation of the curriculum might look like in practice'.

So, clearly, we do need to focus in on that, that lack of connectivity between the vision and the practice that will be expected within schools. There's no doubt that that's a major challenge in the face of inadequate funding. As the children and young people committee has highlighted, there isn't enough funding reaching our schools. Therefore, the challenge of ensuring that the curriculum takes root is difficult in such a scenario, and also, as you've already mentioned, the impacts of COVID do have to be taken into account as we discuss this report and as we make progress with the curriculum. Of course, the report doesn't refer to the current public health crisis, but we do need to take into account what is taking so much of our teachers' and headteachers' time, namely the impact of COVID, on a daily basis.

And you've touched on this, but could I push you further? Are you considering whether we need to postpone the implementation timetable for the curriculum? I have heard some suggestion that there's a possibility that you may be willing to consider that, so I would press you a little further as to whether you are assessing what the impact of that would be and is that something that you are discussing at the moment.

The report notes that there is a risk that schools and pupils who are disadvantaged because of equality issues could be left behind, and I'm very pleased to have heard you in your statement making clear reference to this. The report states this:

'There is a risk of inequalities increasing due to the challenges that disadvantaged schools can have in implementing the curriculum, which accentuates the need for clarifying resources available for schools.'

It's this problem of schools that are in deprived areas, schools that aren't reaching the necessary standards, and the risks for them as they try to put an entirely new curriculum in place. I do want an assurance from you that equality within the policy will be given more prominence in the discussions on the curriculum from here on in.

And the third point, and the final point in a way, is the lack of clarity related to the accountability framework and qualifications. I again quote:

'lack of clarity around the accountability framework and the school-leaving qualifications, which risk that misaligned accountability and assessment measures could undermine the curriculum.'

This is something that we in Plaid Cymru have been highlighting over the weekend, as it happens. A section of the report notes that there is a major risk that teaching and learning from 14 to 16 will be veered to the content of the qualifications rather than helping the students attain the four purposes of the curriculum. And we in Plaid Cymru are convinced that we need to redraw our qualifications—we need a Welsh qualification to run alongside a Welsh curriculum, with less stress on examinations and more on continuous assessment.

So, would you agree with me, therefore, that we now need to extend the scope of the work that Qualifications Wales is currently undertaking, expanding the discussion from the one that's currently ongoing on changes to GCSE to a more broad-ranging discussion looking at how best to assess this new curriculum? Would you be willing to lead that discussion and to arrange a forum to look at this very issue, which is addressed particularly on Twitter at the moment, but it would be excellent to see you leading that discussion in a national forum looking at those issues? I'll finish there. Thank you.

Thank you to Siân Gwenllian for her comments and questions. Presiding Officer, I'm not running away or hiding from the challenges that face us as we move into the implementation phase. As Suzy Davies alluded to, if we were defensive about what the OECD had to say about us, we would have delayed bringing the report for scrutiny by Senedd Members. We welcome the steer that the OECD is giving us to ensure that implementation is successful.

I think there were a number of substantive questions that Siân Gwenllian was asking. Firstly, around the timetable, as I said in answer to Suzy Davies, at this stage, we believe that it is still possible to move to an implementation date of 2022, but, as welcomed in the OECD report, they have praised us for establishing a system of co-construction in Wales around education. This Government doesn't do things to teachers; it does things alongside teachers. And that will continue to guide us as we look to drive forward implementation.

Clearly, she asked the question, 'Are you continually assessing the impact of COVID?' Believe me, every day we assess the impact that COVID-19 is having on our education system and we will continue to do that.

With regard to equity, as I said in my statement, the curriculum will be for nothing if we don't ensure that every child in Wales, no matter where they are, no matter the nature of their schooling, the medium in which they receive their schooling—it'll be for nothing unless every child is given an equal opportunity to pursue and to reach their full aspirations. What that does mean is that some schools will need more additional support than others. Some schools will, perhaps, be further along their curriculum reform journey. Some schools will perhaps have greater levels of curriculum design and expertise within their schools than others. And that's why it's really important, in our expectations document, that we're very clear about whose job it is and whose responsibility it is to provide that additional resource to schools, recognising that our local education authorities and our school improvement service, and, indeed, Estyn, all have specific jobs to do in ensuring that all schools are ready, and recognising that some schools will need more help than others in doing that. How that will work in practice is one of the aims of the expectations document.

With regard to 14 to 16, I share the OECD's concerns that, in recent times in education—this is not something that is peculiar to the Welsh system—assessment for learning has too often been caught up with system accountability. And that has led to unintended consequences, whereby accountability measures have often driven sets of behaviours in schools that, perhaps, as I said, have had unintended consequences, whether that be preventing children from reaching their full potential by the nature of the qualifications they were entered for or narrowing the curriculum with a relentless focus on the core, to the exclusion of some of the creativity and some of the other subjects that children really value and relish and enjoy studying. So, first of all, we need to get back to a system where we recognise assessment for learning and how that teacher assessment can drive children on in their learning journeys. And that is different from accountability. We can't have an accountability-free zone; I'm accountable, every single Member sitting in the Senedd is accountable. These are concepts that are not unfamiliar to any of us. We need to have accountability in our system, but that's not to confuse it with assessment for learning.

Siân Gwenllian says we need a Welsh qualification for a Welsh curriculum. Well, I would argue that we do indeed have Welsh qualifications at the current time. Some of them are completely unique to Wales, such as our Welsh baccalaureate or our maths numeracy GCSE, and, indeed, the way in which we have retained our AS levels, where we still have elements of coursework in our GCSEs, and children still do oral tests in Welsh first language, Welsh second language and English—all things that have disappeared in other parts of the United Kingdom. 

And, clearly, Qualifications Wales's review into the future of qualifications, which has been necessitated by our curriculum reform, is important. I would remind the Member that in the first stage of their consultation, there was strong support expressed for keeping GCSEs. It's a brand that is well understood by pupils, by parents, by schools, by businesses and by higher education establishments. And I would remind Siân Gwenllian how many times I've answered questions in the Chamber, where people have raised concerns about the acknowledgement of Welsh qualifications, sometimes by universities across our border, and the fact that Qualifications Wales has had to employ an additional member of staff that does that work with higher education institutions elsewhere, so that Welsh students are not disadvantaged. 

What's crucial to me goes beyond simply the name of a qualification. What's crucial to me is that a qualification has currency, that it allows Welsh children to fulfil their ambitions, whether that is moving to further education colleges, moving to an apprenticeship, into the world of work, across our borders perhaps to study at institutions elsewhere in the United Kingdom, indeed elsewhere in the world. Nobody in Wales will thank us for creating a qualification system that, in some way, diminishes that currency. And I think that's what we have to focus on. 

But I would agree with the Member that whatever those qualifications look like, they should not dictate the content of the curriculum. It is the content of the curriculum that should dictate the qualification, and it is sometimes—and I think this is one of the discussions we will have to continue to have with the system—it is sometimes concerning to me, that question about, 'Just tell me what's going to be in the spec for the exam and then I'll design the curriculum.' We need to design our curriculum first, and then understand how we will assess it. Thank you. 

Thank you, Minister. We will now suspend proceedings. 

Order. Order. The Senedd is back in session.

We move to item 4, which is a statement by the Counsel General and Minister for European Transition: COVID-19 reconstruction—challenges and priorities. I call Jeremy Miles. 

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the lives of each and every one of us in many ways. It's had a severe impact on our economy, our society and our communities, and that will continue. The virus is still circulating and we understand the demands made of the people of Wales, and we are grateful to everyone for their ongoing efforts to limit the spread of the virus.

As we continue to control the virus, it's also important that we respond to the likely long-term impact and plan for the future. Our response to the pandemic has always been proportionate and evidence based. That will also be our approach to rebuilding. 

We have begun a national conversation about what our future Wales should look like. We asked members of the public to get in touch to tell us what matters to them for the future, and we received over 2,000 submissions from individuals, from community organisations, charities, businesses and representative bodies. I've held a series of round-tables with people from community groups, the third sector, local authorities, trade unions, businesses, academics, young people, along with representative organisations from Wales, other parts of the UK and internationally.

Members of the Senedd will also be aware that I set up an advisory group of experts, which has four standing members: Torsten Bell, from the Resolution Foundation; Rebecca Heaton, who represents Wales on the UK Committee on Climate Change and leads on climate change within the Drax Group; Paul Johnson, who heads the Institute for Fiscal Studies; and Miatta Fahnbulleh, who leads the New Economics Foundation; and a different fifth member has attended for each session, bringing a particular sectoral or other experience and knowledge relevant to the issue being discussed.

The round-tables have considered a broad range of issues to help us consider where best to prioritise our efforts, given the scale of the challenge that we face. They have been extremely helpful and the views put forward in these discussions have informed the development of our priorities. They've also reaffirmed to us that our existing concerns—the climate emergency, the corrosive impact of poverty, the need to adapt to rapid economic change and the importance of reconfiguring public services to make them more responsive and accessible—and our values and objectives of a more prosperous, equal and greener Wales are the right ones for our nation albeit in a changed context. Throughout the pandemic, we've been guided by that vision and, in spite of the challenges of the pandemic, we've continued to prioritise delivery of the actions within our programme for government that will have the biggest real world effect.

Today, I've published the report: 'COVID-19 Reconstruction: Challenges and Priorities'. The report sets out key areas where we will focus our efforts and resources for reconstruction to make the most positive impact for Wales.

Recognising that we are entering an extremely challenging time for the jobs market, which is likely to be particularly difficult for young people, we will focus on keeping people in jobs and creating new jobs. We will do everything we can to reduce unemployment and give everyone the best chance to find and keep decent work with long-term prospects, adding value to the UK Government’s Kickstart programme. We will work with trade unions, employers, schools and colleges to provide opportunities for people to develop their skills and to acquire new ones. We will do all that we can to prevent our young people losing out educationally or economically through the effects of coronavirus and an economic downturn that is not of their making. We will support all of our young people to stay in education and to catch up at school and in college. In addition, we'll make sure that particularly disadvantaged groups, including members of black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, receive the additional help that they need.

We'll step up construction of council and social housing to increase access to high-quality housing across Wales, in particular investing in low-carbon housing at scale and upgrading housing stock, particularly social housing, to make it more energy efficient and to reduce fuel poverty. This will provide a threefold benefit: providing an economic stimulus; enabling more people to live in a home that meets their needs and supports a healthy, successful and prosperous life; and contributing to decarbonisation.

We'll step up our investment in our local town centres to help build resilient communities and to capitalise on how coronavirus has refocused people's lives on the communities in which they live, including providing better access to open spaces, the creation of remote working hubs, and making sure our public services are more accessible. Recognising that we continue to tackle other major challenges, we will continue to respond energetically to the climate emergency by pursuing a strong decarbonisation agenda, managing our land for the benefit of rural communities and future generations, and protecting and enhancing our natural resources.

We will take the opportunities offered by changing working and travel patterns to build on trials of demand-responsive public transport and put a clear emphasis in our new transport strategy on minimising the need to travel, spreading demand for public transport more evenly across the day, and enabling active travel as an investment in public health. We'll focus on the everyday or foundational economy and support the growth and independence of Welsh-headquartered businesses in order to build the resilience of the Welsh economy in the face of coronavirus and the end of the EU transition period. We'll support the NHS to make up lost ground in terms of treatment of non-coronavirus-related conditions.

Across all of these eight priorities and in everything we do, we will focus our efforts on supporting those who have been most adversely affected by the crisis, including children and young people, women, those in low-paid and insecure employment, BAME people and disabled people. This package is an evidence-based approach to reconstruction, informed by the experiences of the people of Wales and one that will help us achieve our vision of a more prosperous, equal and greener Wales.

Thank you, Minister, for a copy of your statement in advance of this afternoon's session. I welcome the publication of the 'COVID-19 Reconstruction: Challenges and Priorities' report. I think there's a great deal to be said about the level of engagement that the Welsh Government has undertaken in order to produce that document, and I welcome a great deal of the focus that the Welsh Government has identified in terms of things that it would like to achieve going forward. But that said, I do think that there are things that I would like to ask you some questions about.

I notice that you refer to the need to ensure that we focus our efforts in Wales on supporting those who have been most affected by the COVID-19 crisis. You listed all sorts of individuals—children, young people, women, those in low-paid and insecure employment, BAME people and disabled people—but the one group that you didn't mention was older people, and, of course, we all know that the impact of the pandemic on older people has, unfortunately, been much more severe than on other groups in society. Can you tell me is there a reason why older people feature very little—not at all in your statement and very, very little in the document that has been published today?

You've also said that you want to ensure that people's jobs are protected where possible, and that young people in particular can get into employment, and I would echo very much those comments. But there is a growing concern across Wales that some of the restrictions that the Welsh Government is putting in place are disproportionate to the levels of risk in people's communities. Do you accept that there is a risk that more young people in Wales will be out of employment as a result of some of the measures that the Welsh Government has taken and that it's very difficult, actually, for members of the public to determine whether the action taken to date is proportionate, because of the lack of granular data at a community-by-community level that is available and published in the public domain by Public Health Wales and othe

Can I also ask about access to improvements in terms of our housing stock? I obviously understand why the Welsh Government has a focus on trying to improve the social housing stock. It's easy to motivate registered social landlords with grants in order to take action to retrofit those properties, but we obviously also need to encourage people who own their own homes to take action to improve their properties too. The UK Government, of course, has its green homes grant scheme, which is very generous, and many people are taking the opportunity to take advantage of that at present, but we don't have an equivalent scheme here in Wales. Will the Welsh Government reconsider its position on that and whether there is a way that you can promote people investing in their own homes and properties by enticing them with a contribution from the Government's coffers in the way that the green homes grant does in England?

Can I also raise concerns with you about the level of investment that the Welsh Government is putting into town centre improvement? You'll be aware that the Welsh Conservatives have called for a £250 million COVID recovery fund, which is, obviously, a significantly greater investment than the cash that has been made available by the Welsh Government for town centres to date. Can you give us an indication of the scale of investment in town centres going forward as a result of your plan?

And finally—oh, I've got a little bit more time than I thought. If I can also, then, just touch on public transport. I note that you are encouraging people to change their working patterns. That will obviously reduce demand for public transport significantly in some parts of Wales. Quite why you've chosen a 30 per cent target of the workforce working from home is beyond me; I'm not quite sure why you've decided to pluck that figure from the air or where the evidence base for that is. But that's the target that you have set. Clearly, if more people are working from home, there will be less demand for public transport, which will make many routes less viable. Now, you've talked about trying to spread the demand for public transport across the day. I can understand that on those busy routes where we've got some overcrowding, particularly on our train services, but what will this mean in terms of bus routes? I'm very concerned, because older people, obviously, are disproportionately greater users of bus services, particularly in rural parts of Wales where they have no alternative transport and may not have a car. So, what work are you doing to identify those critical routes that older people in particular rely on in those sorts of communities?

You mentioned also the national health service needing to make up lost ground in terms of treatment of non-coronavirus-related conditions, yet I haven't seen a single solution in the document as to how you're going to deal with the backlog of appointments. Again, it's older people who are disproportionately—

Can you make this your final point, Darren?

—affected by that backlog and whose quality of life is suffering as a result of it. So, can I ask what specific and targeted intervention will be taken in order to address that particular backlog? I thank you for your indulgence.

I thank Darren Millar for that important range of questions, and I welcome his support for the engagement and the focus that the document describes, and the engagement with people in Wales that has very much helped to shape the priorities and the focus that the document describes. He is right to say that older people have been disproportionately affected in many ways in relation to this coronavirus pandemic. We've discussed that very issue with the older people's commissioner, for example, and as the document makes clear, those who've been most adversely affected will benefit from the interventions that the Government is bringing forward. Older people will benefit from the range of interventions, whether it's support for public services, for the third sector and a range of other interventions that are described in the document.

He raises a very, very important point about young people and their employment prospects. I hope he will acknowledge that the document goes to some lengths to emphasise how significant that is as a priority for the Welsh Government, and that is reflected in the range of commitments in the document in terms of supporting young people to enhance their skills training, support them in work, and indeed to support them in apprenticeships. So, there's a range of specific interventions in relation to young people in employment, to add value, I suppose, to some of the interventions that are happening at a UK-wide level, in particular the Kickstart scheme, and to supplement some of that in a way that adds further value to young people, to make sure that they don't carry this burden with them throughout their working lives, which otherwise they might.

Darren Millar raises an important point about the significance of retrofit for the housing stock. I don't want to trespass on the housing Minister's future announcements in this area, but what we have heard in the discussions that we've held is that it's important to be able to act at scale in a way that enables us to stimulate parts of the economy to generate supply of services in this important sector. And that is important, because the set of interventions around energy upgrades and green housing in the document meet a number of policy objectives, obviously around energy efficiency, obviously around fuel poverty, but also a broader range of impacts around economic stimulus and developing a supply chain and a skills supply chain. The assessment that we have made as a Government is that the intervention that is described in the document stands the best chance of meeting that range of objectives.

In relation to town-centre improvement, as he'll see, that is a significant priority. The finance Minister will be making a statement shortly around the level of financial commitment in relation to the policy interventions in this document more broadly. On the point of public transport, he will have noted in the document the significant sums of money that the economy and transport Minister has made available to public transport already, in particular in relation to bus services, precisely for the reason that Darren Millar gives in his statement. He will, I think, also have noted that the document talks about the importance of demand-responsive transport as an option for the future, which I know certainly many older people in my own constituency, and I imagine in his, will welcome as a means of providing flexible transport that otherwise might not be available.

Lastly, in relation to the points he made about the NHS, I'd refer him to the exchanges earlier in the Chamber with the First Minister in relation to that, and also to the winter protection plan that the document refers to. I'm sure my colleague the health Minister will be happy to elaborate on that when he is next in the Chamber.

Thank you. I'd like to thank the Minister for his statement and for providing a copy to us beforehand. I'm also grateful that he's been willing to release everything publicly.

This is a lengthy report that contains a number of spending commitments that our party will have to carefully analyse, but in terms of the priorities set by Government, they do conform with what Plaid Cymru has been suggesting. I welcome many of the recommendations. Indeed, many of the steps are ones that we've already been calling for, for example to do everything possible in order to ensure that young people don't suffer any long-term impacts in terms of their education, their health and their economic situation because of a situation that they are not to blame for in any way whatsoever. The pandemic has impacted people of all ages in very cruel ways, but it's important to note that young people are missing out on a very important part of their social development because of the restrictions preventing them from socialising with peers and developing educationally.

The report also notes the need to ensure that young people who are already disadvantaged because of structural unfairness do receive additional support. Could the Minister provide details as to how this support will be provided, and how you will ensure that it reaches the right people? Also, could he tell us how the Welsh Government will provide hope for the future for young people and students, in light of the fact that they have missed out on those experiences that I referred to earlier? The report notes the need to try and reduce redundancies as much as possible, as well as creating new jobs. Of course, it's impossible to know now what the scale of the problem will be, but it's crucial that programmes and plans are put in place as soon as possible, and I'm sure the Minister would agree with that.

I understand the rationale of trying to add to the UK Government's Kickstart initiative, but can the Minister confirm that he intends to do this in a way that tackles the weaknesses of that initiative? For example, will he put an emphasis on providing training opportunities, supporting small businesses and providing long-term career opportunities for workers, rather than providing short-term solutions that will not lead to career development? Can the Minister also explain the figures contained within the report? It notes that £2.4 billion will be in the economic resilience fund, but only £40 million for the provision of jobs. So, can he confirm what will be used in order to keep people in work and also how the rest will be invested?

One thing that was missing from the Minister's statement, but I do acknowledge that it is covered in the report, is the dire need to address the mental health crisis, which is sure to develop and get worse as time passes. The report mentioned a major programme of mental health support for children, and I welcome that, but could the Minister provide some detail on how the Government will deliver this, given the appalling failings within the mental health system that existed prior to the pandemic? How will you enhance provision available to the necessary levels as soon as possible?

Another issue that needs to be prioritised is support for the arts. The comments by the Chancellor today told artists to find new jobs, and that was disgraceful and was politically motivated, in my view. I therefore welcome the £53 million fund to support this sector. It would be useful to hear the Minister's assessment in terms of how he'll ensure that these funds reach the individuals and organisations that need the money in good time. The same is true of support for universities, and I do hope that the Welsh Government is having ongoing discussions with them in order to ensure that they receive the necessary support, because our universities are crucially important in terms of the intellectual well-being of our nation.

There are a number of other parts of the report that I would like to discuss in detail, for example the plans to build new homes, to establish social hubs where people can work, managing land for public benefit, public transport—some of the things that the Minister has already responded on—as well as climate change, of course, but I can't address everything in detail today. I would like to recommend that the Minister considers persuading his fellow Cabinet members to provide statements on the post-COVID plans in their individual portfolio areas, so that Members can scrutinise these in an appropriate manner.

To conclude, I will ask one further question: how does the process of doing this work change the Minister's mind as to what the Welsh Government should be doing, and have important lessons been learnt on the need to create a society and an economy that is more robust for the future? Thank you.

May I thank the Member for that very wide range of questions on the whole of the document? Just the point that you concluded on, this document describes the journey over the ensuing period, but the finance Minister's statement will follow on the finance, and then other Ministers will make more bespoke statements on the various specifics that you asked about in due course. There will be an opportunity for ministerial statements generally in that regard.

As regards what we've learnt generally, there are a number of challenges here and they are familiar challenges, but I think that there’s been a greater depth of understanding amongst the public about the level of the challenge, and, of course, that has changed the context from the point of view of us all, I would say. I would say that the response that we received to the public consultation and the consultation with the organisations has reflected generally the principles and the priorities that we had as a Government prior to that, and we have continued to prioritise those elements of the programme for government in these fields. So, this, perhaps, builds on that, with a number of new ideas, but perhaps emphasises some of the things that we haven't been able to achieve.

As regards your specific questions, certainly we need to offer young people hope and acknowledge that children and young people have carried a significant part of the burden over the past period. So, I'm sure she will appreciate the investment in the schools and in higher and further education. You talked about mental health and that includes the fund to support people in the universities who are going through mental health issues and so on to deal with the current situation.

The Member also asked a number of questions regarding the level of support and so on and our intentions for supporting people in their jobs. The figure of £2.4 billion is the level of investment that we've made to date, as regards support for companies and so on. We think that that has probably saved about 100,000 jobs, more or less, over the past period, but the Member is right to emphasise the need for training, the need for sustainable jobs in the long term, and also to ensure that there is continuity and progress, and that they can have career development in their jobs. That's part of the priority included in the document.

As regards mental health in the wider sense, we are offering support to the third sector to deliver and provide mental health services because they’ve been under great pressure in that context, and also in schools, in higher education and through the NHS to support people who don't always have huge problems in this context, but certainly they do require some element of support.

As regards the other questions she asked, I completely agree with her about how unacceptable the Chancellor in Westminster's comments were. I draw attention to yesterday's statement that the scheme has opened to help the freelancers, and that there will be a second phase too. I know that the Deputy Minister responsible for the sector will be listening intently to this discussion and I know how important this issue is for him as a priority.

I'm grateful to the Minister for his statement this afternoon. Minister, I was reading through the document you published earlier today, and I must say I welcome both the nature of the document, the tone of the document and the proposals that you're making in the document. But I want to ensure as well that the ambition and the vision that you've clearly explained in that document is one that the people I represent in Blaenau Gwent will also share.

I was particularly interested in three of the points you made in terms of your priorities—employment, town centres and public transport—because when I look at the community I represent I'm not entirely convinced that the normal we experienced a year ago was what we wanted to experience. I'm not entirely sure that our normal was the normal that we would want to see for many of our communities, and you know that I will have brought issues to this place on numerous occasions about the economy of Blaenau Gwent, the need to invest in the future of our communities and the connectivity of Blaenau Gwent.

Now, if we are to realise the ambition, the test for the Welsh Government is not succeeding in Cardiff or Chepstow, all due respect, but succeeding in Tredegar, Nantyglo or even on the Sofrydd. That is where the test will be. Now, I would like to understand from you, Minister, how you intend to pass that test. How will you ensure that communities in Blaenau Gwent will feel the benefit of this programme? How will you ensure that Blaenau Gwent has the investment in our economic future, has the investment in the future of our town centres and the investment in the future of our people? I'm particularly interested in the three points about jobs, about town centres and about public transport. Thank you very much.

Thank you to Alun Davies for that range of important questions, because I think what his question does is narrow down on the real-life impact of his interventions on people in constituencies that need the support the most. I can assure him, as someone who himself represents a constituency that is outside the south-east of Wales, if you like, that I share his priority to make sure that the interventions bear fruit in all of our communities across all parts of Wales, because we know that there are parts of Wales that have suffered as a consequence of COVID and, in due course, will bear the brunt of both the conjoined effects of COVID and the leaving the EU transition period. There are communities right across Wales that have borne that brunt. I want to echo the point that he made that returning to normal is not the objective that we are setting ourselves. Normal is a kind of life those of us who have relatively comfortable lives regard as a good thing, but for many of our people across Wales, returning to normal is actually not—. Normal was not a good starting point.

On the points that he makes, he will have seen, throughout the document, as well as the skill support and the employability support for those people seeking work across Wales, a number of interventions that are designed to stimulate the economy and create new employment and, actually, the interventions around housing in particular have a geographic spread right across Wales, don't they? I think that's a very fundamental part of the response. Similarly, town centres. I hope that he will have appreciated the references to reintroducing public services into our town centres, whether they're endoscopy services or integrated health and care services—those things which bring footfall and bring vibrancy back into our town centres, alongside the investment in green spaces as well, which the document talks about. And I know that my colleague the Deputy Minister for Housing and Local Government will have more to say about that in due course.

The question of public transport absolutely is at the heart of this, isn't it? And we know what the impact has been on public transport of COVID, but we also know that the system that we had going into COVID didn't reflect the needs of his constituents in parts of his constituency, and certainly parts of my constituency as well. I think that is why I personally think that the plans that the Minister for the economy and transport has brought forward in relation to recasting that relationship with bus operators is actually such an exciting opportunity for us to be able, ultimately, to deliver bus services to people in Wales, wherever they are, and to provide that level of public transport that people ought to be entitled to. I think that level of ambition we have set very clearly as a Government, and, alongside that, a demand-responsive offer, which I'm sure will be transformative to many people, I think is also a very exciting development, and I'm sure he'll welcome that on behalf of his constituents as well.

We have here yet another very impressive Welsh Government document. It has much to commend it, but, once again, I must say, it does read like every other Government document. That might be the result of integrated thinking and working. It may not. I'm deeply concerned about where we are. I thought total lockdown was reasonable, considering all of the circumstances, but I, and many of the people who write to me, never consented to our liberty being curtailed for six months or more. And while there is some relaxation of rules and regulations, we are all aware that the most strict rules can be reimposed at very short notice. There is now talk of the circuit-breaker total lockdowns. The headlines, instead of screaming about numbers of deaths, are screaming about cases now. We're covering our faces. Once again we can't see our loved ones. People have been terrified, and some are still terrified, and Government messaging really doesn't help or instil the confidence needed for us all to play our part to get the country back onto its feet again. It's moved from flattening the curve to waiting for a vaccine, and no-one bothered to tell us when the goalposts again were moved. I know I've said all of this before, but I think it's worth saying again, because it is in this context that I read this document. So, now, there has been another national conversation. Your Government is responding energetically by building resilient communities, encouraging active travel and responding to the climate emergency. I've heard the First Minister say today that his Government is open to a discussion and ideas. However, that same Government doesn't appear to want to discuss the same things in the Senedd, preferring instead to talk to the press. It doesn't bode well, does it?

You talk about housing, and, in the light of the comments I've made over the last few weeks with regard to housing provision, as around 65,000 families are waiting for homes in Wales, I welcome the commitment to get as much out of social housing and council housing as possible, with an increase in the social housing grant. Housing is a need, and indeed your own Government has described it as a right. Your Government didn't need to wait until a pandemic decimated our economy to make this any sort of priority.

You mention resilient communities and our town centres. Our town centres are being destroyed by lockdown and all the more so with the kick in the teeth caused by a 10 p.m. curfew, so let's remember that a night out may also involve a new outfit, hair, nails, aftershave and so on, to bring the town centre back into play. So, further and continued measures will make businesses that may have survived a return to business unviable.

I've been very vocal in expressing my concerns about the other health crisis we're storing up in terms of waiting lists and mental health, so I'm pleased to see some well-thought-out interventions like town-centre endoscopy clinics. I remain deeply concerned about the impact on our collective mental health, and I know that the suicide rates have increased massively during this time.

We hear much about Welsh solutions, not wanting to follow England or indeed Scotland or Northern Ireland, but the fact of the matter is the Welsh approach has been broadly in line with other UK nations. We appear to be all in the same boat and none of us are going out of this anytime soon. I've seen many respected academics, scientists and physicians—sadly no-one advising the Government—say now that we need to learn to live with this virus like we live with colds, flu and cancer. It seems to me that much of the content in this document has been at your disposal and in your gift for a very long time. There was, in my view, no need to wait for it. Thank you.

I thank the Member for those questions and for the welcome that she has given to the document and the interventions that are described in there, for which I'm grateful. I think her comments could be summarised in two broad points, and I hope I don't do them a disservice in doing that. Firstly is to remind us that the contents of the document need to be seen alongside the public health challenge that COVID obviously represents on a daily basis in our lives, and the context of that is a shifting context. I think she raised the point of context herself, and I think it is important to bear that in mind, and I do acknowledge the point that she makes about the anxieties that people across Wales feel about living through this period and living through lockdown and so on.

So, I think the task that the document sets out to meet is to respond to what we already know is the effect of COVID, alongside the task of responding on that more daily basis for some of those challenges. But it is important as well to plan ahead. What we don't want to see—and we have not followed that path in Wales—is a sort of reactive approach, which perhaps has been a feature elsewhere. We've tried to be evidence-based, programmatic and planned in how we respond to COVID in all its many guises, and that's the future of this document as well: it's an attempt to look forward as well as to start the work of reconstruction now.

She makes another point, which I think is intended as a criticism. It's to say that there are some interventions here that, I think, in her words, could have happened anyway, and I think—the point I was making to a Member earlier is that many of these interventions have been under way already. If she looks at the section of the document that talks about the interventions in the immediate post-COVID period, she'll recognise a number of familiar policies in there, and, throughout the pandemic, many of these challenges that we've known have existed for some time we've been continuing to address through prioritising parts of our programme for government that most closely deal with those.

But I think—and I hope she would accept this—that what has happened in the last few weeks and months is a growing understanding amongst the public at large of the scale of some of these issues and an enthusiasm—perhaps a deeper enthusiasm, if I may say—for getting to grips with them. And certainly COVID has demonstrated to us where those inequalities have existed in Wales, but I do want to impress upon her that we've approached this task asking people in Wales what matters most to them but applying the lens that we've applied as a Government throughout, which is the question of economic justice, environmental justice and social justice, and then that is what gives you the range of priorities and interventions that is set out in the document.

Thank you for your statement, and very good to hear you've consulted so widely as we face such unprecedented upheavals, caused by not just one pandemic, but three tsunamis: the possibility of leaving the European Union without a trade deal, and the climate emergency. These things haven't gone away and the idea that we should go back to our bad old ways seems to me absolutely ridiculous, as I think Darren Millar was suggesting.

I very much welcome your proposal for more low-carbon social housing and upgrading our existing housing stock to be more energy efficient, but I just want to probe as to why you're not being a little bit more radical on this. Lord Deben, who chairs the UK climate change committee, was giving evidence to the climate change committee inquiry into carbon emissions last week, and he expressed disappointment that Wales has not used to the powers it has to change the building regulations to prevent what he called 'crap housing' continuing to be built. So, why is it not possible for the Senedd to amend Part L of the building regulations to raise the standards of private housing, and to give them the same standards that we are building social housing to? And also why are we not giving landlords notice that they will no longer be able to let homes that are below E-rated energy efficiency? It seems to me that that would be a huge stimulus to the economy in creating loads more jobs if landlords knew that they had to upgrade their properties by a certain date, and it would help to tackle fuel poverty.

I thank the Member for that question. I think she makes the very important point that none of these sets of interventions can be looked at in isolation and that, clearly, the combined effects of climate change, COVID and the end of the transition period need to be seen as far as possible in the round, and so interventions are designed, in a sense, to be able to take account of that whole context and that'll be clear, I think, to the Member, as the question acknowledges, from the interventions that the paper puts forward.

I think, in relation to housing—I hope she'll acknowledge, as I think she would, how significant the role is of green housing and energy upgraded housing as part of this response. I'm not, I'm afraid, sufficiently familiar with the detail of the building regulations to be able to give her an answer worthy of the question, but I know that the Minister will have heard the exchange and will obviously be able to bear that in mind, but I would say that the boost to the innovative housing programme is designed, in a sense, to find creative solutions into the future, isn't it, really, for those types of property that provide environmentally friendly housing, whilst also stimulating the economy, and I think—I know that she will agree with me—that's an important set of priorities.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement—[Inaudible.]—the Welsh Government's—[Inaudible.]—to commend you on the breadth and depth of—[Inaudible.] There are many questions I'd like to ask about it, but, because of the constraints of time, will stick to just three.

Firstly, the third phase of the economic resilience fund—I note that the document states there will be moneys set aside for businesses who've had to close due to local lockdowns. I'd welcome some further information on this, because it may well be of direct help to businesses within my constituency.

Secondly, I note with interest the reference to the national forest, and the fact that we'll be pressing ahead with the creation of a national forest here in Wales. I welcome this and would like to ask that special consideration be given to increasing forestry cover in those areas of Wales that have suffered so much from flooding, especially over the past year. We know that forestation can have significant positive impact on reducing surface run-off, protecting valley communities in particular.

Thirdly, with regard to the innovative housing programme, could I encourage you, Minister, to look in particular at the need for adaptable housing within that remit? I know from my casework that there's a huge shortage of such properties, and, with more people needing to rely upon social housing as the economic impact of the coronavirus crisis reverberates throughout Wales, I'm sure that the need for adaptable housing will only increase. 

I thank the Member for those questions. In relation to the first point around the next phase of the economic resilience fund, the eligibility criteria for that were published on Monday of this week, and ought to be available—. I think I'm right in saying that, of the £140 million, I think the figure is £60 million that is earmarked for local lockdown support, and the eligibility for that, I think, will be available online. But, if not, then I can make sure that whatever information is available is provided to the Member and Members generally.

On the question of the national forest, I declare an interest in that the last, I think, engagement I did before the initial lockdown in March was to start the planting of the national forest in the Gnoll Park in my own constituency, and it was a great privilege to be able to invite the Minister to the constituency to do that. I certainly take the point that she makes, and I'll make sure that her comment is relayed to the environment Minister in the considerations that she has for bringing that forward in the future.

And lastly, in relation to innovative housing, I know that my colleague the Minister for Housing and Local Government sets a great store on creativity in our response to using housing to meet a range of social needs and a range of family configurations, if I can put it like that, and the flexibility that comes with that is important. I've spoken with her on many occasions of the value of housing that is able to follow the tenant or the owners' life journey, if you like, from different stages and different levels of need from accommodation. So, I'm very sure that'll be upmost in her mind in terms of future announcements that she brings forward.

The final question from Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you very much indeed. Minister, could I commend the engagement you've done on this, but also the radicalism that is shot through this report and the statement as well? That's because, as I prompted you right at the outset of this, you didn't go to the usual suspects, and, of course, we work within the welcome ambition of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 as well.

Let me just ask you a couple of questions here. One is: in terms of public transport, do we use this opportunity now to seize back control, particularly in terms of buses within our Valleys, and make the money that we put into this go further? In terms of town-centre development, can we be clear that it's not only the core town centres, it's actually the Pontycymers as well as the Porthcawls, the Glynneaths as well as the Neaths—it's all those town centres, including in the uppermost reaches of our Valleys.

Just finally, on low carbon housing, I welcome the focus, obviously, on social housing, but that's not the be-all and end-all, as the report makes clear. We should come up with our own version of how we do at-scale development of retrofitting with private homeowners as well. Will that be part of the way forward? Thank you very much. 

Huw Irranca-Davies's questions go to the heart of many of these issues really, so thank you about the point about engagement. The good thing about engagement is a range of voices, and you have with that sometimes things that you want to hear, sometimes things that you don't want to hear, but that's an important part of the process. And I would like to acknowledge how important the well-being of future generations legislation has been to our thinking in this, and to thank the commissioner for her engagement in relation to the Government's work in this area.

On the question of control for future bus provision, that is at the heart of the proposals that I know the Minister for economy and transport is working up. Huw Irranca-Davies will have heard Ken Skates say—you know, with the vast amount of public money that goes into the provision of bus services, we ought to be able to deliver more control over the outputs than the current set of arrangements provides, so I know that his plans are designed to meet that objective.

I couldn't agree more in relation to town centres. I have a constituency, as does he, with a number of towns—not big towns—all of which need, I think, some support. On the last point, in relation to low-carbon retrofit for housing, I'll make sure that the Minister has heard that point; it's been made by more than one speaker today. The intervention in the document, in our assessment, is the best means of making rapid progress, if you like, in a relatively short time frame, but there is no doubt that the point of that is to generate scalability over a longer time horizon.

Thank you, Minister.

Item 5 is a statement by the Minister for Finance: an update on the fiscal impacts of COVID-19 and future budget prospects. I call Rebecca Evans.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer. Today, I am providing Members with an update on the fiscal impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and our future budget prospects. Our efforts are focused on responding to the impacts of the pandemic and setting the foundations for reconstruction with new support for jobs, young people, communities and our environment.

The Chancellor’s decision to cancel the UK autumn budget, the uncertainty surrounding the UK comprehensive spending review and the lack of information on replacement EU funding all contribute to making our task harder. Together with my counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland, who are also making statements to their respective legislatures today, we are setting out our joint requests to the UK Government for greater fiscal flexibilities, meaningful involvement in the spending review and a fair deal on EU replacement funds.

We have now allocated almost £4 billion in response to the impact of the pandemic. This has been drawn from consequentials from the UK Government as well as £0.5 billion from the COVID-19 response reserve that we created through repurposed budgets. Since the supplementary budget, we have allocated £260 million in additional funding for local authorities and an additional £800 million stabilisation budget for the NHS, as well as support for wider priorities from public transport to arts and culture.

Today, I am pleased to announce a further substantial package of funding totalling £320 million to help people and businesses to survive the challenging times ahead. We are investing in the reconstruction priorities outlined just now by the Counsel General and Minister for European Transition to support a values based recovery. Together with the major investment in businesses and skills within the economic resilience fund, these measures provide a significant investment in our reconstruction efforts.

My ministerial colleagues will set out further details in the coming days and weeks, but I can confirm that the action we will take to support children and young people will include £15 million to help more learners in further education with the digital tools they need, at the same time as boosting enrolment capacity to support young people through the economic shock. A further £9.5 million will help those in years 11, 12 and 13 with additional catch-up support at this crucial time in their education.

A further £60 million will be dedicated to support a step up in the construction of council and social housing. This action will help to boost jobs, with investment in low-carbon housing, greater energy efficiency and efforts to reduce fuel poverty. And £14 million will support measures to respond to the climate emergency by pursuing our strong decarbonisation agenda, managing our land for the benefit of rural communities and future generations, and protecting natural resources. This major investment demonstrates how our approach to reconstruction will be guided by the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and in particular the importance we place on early intervention to prevent problems in the future.

While this action is essential to our recovery, only the UK Government has the macro-economic levers required to reignite the economy. I remain greatly concerned that the job support scheme includes an arbitrary definition of what a viable job is, which will only worsen the difficulties for those who are hardest hit. Together with counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland, I am today urging the UK Government to do more to support the businesses and sectors that are hardest hit; to do more on skills and more on job creation for young people; and to continue with additional universal credits, due to run out in March, which have helped some of the poorest families weather the storm. The UK Government must also do more to provide extra support to individuals and businesses in local lockdown areas.

There remains uncertainty about the level of funding that we can expect this year. While I welcomed the UK Government’s guarantee that I was able to negotiate in July, there have since then been several announcements of further funding in England without clarity about the implications for us here in Wales. We rightly expect our fair share of new funding announcements by the UK Government, but we have currently no way of judging whether or not we're receiving it.

This backdrop makes the case for greater fiscal flexibility all the more urgent. There are three main new flexibilities we require: (1) the ability, if we need it, to overspend this year, up to a limit that we can agree with the UK Government; (2) the ability to carry forward more in the Wales reserve at the end of the financial year; and (3) enhanced access to the resources in the Wales reserve in 2021-22 for both revenue and capital. Together with my counterparts, we are collectively asking the UK Government today to provide the full suite of flexibilities that we need to manage the challenges that we're facing.

The cancellation of the UK autumn budget and the uncertainty surrounding the comprehensive spending review has major implications for our budget process. At present, I intend to publish our draft budget proposals on 8 December and the final budget on 2 March 2021. However, this timetable is heavily dependent on when we receive details of our settlement for future years and the conclusion of the spending review. While I continue to press on with our draft budget preparations, without a UK Government budget I am having to make assumptions about the block grant and use provisional information on the block grant adjustments. So, together with my counterparts, we are collectively asking the UK Government today for urgent clarity around the scope and the timing of the spending review.

We also face the continued uncertainty regarding the UK Government’s approach to the end of the EU transition period. We continue to press the UK Government for more clarity about how it will deliver on promises that Wales will not be worse off as a result of Brexit and that devolution will be fully respected. Replacement funds will be integral to our recovery, so their delivery must be fully devolved so that we can target them to meet the specific needs of people, communities and businesses in Wales.

The United Kingdom Internal Market Bill serves to undermine this, and we will do all we can to resist this power grab and the race to the bottom that it represents. For this reason, together with my counterparts, we are collectively asking the UK Government today for assurances that it will provide full replacement funding of EU programmes without detriment to the devolution settlements. We also require a fair share of funding for new functions that will fall to Wales and that will help us to support a smooth transition as we exit the EU.

So, to conclude, it is imperative that the UK Government acts on the collective calls we are making today to provide the flexibilities and the funding needed to enable us to respond to the challenges effectively. In the meantime, the Welsh Government will continue to work tirelessly to build a more prosperous, more equal, and a greener future for Wales, and this is underpinned by the significant investment that I am announcing today.

Thank you, Minister, for the statement.

Well, where to start? I think we are at least united in the desire to support jobs, young people, communities and our environment, and to 'grow back greener', as is the new expression that's going around. But, I must say, Minister, I'm a bit disappointed with today's statement. You point out that the UK Government has the macro-economic levers required to reignite the economy, but of course you must also recognise that you have some pretty powerful levers at your disposal here too. I really do think we need to get beyond this 'It's all Westminster's fault' line, which seems to pervade so many debates and statements in this Chamber.

You say in your statement that £4 billion has been allocated to alleviate the pandemic—that's true. But, as you also indicate, doesn't a large chunk of that money come from UK Government spending consequentials anyway, which surely is a great example of macro-economic support for Wales? In terms of the budget reprioritisation that you mentioned, it would be good to have a little more detail—I know you mentioned some projects—as to what that budget reprioritisation is involving and, indeed, which budgets are being reduced to allow for that reprioritisation to take place.

I welcome what you said about the future generations legislation and the need, as we build back better and greener, to make sure that that legislation is complied with, but how often do we talk about that, but then, in practice, it doesn't actually happen on the ground? Our late colleague Steffan Lewis was always raising this in this Chamber and in committee. These ideas are great in principle, but are they actually working in practice? Because if they're not, then that can be misleading.

I understand fully your calls for more budget flexibility and that is a good thing, however, it's not a panacea, is it? We welcome the guarantee that the UK Government gave you with regard to funding, but with regard to your concerns over clarity, what discussions have you had with the UK Government as to how greater transparency could be provided to the Welsh Government now and in the future when funding allocations are made? Although, I do suspect that that transparency may well highlight that the current allocations have been pretty generous, actually, so I'm not sure that we would hear too much in this Chamber about them at the moment.

Turning to support planning and EU finance matters, well, okay, you're having to make assumptions about the block grant—I understand that these are challenging times for your officials—but aren't Governments across the globe having to make assumptions about all sorts of things at the moment, in these unprecedented times? The situation across the UK is fast moving. As you said, they have macro-economic levers at their disposal, so I don't think it's entirely fair to just throw criticism at the UK Government; I think we have to accept that these are unprecedented times.

On EU transition, yes, we do look to the UK Government to ensure that Wales is not worse off as a result of the UK departure from the EU, and it is important that the devolution settlement is respected. You have support on that.

To bring this to a conclusion, Chair, let's not forget that it was the UK coalition Government that delivered greater fiscal powers for the Welsh Government and for this Senedd, including some pretty significant tax powers. So, I think we need to reflect on that, and, yes, flexibility is good, but when the Welsh Government ask for more money, it actually already has many tools at its disposal here to raise finance, to borrow and to incorporate flexibility into the system. So, let's remember that in the future. And Minister, can we work together, get on with growing the Welsh economy, growing the Welsh tax base, building back better, building back greener and making sure that the future economy of Wales is stronger than it has been in the past?

I'm grateful to the Conservative spokesperson for those comments this afternoon. I do reassure him that we are absolutely using all of the levers at our disposal in terms of our response to the coronavirus pandemic, and also, then, the work that Jeremy Miles has outlined this afternoon in terms of our efforts to focus on the reconstruction.

I think we can demonstrate that particularly in the work that we've done to repurpose budgets across Government. So, the £500 million economic resilience fund is a really good example of where we repurposed Welsh Government funding and European funding in order for us to be able to put in place that rapid support for businesses. And we know how many businesses have benefited from that—over 60,000 businesses have benefited. And we know that we have secured over 100,000 jobs and I think that's an incredible achievement, but we recognise, of course, the difficult times facing us in terms of the economy and the need to do more, which is why the third phase of that economic resilience fund is open at the moment.

It's good to hear Nick Ramsay talking about the guarantee that we were able to negotiate with the UK Government. We understand now that we're at the top end of that guarantee. The UK Government had said it would provide us with comprehensive details as to the Barnett consequentials to which that guarantee referred. Unfortunately, we're yet to have the detailed reconciliation of that information, so it does make it difficult for us to understand to what extent the funding we have received relates to items that the UK Government has spent on. For example, we can't see where additional funding that might have been spent on field hospitals across the border would fall within that guarantee and we can't see additional funding for ventilators, for example. It's very hard to think that the UK Government's health department could have funded those from within existing budgets. So, there's a lot of work to do, I think, yet, in terms of having that transparency across the budgets, which I think we would both recognise is essential.

From my part, I want to be as transparent with the Senedd as I possibly can. So, I've had a very useful meeting with the Chair of the Finance Committee. I'm very grateful for the time that he spent with me discussing how we can make a transparent interim supplementary budget, if you like, and bring that forward before the end of the month. That should be an opportunity for us to tie up the funding that we've already spent on our COVID response, in order, then, for the supplementary budget, which I would normally table in February, to concentrate more on the reconstruction effort. So, I'm really keen to get as much information to colleagues as possible, and be as transparent as possible, because I do recognise the sums that we're talking about are very, very significant.

Of course, flexibility isn't a panacea, but it will certainly help a lot, especially in that context of not understanding completely our budget. We're not asking for additional funding in this respect; we're simply asking for the ability to use our funding that we already have in a more agile way. The size of the Wales reserve is very small anyway, so having additional access to that in order to manage our budgets over years is really important. Nick Ramsay and I have talked before about the fact that COVID doesn't recognise financial years, so the need to move smoothly and seamlessly from one into another, I think, is important. The flexibilities that we're calling for are just common sense budget management tools, really.

Nick Ramsay also asked what discussions we've had with the UK Government. I want to be absolutely fair and say that engagement with the UK Government has improved significantly since the start of the crisis. Next week we will be having our eighth or ninth finance Ministers quadrilateral; I think those have been really useful throughout the crisis, and we need to continue that stepped-up level of engagement now as we move through the comprehensive spending review.

I'd just conclude by saying that I very much welcome what Nick Ramsay had said about European transition and the need for the UK Government to deliver on its promises in terms of ensuring that Wales isn't a penny worse off and doesn't lose powers as a result.

Thank you, Minister, for the statement. Yes, we are in an unprecedented period of pressure on our budgets, and I certainly agree that a lack of clarity from the UK Government does cloud things further, and I would hope that the Conservative spokesperson would agree that we need that clarity. We in Wales must be able to make our own analysis as to whether the funding coming follows the current rules on the allocation of funding between the nations of the UK, and at the moment, it's not possible to do that.

The Minister will be aware that I've made the case on a number of occasions for more fiscal flexibility as we move forward; it's a question I've asked a number of times here in the Senedd. I also agree that the Welsh Government's voice needs to be clearly heard as part of the UK Government's spending review. The Minister told us that the nature of the relationship had improved, that the negotiations were happening at higher levels than was the case earlier on in the pandemic, but it's one thing to have eight or nine quadrilaterals; it's another thing to reach a point, after those meetings, where decisions would be made by the Treasury without giving real consideration or a real voice to the Welsh Government. And, of course, Plaid Cymru and I have regularly argued for the need to provide robust sources of funding to replace European funding. The pledge was that Wales would not receive a penny less, and we're nowhere near that situation as of yet.

So, in terms of the funding that's been spent, reference was made to the £4 billion and the £320 million in addition. Now, I welcome additional funding, of course, in various areas. I'm sure my fellow members in the Plaid Cymru shadow Cabinet will be eager to grapple with a number of elements of what was announced and also announced by the Counsel General in his statement, but there are a few areas where I would like more information. For example, local government was one that seemed to be missing in today's announcement. We know that additional funding has been allocated to local government, but we are still facing a situation where the councils that have been so crucial in the fight against COVID and the response to COVID still face huge financial pressures, and I would like to know, in the context of today's announcement, what kind of level of additional support the Government is likely to be able to provide. In the same vein, I wonder whether the Minister could confirm what the intention is in terms of the publication of another supplementary budget. We were given a date there for next year's budget, but we may be in a position now where we need a supplementary budget too, and confirmation of that would be useful.

There was another element that I would like to get some clarity on, which is around an exit from the European Union without agreement. We're very close to exit date now. The prospects are not looking promising for areas such as Holyhead in my constituency, the port of Fishguard, counties such as Anglesey and Ceredigion, who are on the European frontier and the additional pressures that are likely to come as a result of a disorderly exit—as much order as is possible to imagine at this point. So, what funds does the Government have in reserve—in addition to the pressures as a result of COVID—to deal with that crisis too, which is rushing towards us as we speak?

Minister.

Shall I, Presiding Officer? 

Sorry. Minister, I had called you, but obviously we are battling with the technology.

Apologies, acting Presiding Officer, I didn't hear you.

Thank you very much to Rhun for those questions, and, as always, for Plaid Cymru's support for the Welsh Government's calls for additional flexibilities. That support is also recognised by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Wales Governance Centre and even, of course, our own Finance Committee, which is a cross-party committee here in the Senedd. So, there is, I think, a wide recognition that what we're calling for is simply common sense in allowing us to exercise good budget management, and I'm very happy to work in partnership with anyone who shares that ambition in terms of increasing the pressure on the UK Government in that regard, which is why it's been such a pleasure to work with my counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland on this particular issue. Today, all three of us are making statements to our own individual legislatures on this particular issue, all reinforcing those same points about the importance of flexibilities, and I think that working together on these matters is really important as well.

In terms of a supplementary budget, you would have heard me say to the Conservative spokesperson that it's my intention to bring forward an interim supplementary budget in October, so later on this month, and then we'll ensure that it meets all of the requirements of Standing Orders and, of course, gives three sitting weeks for the Finance Committee to scrutinise it as well. That's, I think, really important, because it does allow that level of transparency for the Senedd and also pulls together all of the actions that we've taken to respond to the more acute end, if you like, of the coronavirus pandemic. It will set out the support that we've made available for local government, which I know Rhun ap Iorwerth is particularly interested in, having raised it with me previously.

We've made available nearly £500 million of additional funding to local government through the local authority hardship fund. That includes £292 million to provide general financial support for local authorities to help them meet the additional cost burden that they're facing as a result of the coronavirus pandemic; £78 million to replace the loss of income that local authorities are experiencing as a result of the pandemic—many operate services such as catering, car parks, leisure centres, cultural services and so on, which have been hard hit, so that's to help them with that loss of income; £62 million to support the provision of social care services, because we know the additional pressure that they're facing as a result, again, of the pandemic; £38 million for free school meals; and £10 million additional funding to support homeless people with a particular aim of ensuring that nobody is sleeping rough during the pandemic.

So, we've made a substantial additional funding package available for local authorities, and have listened to local authorities when they've wanted to work with us to make accessing that fund simpler and quicker and more streamlined, for example changing the way in which we provide additional funding for social services to one that provides a per-head top-up, if you like, for the people who they are supporting, rather than having to undertake a more onerous application to the fund. So, we're in constant discussion with local authorities about the support that they need, and the support there, the aim is for that to see them to year end, but of course we are in constant discussion as to whether additional support might be needed.

In terms of the announcement that has been made today of the additional £340 million for reconstruction, you'll have heard me say in my statement—and the Counsel General has made some references to items in his statement also—about additional funding to step up the construction of council and social housing over and above the funding that I announced when I made my decision about the land transaction tax rates just a few weeks ago, and additional funding to support young people in further education in particular, and those young people who may need additional catch-up support. However, these are the headline figures, if you like, and individual Ministers will be making announcements for those particular matters that sit within their portfolios in the near future. Of course, the overall budget position in terms of where we are now—. So, as I mentioned in the previous response, we think we're at the top end of that £4 billion guarantee, but we're seeking additional clarity on that from the UK Government.

I thank the Minister for the statement. I was encouraged when I saw the title of it, 'Update on fiscal impacts of COVID-19'. I've been pressing her for something along those lines for quite some while. I have to say that I was somewhat disappointed in the contents. I had hoped that we might be able to give estimates or updates about what the impact, for instance, would be on land transaction tax of our having locked down the housing market for harder and longer in Wales than in England, but there came none.

I also wonder: is there a danger that the Welsh Government is exercising power without responsibility? Is the fiscal framework such that it can simply, as the First Minister boasted earlier, lock down earlier and harder and presumably longer than the UK Government does for England, on the basis that the UK Government then has to pay for the economic impact of that differentially in Wales? Is that the strategy? To what extent will we feel any impacts through the Welsh rates of income tax, given the fiscal compact and how that's been negotiated to mitigate changes to that, at least in the near term?

I also think there's a danger to fall back simply on saying that only the UK Government has the macro levers. The Minister said that, but the Conservative spokesperson also concurred, and then boasted about devolving tax-raising powers, having first promised not to do so without a referendum, which wasn't mentioned. But the Welsh Government doesn't want to use those powers, we're told. Are you expecting the UK Government to use those powers? If so, would you think they should raise taxes or cut taxes in light of what is happening?

We borrowed, as a country—the United Kingdom—£36 billion in August 2020. The Office for Budget Responsibility gave its forecasts—this was back in July; it might be higher now, I don't know—but they said this year we were going to be borrowing an estimated £322 billion. That's twice what Gordon Brown borrowed at the worst of the last recession in 2009-10. Is that sustainable? You say the UK Government has the levers, but actually it's just borrowing the money. At the moment, it's managing to get the Debt Management Office to sell those gilts, but largely on the understanding that the Bank of England is going to be printing a similar amount of money to buy them back from investors. At the moment, inflation is quiescent and able to generate that magic money tree, so to speak, but will that continue? And if inflation stops being quiescent, what is going to happen? Do you want to see interest rates be raised by an independent Bank of England, or them stop printing that money in order to stop inflation rising, or do you want to see UK Government order them—and I think this would require the UK Parliament, not just the UK Government—to abandon or at least suspend that inflation target? These are really serious questions, and I don't think it's good enough just to say, 'Ah, well, the UK Government has the macro levers' and for us not to consider them. 

A couple of very specific quick questions, if I may. You mentioned a £4 billion consequential versus £0.5 billion of repurposing. Is that the right balance and order of magnitude less almost what we're doing here, compared to what's being done by the UK Government? And you mentioned an additional £320 million, but you don't then give any split as to whether that's repurposing or consequential, or a combination and, if so, what it is. You mentioned £15 million for digital learning. That's a relatively small sum in the scale of education and what's happened. You mentioned £60 million more for construction, including energy efficiency. I think energy efficiency is one of the best ways of limiting carbon emissions in terms of the impact you have for the amount of money you spend, but you then went on to say you were spending £14 million on decarbonisation. Is that additional to and separate from what you've said about energy efficiency, and shouldn't those two things better be looked at in the round? 

I thank Mark Reckless for his comments. He never enjoys my statements, so I'm not surprised that, today, there was no change in that. But I will say on the matter of land transaction tax, because I know we had the opportunity to rehearse these points in Minister's questions just a couple of weeks ago, it's essentially our understanding, and I think that we are correct in this, that the level of change that we would expect to see to the block grant as a result of the housing market being closed, if you like, for longer here in Wales will just be marginal, and we don't expect to see any major change to the Welsh Government budget as a result of that. Because, of course, the fiscal framework does protect us from overall economic shocks, and this situation has been as difficult in England as it has been in Wales, and we would expect the Office for Budget Responsibility to provide us with updated forecasts, which we will publish alongside our draft budget later on this year. So, we'll have a much clearer picture then. But I don't think the impact for either land transaction tax or landfill disposals tax will be significant in terms of our overall budget. 

And then Mark Reckless also went on to talk about Welsh rates of income tax and exploring why the Welsh Government isn't raising income tax at this time. We made a commitment at the start of this Senedd that we wouldn't raise Welsh rates of income tax over the course of this Senedd term and, given the fact that we're in such a difficult economic situation, I don't think now would be the right time to do so. We have to recognise, I think, the scale of the funding that could be brought to the Welsh Treasury as a result of changes, and a 1p increase on the basic 10p would only bring in £200 million. So, in normal years, £200 million would be a significant amount of money, but we're talking this afternoon about being at the top end of our £4 billion additional guarantee from the UK Government. So, I think that we do need to put things in perspective as well.

The policies of fiscal austerity implemented by the UK coalition Government in 2010 and continued by the subsequent Conservative Governments have delayed and damaged economic recovery, which was the weakest on record. And, obviously, it left public services with insufficient resources to deal with normal demand for routine services, let alone cope with the outbreak of the coronavirus. And, of course, the economy is now in one of the deepest recessions in memory, so it's entirely reasonable, I think, to protect the incomes of households and businesses in these circumstances. And it's our view that the UK Government should continue to borrow while interest rates are lower than they were before the crisis, and are actually lower than the rate of inflation at the moment. It's the only way to really protect the economy's capacity to produce the goods and services that we will need to emerge out of the crisis. So, clearly, introducing further austerity now would be extremely problematic, and the Prime Minister has said that there would be no return to austerity, so, clearly, we would want to be holding him to that. 

And then in terms of repurposing the budget, the £500 million I referred to earlier in my response to Nick Ramsay in terms of the funding we've been able to provide to support businesses—that was funding that was repurposed across Government and the EU funding that was repurposed, but that's not to say that individual Ministers aren't making decisions almost every day in relation to the funding that goes through their department, which is very much focused on our response to the pandemic. I think the repurposed funding only provides I think part of the picture and, of course, the additional funding that has been announced today is over and above all of the other funding that has been announced in these areas. 

And, finally, a question from a Member who always enjoys the Minister's statements—Alun Davies. [Laughter.]

I'm grateful to you, acting Presiding Officer, although I may not demonstrate that gratitude in my comments. Minister, there's one thing we will always agree on, and that is that you can't trust the Tories. You can't trust the Tories with Wales and you can't trust the Tories with the interests of Wales. I always worry when Ministers rely too much on the largesse of a Conservative Government that essentially, historically or today, has never given a damn about the people we represent. 

And there are two-ish areas that I would like to ask questions of you. First of all, in the fiscal framework you've spoken about the work that you've done with other finance Ministers and the Treasury across the United Kingdom. I've got real concerns about the way the fiscal framework is working at the moment. You've talked about some of the additional flexibilities that you feel you need and require, and I agree with you, I think they are all necessary, but fundamentally, at its heart, the fiscal framework doesn't work in the way that it needs to work, and I think we need to think hard about how the structure of UK finances works. They are not working at the moment, and I don't believe that without structural reform they are ever going to work. So, I'd be grateful, Minister, if you could indicate whether you are working on a replacement for the fiscal framework and how you would see any structural change being taken forward, and whether you've started to have any of these conversations with your colleagues in other Governments.

The second point I would like to make is this one: we do have significant financial powers at our disposal in this place. Nick Ramsay was absolutely right in his analysis of where we are and the powers available to the Welsh Government and to the Senedd. And it is right and proper that we look at those powers and we examine the use of those powers. You've referred to tax powers; I think the Welsh Government is wrong on taxation, frankly. I've made that point before and I'll make it again: I don't think we can realise our ambitions and the vision that was laid out very well by the Counsel General earlier with Tory levels of taxation, which is essentially what we've got. And so I think we've got to think hard about how we structure that and how we take that forward. But how else, Minister, have you examined the use of fiscal powers and the financial tools at your disposal to ensure that our communities that are suffering in an appalling way at the moment have the resources, and the Welsh Government has the resources, to fundamentally change the future of our country? Thank you.

I thank Alun Davies for raising both of these issues, and I think the real issue with the fiscal framework is less the framework itself and more the statement of funding policy that sits underneath it. That is the area in which we have the greatest level of concern, really, in terms of the way in which the UK Government is applying it. Colleagues will have heard me talk in the Chamber before about the concerns we had about the additional £1 billion for Northern Ireland—not begrudging a penny to Northern Ireland but recognising that that was a breach of the statement of funding policy, whereby the Welsh Government should have had a fair share of that. And also the decisions that the UK Government took in respect of teachers' pensions, which again had knock-on impacts for the Welsh Government's budget, but there was no funding attached to that. Again, that was a breach of the statement of funding policy. So, this is all, in part I think at least, tied up with the work that is going on on inter-governmental relations, in terms of how we can improve the structures that sit alongside the relationships that we have with the UK Government.

But in terms of the specific statement of funding policy, we're looking to make—. Well, I would like to make some changes to that as part of the work that is going on with the comprehensive spending review. So, that's the appropriate time to take those opportunities to review the statement of funding policy. That review has started at official level, but I think that progress is slower than we would have liked. But, certainly, those discussions have started, and I would like to make some progress through the comprehensive spending review.

And I know that Alun Davies has expressed his different views on how we should be using our tax levers at this point, but I would point to the tax policy work plan, which I published in the last couple of weeks, which sets out our priorities in terms of exploring Welsh taxes and how we might use them moving up into the Senedd elections next year. Then, of course, it will be for all of us to set out our proposals for the Welsh public following that.

Thank you, Minister.

In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, unless a Member objects, the four motions under items 6, 7, 8 and 9—the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) Regulations 2020—will be grouped for debate, but with separate votes. I do not see an objection.

I call the Minister for Health and Social Services, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer. I formally move the four sets of regulations before us today, and ask Members of the Senedd to support them. These regulations were again introduced under the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984, through emergency procedures to support our ongoing action to tackle the unfinished coronavirus pandemic. The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 2) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 12) Regulations 2020—I'll now refer to them as the amendment and then the number regulations, so as not to have a mouth full—amend the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 2) (Wales) Regulations 2020, which are the principal regulations. The principal regulations were amended with effect from 22 September this year to introduce requirements on most licensed premises in local health protection areas to close by 11 p.m. and not to open before 6 a.m. Those provisions have now been replaced with new requirements covering all of Wales, which have the effect that premises with a licence to sell alcohol for consumption on the premises must stop selling by 10 p.m. and close by 10.20 p.m. and not reopen until 6 a.m. Such premises are required to provide seated service only, and premises with an off-sales licence for alcohol must cease the sale of alcohol by 10 p.m. In addition, these regulations extend the requirement to wear face coverings to now include customers in indoor hospitality unless they are at a table and eating or drinking, and staff when in the public area of the premises. The regulations were made and came into force on 24 September.

The health protection amendment No. 13 regulations were made on 25 September, and came into force on 26 September. The principal regulations were amended with effect from 8 September 2020 to introduce restrictions in respect of the Caerphilly local health protection area. The No. 13 amendment regulations extend restrictions to a further local health protection area comprising 13 electoral wards in the Llanelli area of Carmarthenshire, and they provide that no household within that area may be treated as forming part of an extended household, and prohibiting the formation of an extended household. Persons living in that area are prohibited from leaving or remaining away from that area without reasonable excuse, and residents of that area are required to work from home unless it is not reasonably practical for them to do so. People outside that area are prohibited from entering the area without reasonable excuse. We currently have a common pattern for local restrictions in Wales, and Members will be familiar with what I've outlined.

The regulations also amend regulation 12 of the principal regulations, that is, the obligation to take all reasonable measures to minimise the risk of exposure to or the spread of coronavirus. As I said, from 24 September, all licensed premises are prohibited from selling alcohol after 10 p.m. and must close no later than 10.20 p.m. These provisions are now extended so as to ensure that premises that, although not licensed, permit customers to consume their own alcohol, are subject to the same requirements as premises that are authorised for the sale or supply of alcohol.

The No. 14 amendment regulations were made on 25 September and came into force on 27 September. The regulations introduce similar local restrictions for the city and county of Cardiff and the city and county of Swansea.

Finally, the No. 15 amendment regulations were made and came into force on 28 September. These introduced similar local restrictions for Neath Port Talbot, Torfaen and the Vale of Glamorgan county areas as local health protection areas that are subject to specific restrictions and requirements. In keeping with the coronavirus control plan, we've set out our approach to monitoring cases and controlling localised outbreaks. The restrictions we have introduced are based on the principles of caution, proportionality and subsidiarity.

The Welsh Government continues to take a careful and evidence-based approach to dealing with coronavirus, including through the formal requirement to review the need for relevant restrictions and their proportionality every 21 days. Each of the regulations relating to local health protection areas is subject to review two weeks after their introduction, and every week thereafter if the restrictions remain in place for longer than that. Llywydd—or rather acting Llywydd—we all have a role to play in keeping Wales safe. These regulations are necessary to our continued efforts to tackle this unfinished pandemic. I ask Members of the Senedd to support them today.

Thank you. I call the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Thank you, acting Llywydd. Members will know, of course, that the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 2) (Wales) Regulations 2020 are the principal regulations on coronavirus in Wales. The No. 12 amending regulations—I do not intend to repeat the narrative that the Minister has given, the accurate account of what those regulations specifically refer to. I'll go straight to our report on the No. 12 regulations, which identified three merits points. The first noted the Welsh Government's justification for any potential interference with human rights, and the second that there had been no public consultation on these regulations, and our third reporting point highlights two important matters relating to the principal regulations as a whole. First, we highlight that keeping up to speed with all the changes is becoming increasingly difficult and confusing for members of the public. Secondly, we highlight possible inconsistency within the principal regulations that require clarifications.

I now refer to the No. 13, No. 14 and No. 15 amending regulations. Again, these have been outlined by the Minister as to their contents and the restrictions that they bring into force. Our reports on these regulations—that is, on the No. 13, No. 14 and No. 15 regulations—do not raise any new issues regarding the application of restrictions to communities in Wales, but we do draw the reports to the Members' attention to assist today's debate.

And there's one further matter that I would like to draw Members' attention to, and that is this: in the future, the committee intends to consider the extent to which the explanatory memoranda include evidence about why certain areas are placed in lockdown and the reasons for that urgency. Thank you, acting Llywydd. 

Sadly, this is now a weekly occurrence that we, obviously, have to deal with these regulations, although I do welcome that the regulations are coming in a more timely manner, albeit they are still lagging on, obviously, the introduction of them, and I very much welcome a real-time debate and discussion on many of these regulations, rather than us discussing them some two weeks after they've been brought into action in some areas.

No politician at all, from any colour party, or independent, even, in this Chamber wants to do anything that puts a citizen of Wales at a disadvantage or causes them harm, and I think everyone subscribes to making sure that we are doing everything in the best interests to protect the people of Wales from the virus and the effects of the virus on people's health.

But there are concerns we Welsh Conservatives have with some of these regulations. If I go through them: regulation 12, about curfew restrictions and in particular the settings of social activities—we fully subscribe to the table-service only and wearing of masks within such a setting, but where we do have difficulties is we have not been able to see the evidence that says that the curfew at 10 o'clock—or 10.20 p.m. in the Welsh context—actually has a material effect in suppressing the spread of the virus and not stopping people taking their social activities into a house setting, which I know is an illegal activity, but we heard in First Minister's questions today from one of our colleagues that it is going on in Wales and people are continuing that social setting within house parties or street parties. And so we'll be abstaining on that regulation, because, as I said, we fully support the table-only rule within the social setting of a pub or such a like venue, but we do have reservations as to whether the effectiveness of the curfew is actually helping and not hindering making sure that social activity is in a regulated environment, such as a pub or similar sort of setting.

On amendment 13, which deals with the restrictions that were laid in Llanelli, we very much support these regulations on the basis that this is very much what we've been calling for. Where the local evidence clearly shows that there is a need, rather than a county-wide or region-wide enforcement of restrictions, it is done on as localised a basis as possible. And we welcome the Government using that information, but we would wish them to share that information more widely and actually use that localised data when they bring forward other restrictions.

Restriction No. 8 and restriction No. 9 on the order paper, items 14 and 15, which relate to Cardiff and Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, Torfaen and the Vale of Glamorgan—we will be voting against these restrictions on the basis that we do not believe that the Welsh Government actually deployed the same criteria as they used in setting the restrictions for the Llanelli town setting, as opposed to the county of Carmarthenshire, and we would very much welcome the Minister giving us confidence that, as he goes forward, he will start to use this localised data in a more targeted way, so that we don't have county-wide lockdowns or regional lockdowns.

And I would just seek some clarification from the Minister: when you look at the figures that are out today, we are talking about the Vale of Glamorgan—. I declare an interest as a resident of the Vale of Glamorgan and also a councillor for the local authority there, but people have been talking—obviously, we welcome the progress in Caerphilly; well, if you look at the target figures today, the Vale of Glamorgan is in a better position than Caerphilly, and I'd like to understand when the Vale of Glamorgan, for example, will be up for review, so that, hopefully, some of these restrictions can be lifted. If that is the journey that the Welsh Government is going on in the Caerphilly county borough area, then, surely, on the numbers, the Vale of Glamorgan warrants such measures as well.

And I just want to end on this note, if I may: I do think it was unfortunate for the First Minister to take Conservative colleagues to task, whether they were Members of the Senedd or whether they were Members of Parliament, when they are genuinely having constituents either running businesses or just residents of the area—. Looking at the numbers, if you look at Conwy, for example, that had county-wide restrictions inflicted on it—placed on it, should I say—the other day, on the last reporting day, 8.5 per 100,000; on the seven-day rolling average, 64 per 100,000; and in the last reporting week, the twenty-eighth to the fourth, 60.6 per 100,000 cases. Gwynedd, just across the border, where no restrictions exist at all—on the last reporting day, 16.9 cases per 100,000; seven-day average, 73.1; and the last reporting week, 72.3.

Now, I'm not wishing to place restrictions on any area that doesn't need those restrictions, but, when you're a representative of a community, whether you're a member of this institution or Westminster or a councillor, then you are not doing your job if you're not conveying the views of those constituents. And when people are seeing their livelihoods going down the Swanee because of certain restrictions that have been placed on those businesses from functioning in an environment that they have created that is safe, then they're not unreasonable in asking their representatives to convey those views to the Government here or the Government in Westminster or the local authority, and I would seek clarity from the Minister on how he and his officials are interpreting the data when one county, as I've just identified, is in restriction, and then the county next door, with a higher infection rate, is not under restriction.

It's a bit unfortunate—I was trying to listen to the previous speaker and it was being interrupted all the time. But, nonetheless, my reason for speaking here is to thank the Minister for the update, and to reiterate that the success of the public restriction hinges on the public's trust in both each other and those who are making those decisions. And that's why I think that the behaviour of Dominic Cummings and Margaret Ferrier MP is so dangerous, and also at the same time demoralising for those people. But the fall in case numbers in Caerphilly, which has been mentioned, and Newport, does show that the vast majority of the Welsh public do understand and do get the reasons for these restrictions. And I believe that there is a fall in case numbers also in Carmarthenshire. So, of course it's essential, then, that we repay the trust that people have put into that system. You have said that the local restrictions are being kept under constant review. Could the health board or Public Health Wales publish real-time data in Llanelli and other areas, so that residents can monitor progress and understand what criteria have to be met before the restrictions might be lifted? But, on behalf of the area that I represent, and everything that I have heard from that community, there is overwhelming support for the Government's action, and I just want to place that on record. Thank you.

There's a series of regulations before us again today. We will be supporting the No. 12 amendment, which is agendum 6, because we generally agree with the benefit that accrues from closing licensed premises earlier, although we feel that we could go further. We will also be supporting the No. 13 amendments, namely Llanelli, where the Government demonstrated that they were able to operate on a hyperlocal level.

We're still considering our position on amendments 14 and 15, depending on what the Minister tells us this afternoon. The reason for that, in accordance with what the Chair of the legislation committee said, is that I do believe that it's crucially important, if truth be told, for the legislation committee, and through that the Senedd, to see the data that clearly demonstrates why action at a local authority area level is required. Now, that may be true, the data may be entirely convincing, but, in order to support regulations, we need to see that data, and I was pleased to hear Mick Antoniw making that very point. The restrictions imposed are significant and substantial—not as substantial as at the time of lockdown in April and May, but they are still significant, and we need to be sure that people aren't suffering more than is necessary in terms of their well-being, and also economically. So, we need that data in order to decide whether the restrictions are proportionate. And, in the case of amendment 13, namely Llanelli, the Government proved that they could do that, but that wasn't the case with amendment 14 and amendment 15. And, of course, the restrictions introduced in north Wales will be before us in a week's time, I would hope.

The other element that causes a great deal of concern is the anomaly where there is a restriction on people from restricted areas in Wales going to other areas, but no such restriction on people from high-risk areas in England travelling to those very same areas. That anomaly makes these regulations, in turn, appear to some as being unfair and disproportionate, and treating the people of Wales in an unfair manner. In reality, it's the inconsistency that's unfair, so when will the Welsh Government act in order to deal with that inconsistency and to ensure that the same restrictions are applied to people from outwith Wales as are applied to citizens in Wales?

I only have one question, but simply to say, coming from an area that has been within these localised measures for some time, both with Rhondda Cynon Taf and Bridgend, my role, and that of others within the area, has been very much to explain to people why the measures are necessary and to encourage them to abide by them, difficult as that is for businesses and individuals. It was disconcerting to see a letter from north Wales colleagues that seemed truly Johnsonian in its approach, which came close to encouraging people to break those rules and regulations. I'd encourage Andrew R.T. Davies to reflect on that.

My question is very straightforward, though: Minister, I have many people who are caught in the conundrum of having booked travel. Some of them have got caring responsibilities; they've postponed travel but they've rebooked it and they planned to go away, some of them from Cardiff Airport. But, those flights and those travel operators—some of them are not offering refunds, or if they're offering to reschedule flights and accommodation, they're doing it at an exorbitant cost. Do we now have any clarity so that we can say to these travel operators and these flight operators, 'You should play fair by these customers; refund them, offer them long-term rearrangements or do not charge them the earth to reschedule flights'?

Well, Minister, you certainly know how to stir up opposition, don't you? I remember the first set of main coronavirus regulations, voting against those. I think there were just three or four of us then. Last week, there were seven or eight in opposition, and this week you have the main opposition saying that they will be voting against the substantial all-county south Wales lockdowns that you're imposing. Even Plaid are saying that they will consider their position before deciding whether to support you.

I just wonder whether you might reflect on whether this has anything to do with how the Welsh Government has managed these regulations. I, as you know, consider that they are disproportionate and counterproductive, but they're also capricious, they're also arbitrary and you have also been defensive and closed in the way that you have put them forward.

Why on earth can't we have the ward level information that is requested so ably by Andrew R.T. Davies? Public Health Wales have published it down to an individual level on their website for nearly 24 hours. Why can't you put that ward data out there and actually engage with the debate? It's because you're not that you're now seeing this level of opposition, and I've spoken before about COVID lockdown fatigue. There's going to be more of it, because it's no longer being done on a cross-party basis; it is being imposed by the Welsh Labour Government against widespread opposition.

Can I ask you, specifically, about the 10 p.m. lockdowns? Whether it's 10 p.m. or 10.20 p.m., surely it is counterproductive to make everyone leave at once. How does that help reduce spread? What about those hospitality businesses that invested so much in getting COVID secure and ready to reopen, and then you do that to them?

Specifically, and finally, I'd like to ask about the council lockdowns; this apparent rule that in Wales you're not allowed to cross a council border: not going out of the region, the wide region in south Wales with infections, but not to go out of your particular council area; not to stop you going within the council area. Minister, again, I see you go to your office in Cathays Park but you won't come here. What is the purpose of this and what is your ask to the UK Government in terms of what they're doing in England?

You talk about respecting devolution, but are you telling them that they have to do for English county areas exactly as you're doing in Wales, because we say, 'You're not allowed to leave the county area', therefore that's what they must say for local lockdowns in England? What gives you the authority to do that? Or, are you saying they have to add on, 'You can go out of your local area, but you mustn't cross the border into Wales'? Or, are you in Wales proposing border control where you put restrictions on people from England, who can move freely within England, to tell them they cannot move to Wales? Has devolution come to this?

I'm very grateful for the opportunity to speak. I wasn't planning to today, but I'm absolutely fed up of the claptrap and cobblers that's being peddled by the First Minister in this Chamber today, and indeed other Members of the Labour Party regarding the statement that was made by Members of Parliament and Members of this Senedd on the Conservative benches. 

In no way whatsoever—let me make it clear to everybody today—in no way whatsoever did any member of the Conservative Party encourage people to break the law and to disregard those coronavirus restrictions. It makes me very angry to listen to people suggesting that that was the case. What we were raising were legitimate concerns on behalf of the people who we represent who are not persuaded by the proportionality of the response of the Welsh Government in terms of the local restrictions that it has now imposed upon a huge swathe of people in north Wales, including those in my own constituency.

And I request that the First Minister comes to this Chamber and apologises at some point in the future for putting that hare running about a misleading comment that he has thrown arbitrarily onto the floor of this Chamber this afternoon and which I ask and urge him to take back and do the decent thing, because it was an absolute fabrication to suggest that we had encouraged people to break the law.

And the Minister to reply to the debate.

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer. I'll run through the comments as they've been made in the debate. I note the comments that the Chair of the committee, Mick Antoniw, made. We do provide frequently asked questions and guidance to try to assist people with the requirements of the regulations and how to help people to follow the new rules.

And, of course, the requirements are because of the continued spread of the coronavirus and all the harm that it will cause and is already causing. Yesterday, I set out that hospital admissions have more than doubled over the last week or so. I'm afraid that I expect to see the death total increase as well. The action we are taking is to avoid very real harm being caused across the whole country, and the frequently asked questions are to help people to follow those rules to keep themselves, their families and their communities safe.

I'd welcome engagement with the committee around information in the explanatory memorandum. It's supposed to be helpful. If there's a way to have that conversation with the committee then I'd be very happy to do so. I also welcome the fact that the committee has, from time to time, helped us with consistency in legislative provisions. That's part of the point of the scrutiny. We're making these regulations in a rapid manner because of the fast-changing picture with coronavirus, and I think there's value in having the committee undertaking its scrutiny function before the legislature is then able to exercise its function in determining whether these regulations can continue or not. But, that's a choice for how the legislature wishes to operate its business.

I'll deal with Joyce Watson, Rhun ap Iorwerth and then Huw Irranca before I turn to the group of comments from Andrew R.T. Davies, Darren Millar and Mark Reckless. I think Joyce Watson is right: the regulations we have do rely on public trust and support and faith that we are doing this for the right reasons, that there is a proper basis for doing so. That's partly about the evidence we have in hard data, it's also about the wider community intelligence we have over the spread and the re-emergence with a vengeance of coronavirus. I think she's right, in all of the opinion poll evidence we see, there is broad public support for the approach the Welsh Government is taking to keep Wales safe.

On introducing restrictions, there is a 14-day period to then review them, then at least every seven days we have to review them again, and that means there is a regular period to review the position within each area with local restrictions in place and for us to consider the path out of those. And I am keen to see areas move out of restrictions. It is not an easy or a glib thing to introduce restrictions on how people live their lives at all.

In terms of the health board data and the intelligence on the spread that's being undertaken, and this is a point raised by other speakers, I am keen that we do provide a regular amount of information about what takes place on a more localised level. I want to be able to do that in a way that doesn't potentially highlight individuals. In some areas, the prevalence will be so low that highlighting an individual case could potentially identify that person. But I think that that is something that we should be able to resolve and I'm keen to do so. I think it would help to deal with some of the concerns that other Members have raised.

On Rhun ap Iorwerth's point about the data underpinning the action that we took, in particular in relation to Cardiff, Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, Torfaen and the Vale of Glamorgan, we had data at that point in time and a very clear case made to us by each local authority and by each relevant health board that, in those areas, they were confident that, because of the data they saw on the rising number of cases and the community intelligence they had from TTP, they were going to be in a position where they were going to go above the formal data point for intervention. And the point was put in this way: there were sparks that they could all see and they wanted to be able to act before there was a real forest fire. And so, that was the analogy that was put to us in very clear terms by public health teams as well as by each of those leaders and chief executives.

More than that, though, at that point in time, we had more of a challenge with lighthouse lab data. So, we knew that the figures we were seeing were a little in—well, they even further lagged the data that we'd normally have. And actually, we went through this on more than one occasion with those local authorities and we could see that, with the data building up and the positivity rate that we had, actually, we were definitely going to get to a point where we would breach the 50 marker. And there's then the point about why would we wait if we had that level of confidence and a very clearly united view from our public health teams, our national public health agency and the local authority leadership involved as well, including—and I think this is important—the professional officer leadership, not just the elected member leadership.

And in the figures published today, Cardiff has a rate of 107.9 per 100,000; Swansea 111.7; Neath Port Talbot 81.6; Torfaen 54.3; and the Vale of Glamorgan 43.4. The Vale has seen a decline and that's good news. We want to see that decline further and then we could potentially be in a position to lift those restrictions, but that had gone above 50 after we had taken these measures. I think it does show that if the Senedd doesn't pass these regulations today, we would then be releasing restrictions in areas where we know that there is high prevalence already, and I think that would be a mistake. We all have a shared responsibility—us in the legislature and members of the public too and those who are members of the Government—but I think the case is made by the subsequent move. And the same applies for north Wales as well. We're not debating the north Wales regulations today, of course, but in all those north Wales authorities that we put into local restrictions, all of them are well beyond the 50 marker, and I think it was the right thing to do to act when we did.

On the process, we've already described it previously; we also have the chief medical officer and the technical advisory cell co-chairs taking part. And we have that advice from each of the incident management teams that draw together local partners. We also have the relevant police force for the area as well.

On travel restrictions, the First Minister has already set out the position we're in today. We want to see the formal response to the letter, but we are prepared to act to use the powers that we do have in terms of public health protection. The measures on travel restrictions are both to contain the virus in an area of higher prevalence and also to protect lower prevalence areas. Now, we're not interested in saying that this is about England or the English; it's actually about any area where there's a high-prevalence issue, and that's what we're looking to address and to deal with. I think it would actually be in all of our interests to have a more common approach to doing that right across the UK. The Scottish Government take a broadly similar approach and I think it would be helpful to have that joint approach, but if we can't persuade the Government for England to act in the same way, then we'll use our powers, but we'll act on our responsibilities to do so under public health legislation.

Huw Irranca-Davies asked about the travel industry and we have a very clear view that we are deeply disappointed in the way that some parts of the travel industry have behaved. These are legal restrictions on what people can do, and if people go on holiday from one of these restricted areas and fly out of Cardiff Airport, Birmingham, Bristol or any other, then they'll be breaking the law, and that is not a position that travel companies should put people in—to choose between losing a substantial amount of money or to break the law and take the risk. I also think it's not good for the travel industry themselves. If someone were to leave a high-incidence area in Wales to go on a flight and potentially to be the cause of a spreading event on that plane or in a resort, I do not think that the travel industry would be having a good day in explaining why it had acted in such a way where it effectively encouraged people to break the law.

I'll deal now with the more assertive points of people who are disagreeing and not in favour of the regulations. On north Wales, we'll debate those regulations next week, but as I say, all four of the north Wales authorities in areas of additional restrictions are well beyond 50. Gwynedd is in a different position to some of those authorities, because the Gwynedd rate has risen, but we are confident from the additional data we have from test, trace and protect that it is associated with a rise in a specific group of student halls of residence. Now, the numbers of cases are relatively modest, actually, in the overall picture, but in a county like Gwynedd, with the population it has, it does send the rate well beyond 70 on today's figures. But it's because we're confident about where the spread is—that it hasn't gone into community transmission within Bangor—that we don't need to take these broader measures. So, we do set a high bar on whether we should intervene in people's liberties. That's the approach we've taken. It helps to inform the approach that we've taken in Llanelli, where there's broad support for it. So, if the data allows us to take that approach, we will do, and it is a regular consideration for the measures that we put in place.

On the opportunities for a real-time debate, well, there's a choice for the legislature here. These are made under procedures that are in place; they're procedures that are open, providing for made-affirmative legislation, but the legislature must agree them for them to remain in force. And, of course, within the UK Parliament, they don't have the same procedure; there's more scrutiny here than across the border, and I think that is a good thing. It's a choice for the legislature in running its business whether it wants to have the committee report as part of its consideration, because if they chose not to do so, then we could, of course, be debating these regulations at an earlier point in time. We're very open to enabling Members to exercise your function as legislators, at the earliest opportunity, to scrutinise what's being done.

On the 10 o'clock curfew, again, it's a similar curfew to the one that's been introduced in England. We have a bit more latitude for, if you like, the 'finishing up your drink' time, and part of the rationale for that is that there's an issue about consistency in the message. When England indicated they were going to go for a 10 o'clock approach, we had to choose whether we stuck with an 11 o'clock approach or not; we chose not to. It aids the consistency of the message and aids compliance. There is an issue and we're genuinely concerned about whether we're displacing activity or not. That helps to underpin the rationale for keeping licensed premises open, actually, for some of the time. But every single public health team has indicated to us, with the restrictions, that they think there's a secondary spread within licensed premises and there needs to be a formal restriction on the amount of time that people can be in licensed premises for. Because alcohol releases inhibitions, and we've seen particular challenges about people in terms of spreading events drinking long into the evening and potentially not being able to remember all of their contacts as well. So, it's underpinned by local intelligence and it's underpinned by an approach across the United Kingdom. And, actually, it comes from measures taken by the Conservative-led UK Government in having the 10 o'clock measure in place first.

I am disappointed that Conservative Members are going to vote against the restrictions in place for Cardiff, Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, Torfaen and the Vale of Glamorgan. I think that is a very serious step to take when everyone can see today that the figures are so high in those areas that they do present a risk to citizens in those local authority areas and citizens in other parts of the country. I'd ask again the Conservative Members to reconsider the approach they take, because all of us have a responsibility, including as legislators. I don't shy away from people asking difficult questions, but I do ask people to exercise their responsibilities, because each of us has one in helping to keep the country safe from this highly infectious and highly harmful virus. I do not want to return to this place and have to read out the increasing death figures that we all recall from April and May. I'd ask people to consider again and I ask Members of the Senedd to support the regulations before us today.

Thank you, Minister. The proposal is to agree the motion under item 6. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 7. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I'll defer voting under this item until voting time. 

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 8. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I hear an objection, so I will defer that item also. 

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 9. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I again defer voting under that item until voting time. 

We will now suspend proceedings to allow for a change-over in the Chamber.

Welcome back.

We will continue with the rest of the agenda today, and I'll start by calling on the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs to move the motion—Lesley Griffiths.

Thank you, Chair. I'm very pleased to bring forward this legislative consent motion for the UK Government's Fisheries Bill. I would like to thank members of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, for their detailed scrutiny of this Bill during its passage through the UK Parliament. I've laid a number of LCMs across the many lives of this Bill, and I'm grateful for the committees' consideration of them. I recognise the timetable for scrutiny has often been extremely tight, but much of this has been out of our control. There are significant challenges to try to co-ordinate Parliament and Senedd timetables. Wherever possible, I've aimed to provide committees and Members with as much information as possible.

I was pleased to be able to agree to the majority of the recommendations in the LCM reports from both committees, and I hope I provided clarity and reassurance on the points raised. Mick Antoniw, the chair of the LJC committee, wrote to me yesterday seeking further clarity on several issues, and I will address those comments in my opening remarks. I will, of course, also be formally replying to the letter. 

The Welsh Government supports this Bill for a number of reasons. Firstly, it extends the legislative competence of the Senedd in matters relating to fishing, fisheries and fish health in the Welsh zone. That was our No. 1 ask, and a clear red line for me. This will enable us to bring forward a Welsh fisheries Bill in future for all Welsh waters. Secondly, we remain committed to implementing a collaborative UK-wide approach to create a fisheries framework, which can only be done effectively in a UK Bill. Thirdly, it will provide a coherent set of powers for managing our fisheries as an independent coastal state. I have been clear it is not my intention to keep the non-framework powers in a UK Bill for any longer than is necessary. In the meantime, I've agreed to the climate change committee's recommendation on the need to make a biennial report to the Senedd on the implementation of the Bill in relation to Wales until such time as a Welsh fisheries Bill is introduced.

In relation to Schedule 3, I note the LJC committee's concerns raised on the powers within Schedule 3 for sea fish licensing authorities. The fisheries licensing powers are part of the framework powers. Around the circumstances in which I would consider it necessary and expedient to exercise the Schedule 3 powers, it is my view these regulation-making powers are drafted appropriately for the effective functioning of our fisheries licensing system now and in the future. Regulations made under these powers will be subject to Senedd scrutiny.

Another issue both committees raised in their scrutiny was in relation to the power of the Secretary of State to determine fishing opportunities and the potential to impact on devolved competence. Satisfactory resolution of this issue has always been a red line for me. I note the Chair of the LJC committee's view on this matter, however I am satisfied this issue will be resolved via the UK fisheries framework memorandum of understanding and the exchange of letters with the UK Government, which I shared with the committees, and that provides me with the level of assurance needed.

As I have advised committees, I had hoped to be in a position to share the drafting of the memorandum of understanding in advance of today's debate. However, given the wide-ranging nature of the memorandum of understanding, it is still in development, and, with the timetable for this Bill, it was impossible to share in advance of today's debate. However, I would not be bringing this Bill forward for consent if I was not satisfied this issue had been satisfactorily resolved. Regretfully, the fast pace of the Bill in the final stages in the UK Parliament has meant the usual committee scrutiny of the latest supplementary LCMs has not been possible. I am pleased therefore we have an extended debate today to provide Members with the opportunity for their views to be heard. 

I wrote to committees last week, noting we are seeking further amendments at Commons Report Stage. Due to delays by the UK Government, it was not possible to finalise some of the necessary amendments prior to this debate, which is not ideal. With that in mind, I included in my letter to the committees details of the amendments we are seeking. We have sought amendments to the Legislation (Wales) Act 2019 to ensure the Act applies to subordinate legislation made in relation to the Welsh zone following the extension of legislative competence in the Bill. We are also seeking agency arrangement powers to enable Welsh Ministers to enter into administrative arrangements with Scottish Ministers, the Northern Ireland department and the Marine Management Organisation on the exercise of fisheries functions—for example, on joined-up control and enforcement or for science and research purposes. We are no longer seeking the amendments to Schedules 3 and 8 I had noted in my recent letter.

One additional point I wish to address from the LJC committee's letter is the concern raised on recommendations 6 and 7 of the committee's report, relating to changes to retained EU law and Welsh functions. I can assure Members no powers are being lost, and I set out the detailed analysis in my letter to committees on 3 September.

Looking ahead, I recently issued a written statement that sets out our plans for future fisheries policies in Wales. As I note in the statement, I am committed to delivering increased fishing opportunities for our Welsh industry, ensuring Wales receives its fair share of any new opportunities, in turn maximising benefits for our coastal communities and allowing for new activities, such as processing and other economic activities and benefits. The Bill reflects our strong commitment to delivering sustainable fisheries in Welsh waters and to working with others with whom we share stocks. In addition, the need for a modern and flexible system of domestic management for non-quota stocks is also central to delivering sustainable Welsh fisheries. This Bill, including, importantly, the extension of legislative competence, provides the appropriate legal powers to deliver our future policy and aspirations. I therefore move the motion and ask the Senedd to approve this LCM. Diolch.

Thank you. I call on Jenny Rathbone to speak on behalf of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee. Jenny Rathbone. 

Thank you, acting Presiding Officer. Speaking on behalf of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, which has published three reports on four legislative consent memorandums since the first version of the Fisheries Bill went before the UK Parliament in November 2018, I'd like to thank very much all those who have contributed to our work. Our first report on an LCM for the Bill was published in February 2019. This Bill failed to complete its passage by the end of the last parliamentary session, so a new and somewhat improved version of the Bill was presented to the UK Parliament in January this year. We reported on the new Bill in May and again in September, but, since then, two further supplementary LCMs have been laid with no time for committee scrutiny ahead of today's debate. This piecemeal approach to scrutiny illustrates how unsatisfactory the LCM process is when considering Bills of this nature.

In the main, the Welsh Government has responded positively to our reports, accepting the majority of our recommendations. Although in most cases this has not resulted in amendments to the Bill, we have managed to secure firm commitments from the Minister on several key issues, and we will obviously pursue these with the Minister in due course. We are broadly content with the Welsh Government's response, but there are a couple of matters I want to draw to the Senedd's attention.

As the Minister has already outlined, the primary purpose of the Bill is to establish a framework for fisheries management in the UK once it has left the common fisheries policy. We accept the need for such a framework, and using a UK Bill to achieve this is a sensible approach; fish are no respecters of boundaries. But the Bill includes provisions for Wales that go beyond that to establishing a framework, and these include extensive regulation and executive-making powers for Welsh Ministers. Now, the Minister has consistently maintained that these powers are necessary to support Welsh fisheries to get through a very uncertain period. That is hard to argue against with a Brexit trade agreement yet to be reached, the COVID pandemic continuing to take its toll and no prospect of a Welsh fisheries Bill in this parliamentary term.

Now, the Minister has maintained that the powers being taken are transitional, but this is not reflected in the Bill. In our second report, we recommended a statutory time limit on these powers via a sunset clause, and the same recommendation was made by the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. This recommendation was rejected on the basis that the Welsh Government could not guarantee a Welsh fisheries Bill would be introduced before any time-limited powers expired. Lesley Griffiths has committed to bringing forward a Welsh Bill in the next Senedd, but there are no guarantees that a different Minister or, indeed, a different Government will give that same commitment. Without a sunset clause, there will be little or no impetus for any new Government to introduce its own Bill. It would be able to rely indefinitely on powers in the UK fisheries Bill, powers that have been consented to by the Senedd, at least in part, on the basis that they are transitional. As the Minister has ruled out a sunset clause, the Senedd must have an opportunity to reassess the merits of powers being conferred by the UK Bill. As recommended in our latest report, we've just heard that the Minister has given a commitment to report to the Senedd biennially on the exercise of these powers.

And then, I want to focus on the current clause 23—the power of the Secretary of State to determine UK fishing opportunities. This was initially a red line for the Minister. Her concerns, shared by the committee, were about the extent of the powers and their impingement on devolved matters. The Minister has sought to address these concerns not by pursuing an amendment to the Bill, as recommended by us, but through a memorandum of understanding between Governments. Despite previous assurances, the Minister is unable to share that memorandum of understanding with the Senedd. She's also unable to share a draft memorandum of understanding. The Minister has, however, provided a copy of her recent exchange of correspondence with the UK Government on what would be a reasonable approach to consulting before the Secretary of State exercises the power under clause 23.

Our committee has not had an opportunity to consider this latest information, but I hope I speak on behalf of the committee in saying it is disappointing that the UK Government has been unable to agree all of the Minister's asks. It remains unclear whether the UK Government and the Minister have managed to provide the necessary level of assurance on this issue. Llywydd, each of the committee's reports have recommended that the Senedd gives consent to the relevant provisions in the Bill, subject to being satisfied with the Welsh Government's responses, and I ask Members to reflect on the points I've raised before making their decision tonight. Thank you.  

Thank you. I now call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw. 

Thank you for that. We first began our consideration of a UK Fisheries Bill as long ago as December 2018, and Members will know that the first version of the UK Government's Fisheries Bill fell due to the dissolution of the UK Parliament late last year, and that was after the Welsh Government had laid two legislative consent memoranda on that Bill, which we reported on in February 2019. The current UK Government brought forward a new Fisheries Bill in January of this year, and the Welsh Government has laid four legislative consent memoranda, and we have reported twice, first in May, and subsequently just two weeks ago. Memorandum No. 3 was laid just days before our reporting deadline, and the fourth memorandum arrived only last Thursday.

So, in our committee yesterday we discussed memorandum No. 4, along with a letter from the Minister sent to us on 1 October, and, as a result, we wrote to the Minister yesterday requesting further clarity on her letter and memorandum No. 4. This correspondence has been published, and I'm grateful for the reply from the Minister. It's important to note that memorandum No. 4 does not make it clear that the Welsh Government is seeking further amendments to the Bill. Now, these decisions will be made after this Senedd votes on the motion today. The Minister's letter provides some details about these amendments, and you can see that letter in the papers for today's Plenary meeting. We've not had time to assess the impact of these amendments. The Minister has said she will inform Senedd Members of any changes made at Commons Report Stage following the debate. I would suggest that this isn't satisfactory. In our February 2019 report, we highlighted our increasing concern with the transfer of powers from the Senedd as a legislature to the Welsh Government as the executive. This concern is amplified where powers are delegated to the Welsh Ministers through a UK Bill, which Senedd Members are not directly able to influence. In contrast, Members of the Senedd would, obviously, play a key role in the development of a Welsh Bill.

Now, originally, the Minister told us that it was her intention to bring forward a Welsh fisheries Bill in this Senedd term. With that stated intention, it's unclear why the Minister has not sought the inclusion of a sunset clause in the Bill. The Minister's reasoning was that the Welsh Government did not yet have fisheries built into its legislative programme. We raised this issue again in our two reports on the LCMs for the current Bill. In our report laid two weeks ago, we put forward a revised proposal to the Minister. Now, whilst not ideal, we see no reason why a sunset provision in the UK Bill, specifying a date of 2024, could not be accompanied by a Henry VIII power for the Welsh Ministers that would permit the extension of the sunset date by two years. Such a regulation-making power should be subject to the affirmative procedure in the Senedd and, sadly, this proposal has been rejected.

I'd now like to move on to highlight another significant issue. It is an unwelcome fact that, with each LCM we have considered for Brexit-related Bills, there have been notable disputes between the Welsh and UK Governments regarding what is considered to be a devolved matter. The power in the Bill for the Secretary of State to determine UK fishing opportunities was initially a red line for the Minister, because the power interfered with a devolved matter. However, the Minister is seeking to resolve this issue be means of a memorandum of understanding, and that has given us considerable cause for concern, not least because such agreements do not bind either party. The Minister indicated that the development of a memorandum of understanding was critical to any recommendation she may give for the Senedd's consent to be given to the Bill. Now, last week, the Minister shared with us her letter to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, in which the Minister set out her preferred terms of an agreement on the use the powers to determine fishing opportunities. This agreement is in lieu of the fact that the MOU is still in development.

Now, as I mentioned earlier, there has not been time to fully analyse the correspondence that has been shared with us. However, it is not immediately clear to us that the UK Government has committed, or the status of any commitment, to the terms of the agreement as proposed by the Minister. Even with this exchange of correspondence, the fact that the MOU will not be ready ahead of the completion of the Bill's passage through the UK Parliament is unacceptable. The Senedd is being placed at a severe disadvantage in not having access to the detail of the memorandum of understanding relating to the exercise of the Secretary of State's power to determine fishing opportunities.

Moving on, the Bill provides extensive regulation-making and Executive powers to Welsh Ministers. In our report laid in May of this year, we said that it was frustrating that the LCM does not adequately identify the regulation-making powers being taken nor seek to justify why they are being taken. We were also disappointed that the Minister has provided limited information about the rationale and process for the Welsh Ministers providing consent to the UK Government to make regulations in devolved areas.

Now, before concluding, we acknowledge that the Bill extends the Senedd's competence in relation to fishing, fisheries and fish health to the whole of the Welsh zone. While we welcome this extension of competence, it could also have been achieved via a section 109 Order, which would have been subject to scrutiny and approval by the Senedd. Now, as is becoming clear on Brexit-related UK Bills, the legislative consent process has limitations, not least because the Senedd is precluded from the full scrutiny of proposed law that will eventually apply in Wales and in particular because of the need to act in accordance with timetabling in the UK Parliament. There are many examples where the UK Parliament legislating for Wales on a devolved matter may be pragmatic and reasonable. However, in the view of the committee, it's regrettable that a significant change to the law in Wales for the fisheries sector has not been made in Wales. Thank you.

As a nation with a proud seafaring tradition, the importance of this Fisheries Bill cannot be overstated. Our relationship with the sea has not only helped to shape our nation's history but also our culture. This LCM acknowledges that there needs to be a UK-wide approach to create the fisheries framework, which can only be done through a UK Bill. It enables the Welsh Government to act decisively until we reach a time that a comprehensive Wales fisheries Bill can be brought before the Welsh Parliament for full and proper scrutiny.

The Bill introduces many significant positives for Wales, redefining responsibilities in relation to fisheries or the Welsh Government and its marine and fisheries division, including the development of new regulations, new fisheries management plans, new inter-governmental arrangements, including the joint fisheries statement, memorandum of understanding and dispute resolution arrangements, and greater responsibility for regulating and enforcing fisheries in the Welsh zone. It acknowledges the technical and global nature of the fishing market. Clauses 12 and 13 make provision for access to British fisheries by British and foreign fishing boats. Schedule 2 also contains amendments to ensure that any foreign vessels that enter our waters will be subject to the same regulations as British fishing boats. Meanwhile, clauses 19 to 22 and Schedule 4 provide for access and licensing offences. However, these clauses can be only enforced by a fully funded marine and fisheries division.

A CCERA report has previously highlighted concerns about the capacity of fisheries policy and legal staff within Welsh Government to deal with the increased workload resulting from this new legislation. Minister, in a letter that you sent to the committee on 30 June, you said that

'where additional costs may arise'

in relation to the marine and fisheries division,

'they will be drawn from existing programme budgets.'

With concern also that staffing of this team is at half capacity, I urge the Welsh Government to explain what assessment has been made to establish what additional costs may amount to and to explicitly state whether this cost can actually be met by existing budgets.

Clause 23 enables the UK Secretary of State to determine the maximum quantity of sea fish that may be caught by British fishing boats and the maximum number of days that British fishing boats may spend at sea. Under clause 24, before such a determination is made or withdrawn, the Secretary of State must consult Welsh Ministers.

The Welsh Government is to sign a memorandum of understanding on this front, which, at the time of this LCM, remains pending. Now, I share the Minister's confidence in the commitments made by British Government thus far that any MOU will fulfil the parameters laid between the two parties.

Clause 1 sets out the UK's fisheries objectives, which will apply across the UK, alongside a redrafted sustainability objective. The Bill now introduces a new climate change objective. These changes realise that this Bill offers an unprecedented opportunity for the UK and Wales to demonstrate viable environmental ambition and leadership to sustainable maritime policy, but sustainability also means supporting coastal jobs and the communities they serve. It also means ensuring that Welsh fisheries are economically viable and resilient for future generations. Therefore, I welcome the introduction of a new objective under clause 1, designated 'national benefit'.

Information dating back to 1985 suggests that the Welsh fishing industry is the smallest national industry in the UK. In 2012, there were approximately 1,020 employed in fishing, 643 regular full-time workers and 347 fishing staff. More broadly, the number of fishing vessels in the UK fleet has fallen by 29 per cent since 1996. The environmental economist Griffin Carpenter has noted that the financial assistance powers offered under this clause will enable Welsh Ministers to provide funding for a broader range of purposes when compared to the current European maritime and fisheries fund. This included financial assistance for training, which Mr Carpenter suggested could help support young entrants and in turn potentially rejuvenate the fishing industry in Wales.

The Welsh Conservatives will be voting in favour of giving consent, because to do so is a positive step forward towards a thriving and sustainable future for the Welsh fishing industry. But the Welsh Government must act on the concerns of CCERA in relation to the funding and staffing of the marine and fisheries division, and look to finalise the MOU as soon as possible. Thank you. Diolch.

I have to say that there is a feeling of groundhog day around this debate, because there is great similarity between this debate this week and the debate that we had on the UK Agriculture Bill just last week. There are some positives, of course, before us today. Extending the competence of the Senedd in relation to fisheries, fishing and fish health in the context of the Welsh zone is something that's to be welcomed. But I'm afraid that there is a great deal in the Bill that is far less positive. I'm still concerned that there is no clarity on how resources will be shared across UK administrations, or how any dispute can be resolved, not only in terms of resource, but also from a policy point of view.

From the outset, Plaid Cymru and the committees that we've heard from in this debate have called for a sunset clause. I still feel that that is necessary; we, as Members of this Senedd, do need assurances that there will be a Welsh fisheries Bill that will allow us to reset the powers provided to Welsh Ministers by Westminster in a way that bypasses our role as Members of this Senedd. I'm surprised that the Welsh Government has rejected that. You accepted that in the context of the Agriculture Bill last week, and the principle is exactly the same. The content and the topic is different, but the principle is exactly the same, so I don't understand why one rule is acceptable in one context, and another acceptable in another context.

And the Minister is now belatedly offering or promising a biennial report or some sort of periodical update. That does absolutely nothing to address the fundamental issue of not having the sunset clause, which, of course, is one of a democratic deficit, as far as we're concerned as Members of this Senedd.

I was tickled by the Minister's description of Wales as an independent coastal state in opening the debate. You say as much on the one hand, and then, on the other hand, of course, you accept a situation where the Secretary of State will be able to exercise powers to determine fishing opportunities in Welsh waters. Now, this brings me to the memorandum of understanding—or the non-memorandum of understanding—the one you promised that we would be allowed to review in advance of this consent decision today. Now, of course, you're telling us there is no memorandum of understanding, that it's still in development, but that you've had some sort of promises by the UK Government that provide you with the assurance you need to recommend that we approve this LCM. Do you really trust the UK Government, Minister? Are you really taking them on their word? This is a Government that's happy to flagrantly break international laws, and a fellow Labour Member of this Senedd reminded us a moment ago that you can't trust the Tories in this Chamber—his words, not mine. But, seemingly, you can. Now, just weeks ago, you were telling us that this was a red line as far as you were concerned, and now you're expecting us to consent to the legislation based on back-of-a-fag-packet assurances that you've had from UK Government Ministers that they won't overrule the Welsh Government as and when they please. You're absolutely deluded if you think that you can stake your authority on such a limp understanding with the UK Government. Your red lines have just melted away, Minister, and, as far as I'm concerned, it seems to me that you're capitulating to the UK Government. Wales deserves better than this, and I think you know that, Minister. I honestly think you know that.

Now, I share all of the concerns articulated by the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee in the letter and in his earlier remarks. And, of course, that reminds us that the Bill is still changing. And it reflects badly on this whole process, I think, that the Government tabled its original LCM on 12 February, tabled a supplementary LCM on 8 July, another supplementary LCM on 16 September, and yet another one again last week on 1 October—no doubt there probably will be another one again before we get to where the Government wants to be. And the irony here, of course, is the same as the one I highlighted in relation to the UK Agriculture Bill last week. Whatever we decide here today, the UK Government will carry on regardless, ignoring whether we consent to them legislating in devolved areas or not. I appreciate that there are some positives in this Bill, but, on balance, Minister, I can't support this LCM before us today.

I have considerable concerns about this arrangement: one of them is that I don't trust the Tories, and that's my red line for myself. I will support it, but I'm going to support it with huge reservations, which I want to outline. I don't think that biennial reporting is equitable to a sunset clause, and that concerns me. But what really concerns me here is that 90 per cent of the Welsh fishing fleet is made up of small vessels, and they predominantly catch shellfish, and most of that is exported to the EU, and there isn't even a trading agreement in place. Coming back to where I started, I don't trust the Tories: apparently we had the best trading deal ever, and now it transpires we haven't even got a trading deal of any description whatsoever. If we add into that the fact that COVID-19 has had a devastating impact on the industry, and the price of fish has dropped dramatically, by up to 85 per cent in some cases—and, of course, the unavoidable closure of hospitality businesses and restaurants has made the demand for shellfish much reduced.

So, whilst I'm going to support it, I do share all the concerns that people have already outlined. I would like to hear an explanation, really, of why you are so confident that, within the framework—. And I do acknowledge, of course, the positives that others have outlined—I don't want to take time up repeating those—but I would like the answer to how you feel confident that you can, moving forward, under the framework agreement, get a deal that will safeguard, as I've said from the very start, the interests of the fishing industry, albeit small, that exists in Wales. 

Thank you. I now call on the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs, Lesley Griffiths, to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Chair. I absolutely recognise many of the concerns raised around scrutiny of LCMs and the short timescales that we've had to do this that many Members have raised today. I said in my opening remarks that this is not ideal.

We have achieved a significant constitutional step forward through this Bill to extend the legislative competence of the Senedd in relation to the Welsh zone, and several Members recognised that today. Coupled with the wider powers that are included in the Bill, this will enable us to manage our Welsh fisheries better and to deliver our future fisheries policy, and we are absolutely committed to providing a bespoke Welsh fisheries Bill. I am sorry that we haven't been able to do it in this term due to the recent constraints of the legislative programme, and clearly with COVID-19 as well, that's had a significant impact.

On questioning about why I'm taking what the UK Government say, I think one area that is different, very much, in relation to fisheries as compared with agriculture, which Llyr Huws Gruffydd raised, is that there is such a long-standing relationship around fisheries with the UK Government. So, every December, all Ministers—Scotland, Northern Ireland, myself and the UK Government—attend the December council in Brussels. So, there has been for many, many years that agreement and that long-standing relationship. So, I've shared all the correspondence with committees and I will continue to do so to provide that reassurance. 

If I can just turn to some of the points raised by Members, I am intrigued as to why Janet Finch-Saunders is so obsessed with the level of staffing in my department. As I told you, I think, recently in a written question that you asked me, that is a matter for the Permanent Secretary and I've asked the Permanent Secretary to write to you with regard to staffing. 

Both Jenny Rathbone on behalf of the CCERA committee and Mick Antoniw as Chair of LJC committee spoke about the sunset clause. I committed to making my own report to the Senedd on the implementation of the provisions in the Bill that relate only to Wales until such time as a Welsh fisheries Bill is introduced, and I did that on the recommendation of the CCERA committee. And as I've said, it's not my intention to have these powers in a UK Bill for any longer than is necessary. We do need to ensure that we have the necessary toolkit in place to manage the challenge that Brexit poses, and now COVID-19, for our fisheries industry, so we need to retain those powers in this UK Bill.

And talking about that double challenge, Joyce Watson raised concerns around the interests of small fisheries and whether they will be protected. I'm very concerned about the impact of a 'no deal' Brexit, which is becoming more and more apparent as the months go on, that there is not that trade deal that we need. We know our fleet's dependence on access to the EU markets—our closest neighbours; 0.5 billion people—and we also recognise the impact the closure of the EU markets due to COVID-19 has had on the industry, and we have provided £0.5 million of bespoke support to the sector. 

But, I reiterate, this Bill will provide us with the powers to better equip and manage our fisheries in the future, irrespective of what happens with those negotiations.

Minister, I wonder if I might ask you to draw your remarks to a close; we're a little over. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. Just to say, regarding the MOU, I don't think I promised to bring it forward; I said I would if I could. That is still being drafted, but as soon as I'm able to share it, I will. Diolch, Chair. 

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

The next item is item 11, LCM on the Fire Safety Bill, and I call on the Deputy Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion. Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, acting Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to propose this motion today and outline why it should receive support from Members of the Senedd. We all do, and very much should, remember the fire and incredibly tragic loss of life at Grenfell Tower over three years ago. We know from the public inquiry that the rapid spread of the fire and the resulting loss of life was largely due to defects in the external windows and cladding on the tower. Internal structures like fire doors also failed to resist the spread of fire properly.

It's a travesty that fire safety law as it stands does nothing to address these risks. The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 was designed for workplaces, not blocks of flats. The way it is drafted means that it doesn't apply to external walls for such blocks at all; it doesn't even clearly cover internal fire doors separating individual flats and common areas. That means that landlords and other responsible persons did not have a duty to maintain these features to minimise the risk of fire. It also means that the fire and rescue services have no powers to inspect them nor to enforce compliance. This short Fire Safety Bill will correct these significant shortcomings. It will provide that the whole of a block is covered by the Order, except only the interior of individual flats. These are important and what should be uncontroversial changes.

For historical reasons, the Order can only be amended by primary legislation. Although I am clear that such legislation would be within the Senedd's competence, there isn't space within the legislative programme for such a Bill here before next year's elections. So, given the seriousness of the matters it addresses, it is both practical and appropriate for the Bill to cover Wales too. The Bill applies to premises in Wales and England in identical terms and confers identical powers on the Welsh Ministers and the Secretary of State.

I'd like to thank both the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee and the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee for their scrutiny of the Bill and legislative consent memorandum. I agree with what they had to say. In particular, I fully accept that there is much more to be done to learn and apply the lessons of Grenfell Tower. The Minister for Housing and Local Government, Julie James, set out our intentions in a written statement in June and we'll follow that up with a comprehensive White Paper early in the new year. But the Bill before us today is an important first step and I urge the Senedd to agree with its application to Wales.

Thank you. I call on the Chair of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee, John Griffiths.

Diolch yn fawr. I'm very content with the Government's approach to the LCM. We could see that there was some room for potential confusion, but we noted what the legislation committee had to say and we were quite content to support that.

It's obviously an extremely important measure, and as a committee, we've taken a great deal of interest in the tragedy of the Grenfell Tower fire, and we did some work on that, which we followed up with further work. We've tried to keep quite a close eye on what UK Government have been doing as well. We felt that, at some stages, there was a lack of clarity, but it seems that a lot of the problems have been overcome and, as I say, we're content as a committee with the Welsh Government's approach on this.

I call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Thank you. We considered the legislative consent memorandum in respect of the Fire Safety Bill at our meeting on 8 June and we laid our report before the Senedd on 17 June. Our report acknowledged that the Bill is one part of the response to improve building safety following the fire at Grenfell Tower in June 2017. We noted the Welsh Government's assessment of the provisions in the Bill that require Senedd consent. We also noted their reasons as to why, in the Welsh Government's view, making provision for Wales in the Bill is appropriate. 

Finally, our report noted that clause 2 of the Bill gives powers to the relevant authority, which, in Wales, is the Welsh Ministers, to make regulations to amend the fire safety Order for the purpose of changing or clarifying the premises to which it applies. We welcome the use of the affirmative procedure for this power. Diolch, Deputy Llywydd.

Diolch. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you. I cannot emphasise enough how important the Fire Safety Bill is, and as such, I want on record my dismay that this LCM has only been allocated 15 minutes on today's agenda. Such an important issue as fire safety actually deserves more time and debate in this Parliament—a measure that would've certainly reflected the keen interest taken by the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee following the horrific fire at Grenfell Tower in June 2017.

Now, as at May 2018, 143 high-rise residential buildings of 18m plus were identified in Wales: 38 in the social sector, 105 in the private. I can only begin to imagine the fear residents have been living with since the Grenfell disaster, and as such, I'm at a loss as to why this Government did not prioritise any legislation for fire safety. In the ELGC committee report on buildings in the private sector, they called for the Welsh Government to bring forward legislation to replace the fire safety Order in the current Welsh parliamentary term and for that legislation to include:

'Standards for persons undertaking fire risk assessments;

'A requirement for fire risk assessments to be undertaken as a minimum annually for high rise residential buildings;

'Clarification that fire doors which act as the front doors to flats are considered part of the communal areas and therefore covered by the legislation replacing the Fire Safety Order 2005.'

I agree with this committee that the issue is of such fundamental importance it should have been given the highest priority. And I will place again on record my opinion that the Welsh Government has failed by not bringing forward this legislation. I simply do not buy into the suggestion that there is no space, or was no space, in the Welsh Government's current legislative programme.

Nonetheless, as the committee have observed, it is a sensible approach to use UK Government legislation to make necessary changes that otherwise would not happen until the next Senedd election. But one really basic questions for you, I have, is: why has this work on fire safety not been prioritised? An answer to that question is especially important when, according to 'A Road Map to safer buildings in Wales', there is a definite need for significant new legislation to deliver a new regulatory system and to introduce many changes. The road map has clear recommendations, such as, in relation to sprinklers, fire alarms, smoke detectors, planning, risk assessments and staffing. So, I would appreciate an update as to where you are with all or with any of the recommendations relating to the Welsh Government.

Clauses 1 to 3 of the Bill relate to the fire safety of buildings in Wales. Clause 1 makes amendments to the regulatory reform fire safety Order 2005 to clarify that it applies when the premise is a building containing two or more sets of domestic premises, to (a) the building's structure and external walls, which includes doors, windows and anything attached to the exterior walls, such as cladding, insulation, fixings and balconies, and any common parts; and (b) doors between domestic premises and common parts. I welcome the amendments and the fact that they affirm that fire and rescue authorities can take enforcement action against responsible persons if they have failed to comply with their duties under the FSO.

Deputy Minister, earlier this year, you proudly proclaimed that Wales had the most extensive programme of home fire safety visits in Britain. You said that the Welsh Government provides the service, with £660,000 in funding to ensure these visits and the safety devices, which are supplied as part of them, are completely free to our householders. It is noted in the motion that costs will be incurred by Welsh fire and rescue authorities as a result of this Bill, who will now undertake more wide-ranging inspections of blocks of flats, including examining the features of each building stipulated. Urgent clarification must now be provided to our fire authorities about how this extra work will be funded.

In concluding, this Bill looks like nothing more than a temporary legislative bridge—a sticking plaster for Wales until more extensive and considered legislation can be brought forward here. The Welsh Conservatives will be voting in favour, but we remain dismayed at the Welsh Government's lack of ambition, and urgent legislation must be made a priority at the start of the next Parliament. Thank you. Diolch.

I call on the Deputy Minister for Housing and Local Government to reply to the debate.

Diolch. I'd like to thank all Members for their contributions to this debate today. I'm grateful for the comments of both John Griffiths, in his capacity as Chair, and Mick Antoniw, in his capacity as Chair, particularly for the support and the important work with the ELGC committee to take forward the work we're doing and, also, the work on the expert group recommendations. I look forward to engaging the committees as we take forward the work on our White Paper with my colleague the Minister for Housing and Local Government.

I note many of Janet Finch-Saunders's comments and I welcome the Welsh Conservatives' support for this important Bill. As I said in my opening remarks, this is clearly a first step, and I acknowledge that there's more work to be done in what is often a large, far-reaching and complex area and arena. It's important that we take the time to address all issues appropriately and, more importantly, we get any action right. We're working with the UK Government on their building safety Bill and also—we will work with them where is appropriate.

Acting Presiding Officer, just to be quick, this is a small but important piece of legislation for improving fire safety in blocks of flats, but, as I said, we have much more to do. I hope the Senedd can support us in taking these early and important steps.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The next item is item 12, a statutory instrument consent motion on the Waste (Circular Economy) (Amendment) Regulations 2020. I call on the Deputy Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion—Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you again, acting Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you for this opportunity to explain the background to the statutory instrument consent motion in relation to the Waste (Circular Economy) (Amendment) Regulations. I'd also like to thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for its work scrutinising the statutory instrument consent memorandum and to acknowledge the committee's conclusion that it is content.

The statutory instrument consent memorandum laid before the Senedd on 1 September summarised the provisions of the regulations and set out the changes to primary legislation for which consent is sought. The objective of the regulations is to transpose the EU circular economy package. The changes needed comprise elements that are being carried out on a UK and GB basis and elements being carried out on an England-and-Wales basis, reflecting the nature of the legislation we currently have in place. In parallel, additional regulations are currently being prepared to make the necessary changes to Wales-only legislation under the negative procedure. These regulations will be laid before the Senedd shortly.

The decision was taken to collectively issue a joint UK policy statement in relation to these changes, rather than a full consultation, as we are very conscious of the pressures on industry as a consequence of the coronavirus pandemic. It would therefore have been difficult for stakeholders to engage with and respond to a full consultation, and representations were received from industry that a consultation would not be welcome at this time. The bulk of the measures are also relatively small, technical changes, and implementing legislation that simply adopts the same wording as the directive.

The changes in relation to landfill and incineration restrictions on separately collected waste are slightly more extensive. Therefore, key representatives from these sectors were consulted on the landfill and incineration restrictions. They broadly welcome the measures, as these are seen as a driver to encourage treatment of material further up the waste hierarchy by showing higher levels of extraction of recyclable material from the waste stream. This is, of course, in line with our long-term policy. In Wales, little impact is expected on Welsh operators as incinerators are currently not authorised to accept separately collected recyclate unless it can be demonstrated that it is unsuitable for recycling, and landfills generally do not receive separately collected recyclate.

The joint UK statement was published in July and sets out the key changes made by the EU circular economy package and the approach the UK is taking to transpose the 2020 measures. As Members will be aware, I also published a written statement on 6 August to ensure Members of the Senedd were kept informed. These regulations include amendments to primary legislation within the legislative competence of the Senedd. However, the amendments to the five relevant Acts are minor, as they simply update dates and definitions to reflect the latest amendments to the waste framework directive. Allowing the changes to be made through the Waste (Circular Economy) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 avoids the need to duplicate amendments and allows a more efficient approach than would have been the case if each administration was to make the same amendments. It also reflects the scope of the existing legislation being amended. It is on this basis that the statutory instrument consent motion is placed before you for approval. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. I again call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Thank you, acting Llywydd. We considered the statutory instrument consent memorandum at our meeting on 21 September, and we subsequently laid our report on the memorandum last Monday, 28 September. As the Deputy Minister has stated, the Waste (Circular Economy) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 that the memorandum relates to transpose a series of EU directives in the field of waste. We appreciate the letter that the Deputy Minister sent to the committee, which helped us with our consideration of the memorandum. We also welcome the commitment to table a motion to debate the memorandum. I can confirm that we are content with the memorandum.

Thank you. Again, I call on Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you. The United Kingdom is committed to moving towards a more circular economy, which will see us keeping resources in use as long as possible, extracting maximum value from them, minimising waste, and promoting resource efficiency. In fact, the UK is already a global leader, with a resources and waste strategy setting out a comprehensive and ambitious plan to transform the waste industry and produce a more circular economy. Our Government is making all the legislative changes required to transpose the 2020 circular economy package measures on behalf of England and Wales, apart from some amendments relating to hazardous waste.

According to the explanatory memorandum, DEFRA engaged with representatives of the landfill, incineration and recycling sector, and the measures were broadly welcomed. Importantly, as noted in the statutory instrument consent memorandum, it is appropriate for the SI to make the provisions, because there is a need to amend out-of-date references to European law. The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 transpose the revised waste framework directive in England and Wales on a composite basis. However, it was not possible to act compositely this time as some amendments required are to UK or GB-wide legislation.

The changes made are purely technical and uncontroversial, and there is no change in policy. The memorandum is correct—the changes are technical. Regulation 2 updates references, as do regulations 3, 4, 5 and 6. Consideration has also been given to the memorandum by the LJC committee, and I note their conclusion that

'We are content with the Memorandum.'

I agree, but note that, in the letter to the LJC committee dated 2 September 2020, you advised that

'The Devolved Administrations will make their own regulations for further amendments needed to legislation which fall outside this.'

So, can you provide some clarity, Deputy Minister, as to what amendments you intend to bring forward? What steps are being taken to publish updated guidance to industry and the public regarding the changes covered in this SI? According to Clyde & Co LLP, the regulations and focus on the circular economy do provide a key window of opportunity for businesses to seize on fresh innovation and ideas. Your ambition is for Wales to become a zero-waste nation by 2050. According to the 'Beyond Recycling' strategy, a core theme is to support businesses to save and make money and become resilient.

Similarly, it is stated that shifting to a circular economy has the potential to create green jobs. Certainly, in light of COVID-19 and the climate crisis, the creation of green jobs has never been more essential. So, what steps are you taking to ensure that businesses can pursue innovative ideas and create jobs? We need to see you reflect the ambition of our Prime Minister, who is pushing forward today with a green industrial revolution, pledging £160 million to upgrade ports and factories for building turbines.

Finally, Part 4 of the SI relates to waste separately collected for preparing for re-use and recycling not to be incinerated. A report from the Waste and Resources Action Programme, WRAP Cymru, found that 75 per cent of commercial and industrial waste is still sent to incineration or landfill in Wales, and it is actually recyclable. It is vital that proposals for new incinerators are subjected to proper public consultation. There are concerns, however—and I've made them clear in letters to the Minister—that the pandemic is having a negative impact on planning consultations. So do you agree with me that there should be a moratorium on planning consultations for incinerators during this pandemic?

The Welsh Conservatives will be voting in favour of the memorandum today, but I really would be grateful if you would outline what immediate steps are being taken to help our businesses to embrace the circular economy and to pursue green innovation, with the hope of creating a better climate and green careers for our nation. Thank you. Diolch.

I call on the Deputy Minister to reply to the debate—Hannah Blythyn.

Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank both Members for their contributions to this debate, and can I thank Mick in his capacity as Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their support on this important piece of legislation? I also welcome Janet Finch-Saunders's support for the legislative consent motion, but the Member raises a number of issues that are beyond the remit of this current debate. I very much welcome the opportunity to discuss them further when we bring the 'Beyond Recycling' strategy to the floor of the Senedd. We're committed to not just warm words but actual action and leading the way to go beyond recycling and towards a truly circular economy in Wales, working with our communities and our businesses through our circular economy fund, which is enabling businesses to innovate and communities to take action in their own areas. As I outlined in my opening remarks, the changes that amend primary legislation within this particular LCM that are within the legislative competence of the Senedd, are purely technical and there's no change in policy. They are simply needed to reflect the latest changes to the waste framework directive. Diolch yn fawr. 

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? The motion is therefore agreed. 

The next item is the debate on tackling racism and race inequality, and I call on the Deputy Minister to move the motion—Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd. 2020 has been one of the most challenging and difficult years in memory, particularly for black, Asian and minority ethnic people. COVID-19 has exposed deep inequalities in our society. The resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement, following the violent death of George Floyd, shows why this annual debate on tackling racism and race inequality is more important than ever. This motion does focus on the events of this year, but it also reaffirms the commitments we made last year in our race debate—cross-party commitments. In that debate we supported, as we do today in our motion, the fundamental importance of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

Llywydd, as the coronavirus took hold earlier this year, we began to learn of its impact on black, Asian and minority ethnic people. The First Minister immediately established a COVID-19 BAME advisory group, under the leadership of Judge Ray Singh. Two sub-groups were established, led by professors Keshav Singhal and Emmanuel Ogbonna. These groups delivered at remarkable pace, providing tangible and practical advice and tools that set Wales ahead in terms of our response. The development of the Welsh workforce risk assessment tool, the first of its kind in the UK, now in widespread use in the NHS and social care in Wales, but rolled out in other workplace settings, is helping to safeguard people's health and well-being.

The Welsh Government also chose to address the contribution of the socioeconomic factors to the virus head on, responding to Emmanuel Ogbonna's report and his group—an acknowledgement that medical data could not explain the disproportionate impact on BAME people alone. A report of the socioeconomic group set out the entrenched inequalities experienced by black, Asian and minority ethnic people, which COVID-19 has highlighted in the most tragic way. It should remind us that the rights enshrined over 50 years ago in article 5 of the convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination are yet to be fully embedded in society. I'd like to put on record my thanks to the advisory groups for the work they've done, for their continuing leadership, together with the sharing of insights and expertise, which has been invaluable to us all. 

This is not work that can wait. The First Minister published our response to the socioeconomic report on 24 September. We'd already implemented a number of recommendations, with more under way. During the pandemic, we produced 'keep Wales safe' communications in 36 different languages, to make health messages accessible to everyone living in Wales. Test, trace and protect services have been expanded to establish black, Asian and minority ethnic outreach workers within communities. And those in employment have also been affected by lockdown. We funded the ethnic minorities and youth support team, with partners, to deliver a BAME multilingual helpline for people to access advice and support on many issues, including employment and income. Work is under way to ensure that anti-racism training programmes are undertaken across the public sector. Llywydd, in February we launched a public appointment strategy to tackle the under-representation of BAME and disabled people in public appointments. This is under way, developing a leadership training programme for black, Asian and minority ethnic and disabled people, as recommended in the Ogbonna report.

Renewing our commitment to eliminate racism and discrimination across our nation includes education, and the communities, contributions and cynefin: BAME experiences and the new curriculum working group, chaired by Professor Charlotte Williams, is in place. Our goal is to embed the teaching of themes relating to black, Asian and minority ethnic communities and experiences across all parts of the school curriculum.

I've been engaged with BAME fora and events right across Wales, including Black Lives Matter events, as well as through our Wales race forum, and, during the height of the pandemic, I was grateful for the frequent advice and counsel. We met very often to learn and share information, to act together to address emerging needs, and this dialogue is vital as we develop a race equality action plan to be delivered by the end of this Senedd term. And our plan will be achieved through extensive engagement and will be co-constructed with BAME communities, community groups and organisation, with Professor Ogbonna co-chairing the steering group with the Permanent Secretary. This plan must provide the foundation for bringing about systemic and sustainable change for Wales.

We know there are many issues to tackle across the Welsh Government, including health inequalities, employment for young people, education, access to housing, everyday experience of racism, structural and systemic racism, representation and visibility. We recognise the need for fundamental change in our society. We cannot and will not do this on our own. We're committed to working with black, Asian and minority ethnic people, hearing their testimonies and acting on that evidence. We'll address the interests of specific communities and issues raised by intersectionality. It will be informed by research and data, official inquiries and reports that have already taken place. It will be backed up by clear, concise actions and recommendations, including the development of a race disparity unit in the Welsh Government.

But I want to maker this clear: this is not my plan; it's owned by the whole of the Welsh Government, and we want to see a culture change across the Senedd, in public services and in Welsh society, because Wales is a multicultural nation with a shared history and a shared contribution to its success. Migrants to Wales were a major part of this country developing as an economic powerhouse prior to the first world war, and migrants have continued to be an integral part of our nation that has developed as a nation of sanctuary, which is what we strive to be. We celebrate our BAME communities and acknowledge that we must all reflect on our positions to ensure that all of our citizens are able to reach their potential.

Today, I call on leaders in Wales at all levels to drive racism and race inequality out of our country. I ask everyone to take a stand against inequality wherever and whenever they see it or experience it, to seek out racial inequalities, racist and race disparities and take action to address them. We have to look carefully and honestly at the structures and systems in society, and consider where and how we can bring about real change for the lives of people of colour in Wales. We have an opportunity, a responsibility and a means to do this. Let's show that unity of purpose here in the Senedd today. Diolch yn fawr. 

When we take a moment to think about what we're discussing today, when we actually stop and think that, in 2020, we're still having to talk about tackling racial inequality and racism in our society, in our country, it's quite incredible, and it beggars belief that still, still people are being judged, abused and cast aside due to purely the colour of their skin.

Last night, as part of the nightly chat that I have with my 10-year-old son as I tuck him into bed, he asked me what I'm doing tomorrow, and I said, 'The usual stuff really, and we're debating tackling racism and race inequality.' He took a deep breath, paused, and screwed up his face in confusion. 'So, mummy?' 'Yes, Henry?' 'Why do you need to debate that; is it really that bad? Why? Is that why Man United and other teams, and Lewis Hamilton and F1 are still getting on their knees and wearing black T-shirts? I don't understand why people don't like someone because of their skin colour. None of my friends think like that.' Poignant and also reassuring. A conversation that, no doubt, children and parents the length and breadth of our country have had when discussing what they're seeing on their televisions at the moment. And I know it's being discussed in our schools, which is welcome, because education, as Jane Hutt just pointed out, is the key to change. It's hard to respond to my son and others why generations above him have failed to eradicate racism. But we haven't. It's still happening. Some of it's out of our control, but there is still racial hate and racial discrimination happening somewhere right now. And this, to some extent, has to fall on our shoulders as legislatures, as law makers, as we have the powers to really change things.

In my view, there isn't really anything to debate today, as, surely, we all agree that there is a need to change laws at speed, to ensure that, in every way possible, within our powers, we can eradicate this injustice to humankind. I was brought up to love thy neighbour, to treat others how you'd like to be treated yourself. Therefore, I find not giving someone a job and treating someone differently just because of the colour of their skin hard to understand. We are all equal, and I take comfort from the majority of our young people sharing that view.

I really feel for those who still, after 20 years of an Assembly and Parliament, don't think the Welsh Governments have done enough to date to tackle racism and inequality in all forms, when, practically, there is so much we can do, and that there are still people suffering injustice every day. Following the death of George Floyd, though miles away, it was met with widespread anger and disbelief, and a sense of injustice across our country, and resonated strongly here. The Black Lives Matter movement, whatever you think of them as a movement, particularly through sport, have managed to get this really important message into homes across our nation—that inequality still exists in many ways in today's society. It is current affairs now. It is on our televisions daily now. So, now is the time for us to act. Being co-submitters of this motion, we obviously support all aspects outlined, and clearly commend the work now being done by the Government in this Parliament, and the BAME COVID-19 advisory group, risk assessment group, and socioeconomic sub-group, led by some remarkable people, which is outlined in the motion.

There is, unfortunately, in 2020 a real need for a race equality action plan to address structural and systemic inequality, and we need to advance opportunity for black, Asian, minority ethnic people in Wales. We wholly support that. There is much that's being done at a UK level, and here, and I thank Jane Hutt and the Welsh Government for all that you're doing now, particularly during this pandemic, as this pandemic has highlighted the vast inequalities, as you've outlined.

It is also good to see that in governments, particularly in the UK Government, the key offices of state are now being held, and here in the Welsh Government, by BAME people. Here we can see real progress, but this must be reflected in all parts of our society. Article 2 of the international convention, written back in 1965, calls on all state parties to condemn racial discrimination and undertake to pursue, by all appropriate means and without delay, a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms and promoting understanding among all races—1965, and we've still got a long way to go. We can no longer rely on this being a generational thing that will die out. We need to act now and we need to act fast. The Welsh Conservatives are determined to play our part in creating a more equal and just Wales. We support this motion. 

There can be no doubt that racism, in all its forms, is real and rife for so many people in Wales. The Wales Governance Centre has shown us how imprisonment rates of people coming from black and minority ethnic groups are much higher here, with average sentence length being greater too. The 2018 report from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, 'Is Wales Fairer?', found that race was a motivating factor in 68 per cent of all of the 2,676 recorded hate crimes in Wales. And hate crime in Wales has increased by 16 per cent on the previous year. We know from the Institute for Fiscal Studies that people of colour are more likely to be employed in shut-down sectors, therefore more likely to be made unemployed. So, there is no doubt that racism exists—it is as prevalent in Wales as it is elsewhere, and in some cases it's worse here.

Questions of racism have been brought to the fore over the summer following the brutal murder of George Floyd and the protests that followed. Let's be under no illusion that these issues are confined to the United States, because we all have to have our eyes wide open here too. I've made the point many times before that politics and how we debate politics has an impact on racism and how racism is played out on the streets. How we talk about asylum seekers and immigration, how issues like the recent decision of the Home Office to house people in army camps in Penally, and how the Home Secretary talks about these matters, and how some have sought to exploit such decisions, directly contributes to ill-feeling towards minorities and fuels the flames of racism.

The dog-whistling we have seen from the far right politicians has been appalling. They know what they're doing, and they deserve to be called out by all of us who can see it. Because these actions and words have impacts, and that could mean a black child is bullied in the playground, or black teenagers getting beaten up, or women having scarves ripped from their heads. These are the everyday results of racist dog-whistling, and we all have to unite against it before it's too late. Racism is getting worse. There's lots of talk; let's now see some action that ends up reversing these trends.

On the face of it, I have no difficulty in endorsing and embracing point 1a) of this motion—why would I, why would anyone? However, I do think that the rest of point 1, and point 2, are worth questioning. Why does this motion refer to an international convention made in 1969 when the UK Government passed its own race relations Act in 1968, which has been reviewed over time? And the convention itself? It was, and presumably still is, administered by the United Nations—the same United Nations that is stained by the sexual abuse of those it apparently seeks to protect. So, I would actually want to distance Wales from this; it feels very tainted.

And let's look at the party moving this forward. The Government in Wales is, and has been since 1999 in some shape or form, Welsh Labour. And it's that party—the Labour Party—that has been the subject of a very recent EHRC investigation into antisemitism, and the party that has had 20 years to deal with many of these issues, although I accept that none of those levers are held in Wales. But also, the Plaid Cymru leader has remained completely and utterly silent on the antisemitic tweet made by a prospective candidate—the same person given a literal platform in the Senedd more than once here, and it's in the headlines again today. In fact, the Board of Deputies of British Jews have said this:

'Jews and anti-semites alike are likely to draw the conclusion that Plaid is willing to tolerate antisemitism in its ranks'.

So, we clearly do need some concrete commitments to anti-racism here and now.

And let me also highlight the use of the phrase 'BAME'. I find it very dehumanising and lazy. People are individuals, and there is a world of difference between somebody of Japanese descent and someone from the Gypsy/Traveller community. However, for brevity, I will use it for today's debate.

I've read the report compiled by the COVID-19 advisory group with some concern. I am most deeply disturbed by the reference to the maternal mortality in black women being five times that in white women. And this is common knowledge—again, the remit of Welsh Government and the Welsh NHS. If this is now an accepted statistic, how long has this been a thing and what are you doing about it?

The report is the report and I accept its findings and understand why the scope has widened to consider socioeconomic matters. To be completely honest, some of those findings with regard to loneliness, lack of opportunity, access to housing and so on could refer to rural Wales or to the people living in the Valleys, so I don't think many of these issues are solely confined to the BAME community. We didn't know what we were facing when the pandemic started. We know more now and we can use this growing body of knowledge and experience to inform better decisions going forward. I welcome in particular the recommendations made by the report, especially the risk assessment process for all staff.

I was attracted to aspects of the amendments tabled by Neil Hamilton and Neil McEvoy, and would like an explanation as to why they were deselected. My impression of the UK as a whole is that it is essentially a tolerant and respectful country. If not, why would so many people try so hard to come here and make their lives here? In fact, it took me some time to be accepted in my own rural community in Wales, being as I'm English, and it was only through my lambing experience and working on farms that I ever got the leeway with the Welsh people here and gained their respect. And I fully agree that the wrongs of many Governments over many decades should be righted forthwith in terms of Windrush.

While I appreciate that this report was written at a particular point in time, I find it a matter of great regret that it refers to the death of a career criminal on the other side of the world. As we now know, this was hijacked by a Marxist group whose members want to dismantle the state, the police and the family. And I doubt any of these aims would assist any of us, let alone members of the BAME communities.

So, in conclusion, yes, I agree wholeheartedly with the commitment to tackling racism of all kinds and inequalities of all kinds too. I don't believe that to do this you need to make a particular statement or endorse a particular set of promises made a very long time ago, but I do believe that some in this Chamber need to take a very long hard look at themselves before looking to others to live these values. Thank you.

Early on in the pandemic, it became quite apparent that black and ethnic minority communities were being particularly badly affected. And at that time, locally, we had some issues in our communities, where there was understandably a good deal of concern and anxiety. We then arranged meetings with the local health board, which were very useful and productive, and then, of course, Welsh Government were very quick to act.

I'd like to pay tribute to Jane and the First Minister, and the Government as a whole, in setting up the working group that looked at those issues and indeed produced a toolkit for assessment of risk for front-line workers and others in those black and ethnic minority communities, because that was very important. That group then went on to do wider work on the economy and social circumstances and produced recommendations, which are very important.

The committee I chair as well, Llywydd, did some work that made similar findings. And I think that what we found, really, was that the factors that we'd known about for a long time in terms of discrimination and disadvantage faced by our ethnic minorities was playing itself out in terms of COVID: issues around poor-quality jobs, inadequate protection at work, insecure and low-paid work, overcrowded and poor-quality housing, and, of course, the front-line jobs that people from our black and ethnic minority communities were doing, sometimes, unfortunately, with inadequate understanding of their vulnerability and insufficient protection.

So, with that set of issues—the longstanding problems, but the very real emergency and crisis around COVID—it was absolutely necessary to act very quickly nationally in Wales and locally, and I'm really thankful to Welsh Government and our local authority in Newport, and I'm sure others around Wales, that action was taken quickly and effectively. I think our challenge now is to build on those short-term actions and the recommendations that have been produced and make sure that we're effective in the medium and longer term as well. I know that Welsh Government is looking at some of its strategies: there's a short-term update on the cohesion strategy and the tackling hate crime framework and also a commitment to a longer term integration strategy, and we know about the race equality action plan and strategy. So, there's a lot happening.

I think, in the light of all of that, we reflect as well on what's been said many times by our black and ethnic minority communities—that there's been a lot of work, a lot of recommendations, a lot of reports and strategies over a period of years, but, obviously, given that we still have these entrenched problems, there hasn't been enough actual effective, on the ground action to deal with these issues. And I think, very often, it comes across really, really strongly from these communities that, understandably and rightly, they feel that it is time for effective and concerted action to deal with these longstanding problems. The problem has been highlighted so many times and yet, to such a great extent, they are still with us. So, when they make those pleas, I think obviously we have to listen and we do have to act ever more effectively. 

I know that it's been very good locally in Newport to see young activists and others coming to the fore. We had a very effective Black Lives Matter march through Newport, which respected social distancing, and was very responsibly organised and very effective in the messages that it got across. We've had local Asian councillors taking part in Welsh Government's working group and feeding back information locally, and that's been very effective as well. We do see a lot of progress, but I think it's abundantly clear, now, isn't it, from the highlighting of vulnerability that's taken place during this pandemic, that these problems are so overdue, in terms of being effectively dealt with, that there can be no further delay. We need effective and wide-ranging action on the various recommendations produced, and we need it very, very quickly indeed.

So, I'm really pleased the Welsh Government has understood that urgency, got groups together, done important work, and is now very committed to short-term, medium-term and long-term action on these problems that I think, right across Wales, black and ethnic minority communities have every right to say have to be tackled effectively once and for all.  

I've now called representatives of all political groups to speak, and I hope to be able to call all Members who've indicated that they want to speak during the debate, but one Member has walked into the Chamber—and this is for the purposes of those of you who are on Zoom—and gagged himself, and is holding up a prop and has been photographing himself during the debate and placing those photographs on Twitter. That breaches I don't know how many Standing Orders. But I'll put all of that aside, and you will be called to speak, Neil McEvoy. But, to do so, you will need to ungag yourself and put down your prop. If you do so over the next few minutes, you will be called later on in the debate. Siân Gwenllian.   

Thank you very much, Llywydd. I wish to focus on one particular aspect of the motion related to the socioeconomic sub-group established by the First Minister at the height of the pandemic to look at the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on black and minority ethnic communities. This is a very thorough approach and report and provides a way forward for action, and that's what we need: action. And the motion before the Senedd today does bind the Welsh Government to accept those recommendations in full and to take urgent action to implement them.

I welcome this sub-group's report as an addition to the evidence and the increasing consensus of the need to make black and minority ethnic history a central part and a compulsory part of the teaching of history in our schools. Rooting anti-racism in the curriculum is one small but substantial step in the bigger picture as we move towards eradicating structural and systemic racism in Wales, and there is an opportunity for this legislature, through the curriculum Bill, to ensure that that is guaranteed in statute.

I have mentioned before in this Chamber the comments made by Judge Ray Singh, another who has stated that a voluntary approach of teaching about these issues doesn't work and, as a result, BAME history is virtually absent from school classrooms. But, despite the clear recommendation that action should be taken immediately to include BAME history in the national curriculum for Wales 2022, the Government's response is a cause of concern. The Government say that they acknowledge that developing certain aspects of the new curriculum are sensitive issues, and then refer to another working group established, chaired by Professor Charlotte Williams, focusing on teaching materials most of all.

Now, I don't oppose the establishment of the Charlotte Williams working group—to the contrary—but it does concern me that the Government's response to a clear recommendation from this sub-group is being diluted. The latest working group chaired by Charlotte Williams, as far as I can see, hasn't been asked to consider making BAME history and education a compulsory part of the curriculum through the Bill, and there's no expectation for this working group to report until the spring, and by that point it is more than likely that the curriculum Bill will be an Act. So, I would like a pledge from the Deputy Minister today that the remit and timetable for this working group chaired by Charlotte Williams will not actually hinder the possibility that the Government may accept an amendment in Stage 2 or 3 of the curriculum and assessment Bill to make BAME history a mandatory part of that curriculum.  

Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I'll see if I can just improve the sound. Sorry about that. Thank you very much for calling me. I was very impressed with the Ogbonna report and particularly its highlighting of the difficulties that asylum seekers and refugees have in accessing mental health services. This is a really important issue. Some years ago, I befriended a boy who was an asylum seeker who had witnessed the murder of his father by political opponents in the country he fled from, and his mother often asked in school for him to get counselling and to get help. But, as he progressed through school and through college, he never managed to get the counselling he needed in order to overcome the adverse childhood experience that he'd had. Unfortunately, he is now, tragically, addicted and has been thrown out by his family. He's now homeless, and it's going to cost an awful lot more money to put things right, if he manages to survive. It's a very sad story, and I'm sure my friend is not alone in all this. It really does highlight the importance of teachers understanding when children are suffering and the need to refer them to services where they can help heal the wounds that children often carry with them.

I think one of the important things that's highlighted in the report is that the progress that BAME children make—black pupils have lower attainment than white pupils in early years education, but by the end of key stage 4, when they take their GCSEs, they are slightly out-performing white pupils, which is a credit both to their families and to their teachers. We need to do more, though, because we know that the Gypsy and Traveller community has abysmally low levels of attainment compared to other black and minority ethnic groups, and in discourse that we've had in the Senedd not that long ago, we know that the traveller sites in Wales, only half of them have any form of internet connection, and that means it's extremely difficult both for pupils to access online learning if there's another lockdown, but also for other people who live there to access all the other public services that are now more readily available online.

I think that I have to highlight that many of my BAME constituents are disproportionately affected by the COVID pandemic because they're working in areas of the economy where they have no right to sick leave and they're people, for example, working in hospitality and as taxi drivers, who are very, very seriously impacted because they have no right to any support, and as freelancers, it's very difficult for them to get public support.

I want to just recognise the terrible struggle of people who come from abroad and who get work permits to come here, and the discrimination and the economic hardship that they go through in order to stay here and the huge cost of renewing their work permits. I think this is one of the things that we need to address when we want to become a nation of sanctuary. There are still so many things that we have to do. We have to recognise that air pollution is a killer and the BAME communities in my constituency are disproportionately living in the areas of highest air pollution. Equally, housing: they're obviously often poorly housed.

So, I want to understand that of the—I think it was 25—recommendations from the Ogbonna report that were deemed to be ones they wanted to be addressed immediately, how are we going to ensure that we're going to take all of these forward when we are struggling with the pandemic? Clearly, the ones that need to take top priority are the ones that impact on the disproportionate numbers of people who have been seriously ill with COVID, or in many cases have died, but this is something we really, really need to address, particularly through the curriculum reform. We need to learn about our own past and the terrible things that we did to people in other countries and some of the injustices that we still haven't rectified as a result of that.

Neil Hamilton. You have to unmute yourself, Neil Hamilton. There you go. 

I'm so sorry.

That's fine. Carry on.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Thank you very much for calling me. Few things, I think, illustrate the gulf between the obsessions of the political class on the one hand and the real concerns of ordinary people on the other in their everyday lives. This disconnect has grown, I think, in the course of my lifetime. I'm very disturbed by the references to systemic and structural racism in Wales in this motion and in some of the speeches that we've heard today. I think this is a grotesque slur and an appalling libel on our own electors.

Laura Anne Jones told a charming anecdote about her 10-year-old son: he doesn't know any people who thought that people were to be thought worse of on account of the colour of their face. Well, I think if she'd asked other parents the same question, for the views of their friends, she'd have got exactly the same answer. I don't know anybody who thinks worse of somebody because of the colour of his or her skin, and I think that would be the experience of us all. There is no evidence for this, I believe, that there is systemic racism or institutional racism in Wales, or indeed in the United Kingdom.

There was of course at one time: when I was born in 1949, I was brought into the world by probably the only black doctor in Wales. He was a Nigerian and I was born in a pit village in the Sirhowy valley called Fleur-de-lis, and my father helped him to overcome racial prejudice and the negative attitudes of the time and to build a practice. He found it very difficult to get going, so he devoted himself to my mother and her difficult pregnancies in the years to come. And Neil McEvoy's amendment referring to the Windrush generation, I think, is very poignant as well, and had it been selected, I would certainly have voted for it. There was real racism in the 1940s and the 1950s, and as my proposed amendment said, in the course of the last five decades also, we've made tremendous progress in changing social attitudes and therefore improving the life chances of people of different ethnic groups.

The race relations industry, of course, works very hard to create friction, because that creates jobs for them and keeps them in jobs. They're grudge hunters, so they'll find grudges. The references to Black Lives Matter I find quite extraordinary, because this isn't some kind of benign social organisation; this is an extreme far-left agitprop organisation that believes in defunding the police and ending capitalism. It's explicitly committed to that. Its founder, Patrisse Cullors, an American, believes we should abolish the police, abolish prisons and abolish the army. And of course, the protests of Black Lives Matter gave rise to some of the most disgraceful scenes of violence and disorder that we've seen in the last 12 months, with the desecration of the Cenotaph in London and other war memorials in other parts of the country, and the tearing down and desecration of statues to famous British people.

Of course, what counts as racism today in history takes no account whatsoever of the attitudes of the time: Mr Gladstone is now a racist, of course, as well. His family did make money out of the slave trade, but he devoted his political life, of course, to the abolition of slavery and the improvement of the condition of ordinary people in this country. The idea that he should be regarded as a racist and, therefore, that statues to him should be removed is just absurd. Of course, there is a Cambridge professor who tweeted in the aftermath of Black Lives Matter that white lives don't matter, but of course, she was promoted to a full professorship at Cambridge, so that kind of racism in reverse is rewarded, whereas the fantasy racism of our historical figures is execrated by those who follow the Black Lives Matter movement.

So, Black Lives Matter's aggressive tactics, I think, set race relations back. It creates resentment and ordinary people know what's going on here. People who have very little in life are told that they've got white privilege. Well, they don't recognise privilege in the lives that they lead in places like Blaenau Gwent, for example, one of the poorest towns in western Europe. Labour and Plaid between them have now become totally obsessed by identity politics, which pit groups against one another based on race or gender or sexuality. Labour, in particular, is now the prisoner of a metropolitan multicultural mindset, which is why, of course, they lost all those seats in so-called 'red wall' constituencies in the last general election.

And I'm amazed by the enthusiasm expressed by the Conservative Party for this motion and the attitudes that lie behind it. I don't know what the average Conservative Member thinks of that kind of approach; I don't think they'd be very impressed by it.

The overwhelming majority of people in this country do not think along racial lines and they judge people on their character. The UK is in fact one of the most tolerant countries in the world, which believes in the rule of law, free speech and democracy. But racism is endemic in many parts of Africa and Asia. This UN convention that's mentioned in the motion today is just a case of hypocrisy and virtue signalling for many of its signatories. China, Turkey and Brazil are on the monitoring committee that looks at the way this convention is being observed. Well, look at the treatment of the Uighurs in China by the Chinese Government, or the Kurds in Turkey by the Turkish Government, or Brazil's attitude towards the indigenous peoples of the Amazon.

You are now out of time, Neil Hamilton, so if you can bring your contribution to a conclusion.

Yes. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. So, my overall view is that whilst racism is of course wrong and to be deprecated, and we all should work towards its reduction, and ultimately, possibly, its elimination, it's not going to be achieved by the kind of debate that we're having today.

I want to disassociate myself from an awful lot of what has been said before. I'm going to welcome this debate, especially as we celebrate Black History Month and acknowledge that it is an integral part of the history of all of us here. Black History Month provides us with an opportunity to celebrate the achievements and the contributions made by individuals with African and African Caribbean heritage. In Wales, it gives us a chance to think about the role that black people have played in shaping our history and our culture. The Senedd Commission is proud that this year's activities, to note this important movement, are the most ambitious yet. They were launched last week with a lecture by academic Abu-Bakr Madden Al-Shabazz. We will look at how the Windrush generation has shaped all our futures here in Wales.

But we must make sure that the important messages of equality, which we remember during Black History Month, are woven into our everyday life, every single day of the year. As a Commission, we are proud of the work that we are doing to promote equality for black, Asian and minority ethnic colleagues, but we know we have a long way to go. As an example, last year, the difference in pay between BAME and non-BAME staff was nearly 40 per cent. That almost halved this year, but it all is still far too much. We are going in the right direction. The difference in pay is as a result of a lack of senior staff within the Commission and that is something that we are taking steps to address. We're aiming to increase the number of external applications from candidates from BAME backgrounds over the next three years. We've already taken steps to increase the number of apprentices we take on from a BAME background, by working with organisations on outreach work, with schools, communities and relevant networks. One of the successful candidates last year was named by the Quality Skills Alliance as the apprentice of the year, and has since been nominated for the public service apprentice award at the UK BAME Apprenticeship Awards.

As Members of the Senedd, we know there is collective, agreed support for the principles of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, meaning that we must take further action as we legislate and scrutinise on behalf of the people of Wales. The Commission is undertaking the requested facilitation of development of a cross-party Welsh declaration, on behalf of the Senedd, to reflect the need to make the Senedd commitment work effectively and tackle all forms of racial discrimination and equality here in Wales. The Commission is currently consulting with the cross-party group on race equality. I also note the work of the BAME COVID-19 socioeconomic sub-group, and support the motion calling on the Welsh Government to ensure that Professor Ogbonna's report recommendations are implemented. As a Senedd Commission, we recognise the additional role we play in the way that our Parliament in supported, for example, providing information and training to Members. With the commencement of the socioeconomic duty on public bodies, we will ensure information is provided to Members to support their scrutiny of this responsibility. 

I'd also like to take this opportunity to invite everyone here today to join me in recognising the inspirational work of Patti Flynn from Tiger Bay, who sadly died last month. Patti was one of the founding members of the Black History Month movement in Wales and, significantly for this debate, will be remembered as an advocate and campaigner for black history to be included in education. Those who wish to know more about the history of the area that our Senedd building occupies should look at the wonderful gallery of images on the Pierhead building's social media feeds. They've teamed up with local Butetown historians to tell the real story of Tiger Bay. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister, and to the Welsh Government, for bringing this very important debate to the Senedd Chamber. Llywydd, black lives matter. 2020 will be a year that will be burnt into the collective consciousness with the COVID-19 pandemic; however, we here in this place can ensure that 2020 is also remembered for the year that we collectively said, all of us, that enough is enough when it comes to racism. Black lives truly do matter, but words are cheap and actions are not.

In the communities of Islwyn and throughout Wales we have seen the concerns manifest that black, Asian and minority ethnic groups are disproportionately contracting and dying from COVID-19. The First Minister of Wales, Mark Drakeford, has led assertively in constituting his BME COVID-19 advisory group. The report of the socioeconomic sub-group, chaired by the eminent Professor Emmanuel Ogbonna, is an important body of evidence-based work, focusing on the fact that available statistics suggest that British BAME groups are up to two times more likely to die from the disease than their white counterparts. It is right that we do this as a nation and that we accept the facts that we find.

The report's finding that race inequalities exist in Wales does not surprise me or many others in this place, but it is a sobering thought for all to consider, especially those deniers, as we've just heard, in the factions of residue of some Brexit and UKIP opposite. I could not and cannot believe their denial of the facts, of the evidence, and am actually appalled at the language used and world view proudly displayed in the amendments to this debate. My advice is for people watching this debate to read the amendments set out. But, if you deny climate change and if you deny expert health and science evidence, I know that you would deny racism in Wales. 

In 2020 in Wales, our proud country, the experiences of our citizens continue to be affected by their racial profile. It is a fact. We must do better, and we will do better. I note that the Equality and Human Rights Commission's 2018 report, 'Is Wales Fairer?', highlighted that race inequality persists in Wales, with race hate crime still being too prevalent. In education, attainment gaps, the report notes, are also sadly evident. BAME groups are also under-represented in apprenticeships. And the question is: why?

So, I do applaud the inquiry of the Deputy Minister and Chief Whip, Jane Hutt, who has committed the Welsh Government to developing a race equality plan for Wales. Thank you. We need those answers. Wales needs those answers. The report recommends, and I also welcome, the Welsh Government's proposal of an independent racial equality champion for Wales, the production of the race equality strategy for Wales, and the establishment of the race disparity unit within the Welsh Government.

I have campaigned all my life for racial equality, as have many others in this place, and the death threats I have had from far-right groups, and media abuse, has been, at times, part of life. So, racial hatred is very alive and deeply seated and it is actively being bred from far-right groups across the UK, Europe and in Wales. So, now is the time to act.

But, leading into the Senedd elections now, it is time for political parties and certain newspapers and press outlets to stop racist language and inference used in party campaigning, as evidenced during the Brexit campaign. Who can ever forget Nigel Farage standing in front of a black and white photo of a refugee queue from the 1940s?

So, now is the time to act, and I know that my party and Jane Hutt leading this debate and the Welsh Labour Government are totally committed to ensuring racial equality, a fairer Wales, and making real in our country that black lives matter. These are not words, these are actions. Thank you, Llywydd.

Before I call on the Deputy Minister to respond to the debate, I just want to say that I offered you, Neil McEvoy, the opportunity to speak if you were to ungag yourself and put down your offensive prop. You chose not to do that, and therefore I deem it that you have not agreed to comply with my—[Interruption.]—not agreed to comply with my request earlier on, and that you were out of order to do so. I've now decided to move on to the Deputy Minister—[Interruption.] Okay. Speak then, Neil McEvoy.

Diolch, Llywydd. I—

No, no. Jane Hutt, I have a degree of kindness that's come upon me and I've offered Neil McEvoy the right to speak, even though he has broken at least three Standing Orders during this debate. But in the interests of goodwill, I ask Neil McEvoy to make his contribution.

Okay. Diolch yn fawr. I stand here as the first ever Welsh-born elected Member of this Senedd. Many people probably wouldn't know that because it's never been reported. I live racism every day of my life. Many of us—so many of us here—have common experiences, not in this Chamber, of people of colour around Wales. 

I put forward some serious amendments—positive amendments—to try and take things forward. The amendments were accepted by officials but they were, at the very last moment, withdrawn by the Presiding Officer. So, forgive me here now for talking about the irony of this—that we have a discussion on race and racism and how to combat it and the only MS of colour here able to put an amendment had his amendments removed.

The first amendment was from Camilla Mngaza. I'm really thankful to Camilla. Her daughter Siyanda reported a hate crime, but it was never investigated. What Camilla wanted was an amendment—updates to race equality impact assessments, mainly so that there would be more diverse decision makers, and it would be wonderful if we had more diverse decision makers in this building.

The other amendment urged the UK Government to add a module on race and class to the Grenfell inquiry. Another amendment talked about the victims of the Windrush scandal living in Wales. The boxing legend Steve Robinson, his father was affected by the Windrush scandal. What we wanted the Government to do through the amendment was to encourage the UK Government to speed up its progress on compensation. What we also wanted was a review of the implementation of the Lammy review in Welsh prisons and in Wales in the criminal justice system.

But today, in this Parliament, if I can call it that, the only Member of colour able to put an amendment, which is me, I had my voice taken away. For me—

For clarity, Mr McEvoy, you are speaking; your voice has not been taken away. I have allowed you to make all these points during this debate, whether amendments were selected—and for the information of all Members, all amendments tabled today were not selected, not only Neil McEvoy's but those offered by others as well. As the Business Committee knows and as Members know, we are in extraordinary times of a hybrid Senedd, and I have said on many occasions that I will proactively now be looking to select or not select amendments for the proper conduct of a hybrid Senedd and its voting. You are perfectly entitled to make all the contributions relating to those amendments, as you are doing, but it was wholly in order for me not to select any amendment for the purposes of this debate. It is not their content; it is for the proper conduct of a hybrid Senedd and its voting process that these amendments today, amendments in the past and amendments in the future will not be selected. Please carry on with your comments; you are perfectly free to do so.

Please forgive me, Presiding Officer, if I beg to differ, because I'm a democratically elected politician, and I had put forward some very sensible, very positive amendments to be voted upon. You've denied me—perhaps you've given me my voice now, but you've denied me the right, my democratic right, to put forward those amendments and have them voted on. And if you want my personal opinion, the opinion of many people, that is racism in action and it's the—

This is an important debate on racism. You have exercised your democratic right as a Member to table amendments, I also have a role in this Parliament as the Llywydd to select amendments, and I have chosen today not to select any of the amendments for the debate. Some were yours and some belonged to another independent Member as well. Please conclude with the content of your debate.

Thank you. I would conclude by saying that we have real problems in this Senedd. I'm not accepted. If I worked in security, if I worked in cleansing, or maybe catering, I would be accepted, but as it stands now, a brown man with a voice and opinion is not welcome by too many people in this building. And I ask people to consider this: is there any other Parliament in the world where a politician would have been described as a species of animal by an official and then be forced to deal and interact with that official?

And I'll finish on this: is there any other place in the world where a person of colour would have to go accused of something before a committee and not be allowed any witnesses and have CCTV proving that statements were false and yet that CCTV not allowed to be presented to prove innocence and gross exaggeration? This is the Senedd that we are talking about. This is the racism that I deal with in this building. I think I'll conclude my remarks there. I tell you what, I speak for many people out there—many, many people. Diolch yn fawr.

I'd ask the question if there is any Senedd in the world that would have allowed you to have your say after your disorderly conduct throughout this debate. This Senedd, this Llywydd, allowed you to speak and have your say today—[Interruption.]

I now call on the Deputy Minister to respond to the debate. You need to unmute yourself, Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd. This has been the most significant debate on race that has been held in this Senedd, in a year when we've seen the disproportionate impact of coronavirus on people of colour in Wales, the UK and across the world. I thank all of those who have contributed positively and constructively to this debate. As speakers have said, this is the time for action if we are to call ourselves a humane society, a country that seeks to be a nation of sanctuary, fair play and equality. We must bring all our efforts to bear across this Welsh Government and with our partners to combat the racism and racial inequalities that have been exposed in the past year.

But the key to this is to recognise that we've got to tackle racism in ourselves, in our communities and our institutions if we're going to stand up and be counted in support of this motion. At a meeting of Black Lives Matter I attended earlier this year, after the killing of George Floyd, I drew attention to the words of Baroness Valerie Amos, who said

'We have had report after report, which shows the depth...of racism in Britain.... We need to stop writing reports and actually start tackling it at the root'.

So, this is the message from this Welsh Government motion that I've moved today, and I'm glad it's supported by Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Conservatives. It sends a strong message to our diverse communities that we will take responsibility, led by this Government. 

It is appropriate to be debating this today, as Joyce Watson, our equalities Commissioner said, as we commence Black History Month 2020. At the launch last week, I was able to welcome the move from Black History Month to Black History Cymru 365, with funding from the Welsh Government to support the team at Race Council Cymru to work throughout the year and hear the voices of Windrush elders, Black History Wales patrons, and, as we heard last week, Professor Charlotte Williams and Gaynor Legall, who are leading the work on our curriculum and our audit of monuments and place names. I can confirm that Professor Williams will be reporting on her interim recommendations later this year.

But, like Joyce, I want to also dedicate the motion today, and this debate, to the memory of Patti Flynn, that celebrated jazz singer who died recently after a battle with cancer, known to many of us here in the Senedd. Tributes were given at the Black History Month launch last week, and they were led by Humie Webb. She recalled that Patti lived to see her campaign delivered in her lifetime after a long struggle for recognition, and that campaign resulted in, last November, a plaque in honour of BAME soldiers, servicemen and women finally unveiled at the Welsh National War Memorial, in memory of the BAME servicemen and women who served and gave their lives in conflict and war. Patti herself lost her father and two brothers in world war two.

Last week many of us also took part in the launch of the Race Alliance Wales manifesto. We had speakers from all main parties welcoming the call to 'move from rhetoric to reality for an anti-racist Wales', and that sums up where we want to go and where the people who have spoken today, in support of this motion, want to go. The messages from the steering group from Wales Race Alliance were very powerful, very clear, as Mymuna Soleman has reminded us so often in these months, when we learn more from her Privilege Cafe and from the Black Lives Matter movement that we should use our privilege for good. The Wales race equality panel will take this commitment forward.

And to those Members who've spoken against this motion, I would urge you to go to the Privilege Cafe. I would urge you to listen to the young people, both black and white, in Black Lives Matter across the whole of Wales—from north to south, east to west, we have groups of people, particularly young people, who are committed to the Black Lives Matter movement and committed to making and urging us to make change. But I would also say to those people who speak against this motion: respect the views of those who have the lived experience of being black, Asian, minority ethnic people in Wales, and that's where we will learn and where we will take our commitment.

So, today, finally, we are recommitting this Welsh Government and this Senedd to stand against racism in Wales. And as Professor Raj Bhopal, as the Black Lives Matter leader spoke to us, said:

'Enough is enough. Be the leaders that this country, this world needs.'

And that must be our resolve today. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? Does anyone object? [Objection.]

Did I see a—? Oh, an objection. Yes, I have seen an objection.

Therefore, we will defer voting until voting time.

And that brings us to voting time. Therefore, there will be a short break now as we move towards virtual voting.

That brings us to voting time, and the first vote is on the motion on the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 2) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 12) Regulations 2020. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 37, nine abstentions, six against, and therefore the motion is agreed. 

The next vote is on the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 2) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 13) (Llanelli etc.) Regulations 2020. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, no abstentions, six against, and therefore the regulations are approved.

The next vote is on the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 2) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 14) (Cardiff and Swansea) Regulations 2020. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, nine abstentions, 15 against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.  

The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 2) (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 15) (Neath Port Talbot, Torfaen and Vale of Glamorgan) Regulations 2020. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, nine abstentions, 15 against. The motion is therefore agreed. 

The next vote is on the legislative consent motion on the Fisheries Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 42, no abstentions, 10 against. And therefore the motion is agreed.

The next vote, and the final vote, is on the debate on tackling racism and race inequality. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 48, one abstention, three against. And therefore the motion is agreed.

And that brings today's proceedings to a close. Thank you.