National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon and welcome, all, to this afternoon's Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda will be questions to the First Minister, and the first question today is from Russell George.

This Welsh Government is backing farmers, with over £366 million going into farm support this year alone, including more than £80 million for the basic payment scheme in mid Wales. While others talk about standing up for rural communities, we're getting on and delivering practical support, tailored advice through Farming Connect, and help with everything from sustainability to mental health.

First Minister, the Deputy First Minister's decision to not align with England from 1 July in regard to bluetongue policy is a disastrous one, and one that will cost the mid Wales economy significantly. It's also an impractical policy as well. This isn't just my view; this is the view of auctioneers and farmers who I met with at Welshpool livestock market yesterday. You will know, First Minister, that this is one of the biggest markets in Wales and England, smack on the border—in fact, you can see the English border from the market itself. This policy, announced last Thursday, will have huge implications for cross-border trade. It will impact on not only farmers, but the whole supply chain, including the auctioneers that sell their stock. Farmers not spending money locally will have repercussions, and the policy position will cost the mid Wales economy millions of pounds. When I spoke to farmers yesterday, they were anxious and they were worried about their livelihoods. They're concerned about not being able to source stock, including stock for breeding. So, I would suggest the Welsh Government urgently needs to review its policy before 1 July. The Deputy First Minister spoke about his decision last week, making it based on the available evidence. So, can I ask the First Minister to confirm if the Welsh Government has carried out an economic impact assessment of the controls that they plan to introduce from 1 July?

I know there's considerable concern in rural communities in relation to bluetongue, and I know the Deputy First Minister is doing everything in his power to try and keep it out of this country. Discussions have taken place with all our key stakeholders, including farmers' unions, including the Royal Welsh Agricultural Society and the Livestock Auctioneers Association. So, those discussions have taken place. There will be a statement by the Deputy First Minister later, who I'm sure will want to go into a lot more of those details, but I want to assure you that this policy will be kept under review and will respond to the ongoing situation.

First Minister, the Welsh Government's approach to bluetongue is one of the most baffling and impractical things I have seen from this Government. Yet again, no common sense has been applied whatsoever. What it does show is a real disconnect and a lack of understanding from the Government of how livestock movements and our livestock sales actually work. And it also doesn't show that farmers with sheep on tack in England now face eye-watering testing costs, complex licensing and huge uncertainty, going forward. The impact on cross-border trade is also going to be significant, disrupting markets, having a two-tiered system when it comes to buying livestock in terms of prices, and hitting our breeding sales across the country. And let's be honest, First Minister, the midges don't know the difference between England and Wales—they don't know where Offa's Dyke is, and they don't stop to show ID or a passport. The Deputy First Minister has got this decision wrong, and it is now time for you to step in and show some leadership and change course. So, will you confirm today that you will change course on this policy before untold damage is done to our livestock industry in Wales? Or are you yet again going to sit down, be quiet, and show that Labour is out of touch, and out of touch with our livestock farmers, my constituents and the people who produce food for this country?

As I say, there will be a more comprehensive statement by the Deputy First Minister later. What I can tell you is that we are aware that there are financial pressures for industry arising from this decision, but we know also that we need to be concerned about farmer well-being in terms of the impacts of dealing with sick animals if bluetongue comes in. The point is that it is not here at the moment, so why would we invite it in? There are implications to this disease. Obviously, as I said, this will be kept under review all the time.

First Minister, the farmers unions—. We've heard already the deep-seated anger about this decision and the Welsh Government's approach to managing bluetongue. We know that there are concerns that the diverging context for managing the disease across the England-Wales border will come with considerable costs and disruption to cross-border holdings and trade. So, can I specifically ask what support you are giving to the sector, in particular your support to the livestock markets that have been mentioned already, in mid Wales particularly, that rely heavily on that cross-border trade in animal movements, and how that will be disrupted by the increasingly divergent approaches that the Welsh Government and UK Government are taking on this. So, what exactly are you giving in terms of your support?

Thanks very much. The Deputy First Minister held a bluetongue round-table with representatives of the livestock and veterinary sectors on 5 June to hear their views, and made a decision on 12 June. Following the Deputy First Minister's decision, livestock moves to slaughter at designated abattoirs will be permitted. But, as I say, there will be more information when the Deputy First Minister speaks later.

Good afternoon, Prif Weinidog. We've heard across the Siambr today the concern that there is in our rural communities, but also in other communities as well. I must say, I hadn't appreciated the real impact this will have on all aspects of our life here in Wales. Like my colleagues, I've met with livestock auctioneers, with farmers, with vets as well, to hear their views. There are options. In the round-table and in the statement on 12 June, the Welsh Government actually said that vaccination would be an option that would be looked at, but this can only work if England and Wales are one zone and that there is no border. For those of us who live in border communities, this is absolutely vital. So, Prif Weinidog—and I realise there's going to be a statement later on—we do need you to step back and rethink this position, we need to rethink what options are available, we need to look at vaccination, and we need to look at England and Wales being one zone. Is that something that your Government would consider? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I think there's general agreement that vaccination is the best way of ensuring flocks and herds against bluetongue. We're going to be working with our partners to encourage farmers to consider vaccination with their vets and to remain vigilant for the disease and report any suspect cases. I don't think it is the case that it will only work if Wales and England does it, but I know that the Deputy First Minister will want to address that issue later.

I’m proud to say that we’ve laid the regulations today and, from December, communities will have a real say over big energy infrastructure. This is a Labour Government doing devolution properly, standing up for rural Wales, putting people before profit, and giving local voices more power than ever before.

Thank you for that response. Can the First Minister explain whether the regulations laid today relate to Parts 2 to 8 of the Act that cover electricity projects, including energy distribution pylons? What will be the transitional arrangements for plans that have already commenced some pre-application work, under the old regime, as it were, if the application is then submitted after the implementation phase for the relevant parts of the infrastructure Act? Will they have an option to continue as a development of national significance—DNS, as it's called—or will they be required to resubmit the application as a significant infrastructure project? And how much time will they have to decide which path they choose? 

The Infrastructure (Wales) Act 2024 does provide us with an up-to-date decision-making process for significant infrastructure projects in Wales, and the whole point is that it's about engagement with the public and other stakeholders. We need to strengthen the community engagement, and there will be improved and consistent pre-application consultation requirements. I can write to you in terms of the answers to your specific questions, but I think it is important now that we recognise there is a lot of concern within lots of communities. We know, though, that putting power cables underground will lead to increased costs for consumers, at a time when people are struggling to pay their bills. So, we just need to get this balance right, and that is, obviously, a part of what will need to be considered in these new regulations.

First Minister, I am grateful for your response to Adam Price. Of course, getting infrastructure right is crucial to boosting the Welsh economy—stimulating growth, creating jobs and supporting communities, in particular in my region in north Wales. You will know, with the Act, that the new infrastructure consent will be required for power stations in Wales between 50 MW and 350 MW, which, of course, would be the region in which you would have small modular reactors, around 300 MW, for the nuclear sector, which is a potential area of huge growth in my region of north Wales. It has the potential to boost the Welsh economy by creating those much needed high-quality jobs, and, of course, for nuclear sites, such as Trawsfynydd and Wylfa, there is significant infrastructure already in place to support development there as well. So, I wonder what support will be given to the nuclear sector through the implementation of this Act and the ongoing work that the Welsh Government are providing, to avoid any pitfalls in the planning and consenting process, specifically in terms of guidance for developers who want to invest in north Wales. Thank you.

Thanks very much. Well, small modular reactors do seem to be the new kid on the block, and certainly you will have seen in the announcements last week that this is something that the UK Government is very interested in exploiting. The infrastructure exists, as you say, in north Wales, in particular in Wylfa and Trawsfynydd, so there may be opportunities there. I think we are very much at the beginning of this discussion, but there are real opportunities as well, particularly now that Rolls-Royce is to be the preferred bidder in relation to SMRs.

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Darren Millar. 

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, in early January, in the absence of a UK inquiry into the prevalence of grooming gangs, I called upon your Welsh Government to establish a Welsh grooming gang inquiry. You refused. You suggested that the issue had been politicised to the point where people feel threatened, and twice expressed disappointment that I was raising the issue in the Senedd. When describing the experiences of just one Welsh victim, I was jeered at, heckled and interrupted by Members of this Senedd, including, I am very sorry to say, members of your own Welsh Government. We're now in June, and finally, after many months of delay and more hurt and harm caused to those brave victims who have spoken out about their experiences, the UK Government has finally agreed to a national inquiry into grooming gangs. Do you regret rejecting the calls of victims and survivors for an inquiry last January? Do you accept that the delay has caused further harm and hurt? And will you now give a full public commitment that the Welsh Government will back that UK inquiry and instruct all public bodies under your control here in Wales to co-operate fully with it, because victims and their families deserve nothing less?

Well, thanks very much, Darren. This is an incredibly sensitive issue, and whenever we discuss these issues, it is really important that we put the needs and concerns of the victims right at the very centre of what we do. I want to reassure you that there is absolutely no complacency in the Welsh Government. If women or children are being abused, I want to know about it and I want us to step in and to prevent it. And that's why we know that there's already been this independent inquiry into child sexual abuse that was chaired by Alexis Jay, and we are already undertaking the recommendations set out there.

As you will be aware, the steps that happened were that the Prime Minister commissioned Baroness Casey to carry out an audit in relation to grooming gangs. So, we didn't say that we were rejecting it, we said, 'Let's do the audit first.' That audit has now taken place and Baroness Louise Casey herself has now said that she has changed her mind about a national inquiry and, of course, we welcome the decision made by the Prime Minister to undertake a national statutory inquiry into grooming gangs, and of course they will have our full co-operation.

I'm pleased to hear that reassurance and I'm glad that the position of the Welsh Government is that they support that inquiry, because back, of course, in January, Welsh Government issued statements calling upon me to provide evidence that there was a need for an inquiry, yet the Jay inquiry, which you've just referenced, into child sexual exploitation, which you knew about, examined just one part of Wales, and that was Swansea, and it uncovered evidence as far back as 2022 of grooming gangs operating in the city, citing an example of an 11-year-old girl with multiple sexual partners. A report by Barnardo's, going even further back to 2016, highlighted groups of men abusing boys in Swansea and Newport. And just last year, Crimestoppers raised the alarm about vape shop owners grooming pre-teenage children for sexual exploitation. The Casey report, published yesterday, made numerous references to Wales, including exploitation of children by a gang in Wrexham and the case of a 13-year-old girl who was sexually abused by three men, yet was on a child protection plan just for neglect, rather than sexual exploitation. So, the evidence is clear: sexual exploitation has been happening right under our noses here in Wales, and, concerningly, Baroness Casey also referred to more than 1,000 under-18s receiving support at sexual assault referral centres here in Wales in just 2023-24 alone. And that appears to be more than twice the rate of under-18s presenting at such centres in England. That is alarming. 

Now, when I submitted written questions asking the Welsh Government to publish its correspondence with the police, local authorities, social services and other stakeholders back in January, it took five weeks for the Welsh Government to issue a simple three-sentence response. It didn't publish the information; it issued what I regarded as a dismissive three-sentence response. And the Casey report also suggests that the Welsh Government has failed to provide information that she also requested, and it warned that fear of being accused of racism has deterred authorities from acting, both here in Wales and in other parts of the UK. So, will you guarantee, First Minister, that there will now be full co-operation with the national inquiry, that you will publish the information that I've previously requested you put in the public domain in terms of correspondence between agencies, and that you will instruct now all bodies funded by the Welsh Government to release all of the requested information and documents, regardless of the ethnicity of perpetrators?

Well, thanks very much. The report came out yesterday. Obviously, we'll be looking at the recommendations to ensure that there is full co-operation. I have written to the Home Secretary to ensure that Welsh issues and any recent events, as well as historic events, will be investigated and analysed by this inquiry. It is clearly an issue that needs to be addressed, so I think that lessons need to be learnt. We mustn't shy away from collecting data on the ethnicity of perpetrators. I think that abuse is abuse and it must be condemned, irrespective of where it comes from. But what we will do is to ensure that we comply and we work with the inquiry to make sure that we do everything we can to stop this hideous approach and that the things that are happening to young girls in our communities stops.

First Minister, I made the call for a public inquiry back in January because of reading about the account of Emily, a Welsh survivor of sexual abuse. As you will know, because of media reports, as a teenager, she was groomed by a group of men in Wales who then trafficked her around the UK for sex. She was raped over 1,000 times. She wrote a harrowing book about her experiences, and for years she's been campaigning for justice, not just for herself, but for all of those other victims of this vile crime, and for those that she wants to protect, because she believes that these things are still going on. I've been in touch with Emily in recent days, and had a conversation with her again this morning, and she told me that she's been trying to raise concerns about grooming gangs in Wales for many years, but feels completely let down by the authorities, by so-called experts, and indeed by the Welsh Government. So, can I ask you, First Minister: will you agree to meet Emily, with me, in person, so that you can hear first-hand about her experiences, and so that we can capture her concerns and finally work together by putting party politics aside to make sure that this inquiry delivers justice for Emily and thousands of victims like her across this country?

Thanks very much. Too many women and girls have suffered at the hands of these perpetrators. I have already met with women who were based in a hostel that was clearly being targeted by some people. I have met with police commissioners to discuss this issue. And I think the important thing is that we continue to keep the victims at the forefront of our minds and that we follow now where the inquiry takes us. 

The leader of Plaid Cymru, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch, Llywydd. Plaid Cymru has a positive vision for Wales, believing, without doubt, that this is not as good as things could get for our nation. We need that vision for fairness, for prosperity, and for new opportunities to be created, but we know that it needs investment. It's why there's deep frustration year after year at the way Wales is funded, and it's why there's deep frustration when Welsh Government celebrates as a victory what was clearly a spending review that left Wales trailing further behind in terms of the investment needed: the worst real-terms growth in the capital budget of all devolved Governments, a worse deal than Scotland and Northern Ireland, a capital block decreasing between 2026 and 2030, the risk of real-terms cuts for some services, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the slowest growth in Welsh Government day-to-day spending outside of the austerity years, and the prospect of cuts to budgets beyond health looming large. Does the First Minister disagree with any of those facts I've laid out?

What I know is that in the recent spending review we have seen £5 billion in terms of public spending. That's money that we can spend on the things that matter to the people of Wales, including things like health, education and making sure that we can produce quality jobs. The fact is that when we do get money into Wales it's really important that we are supported and that it's spent on those communities, and I'm afraid that in the past your party has demonstrated that you won't stand by us and with us and support a budget that would go into supporting communities.

I see nothing has changed from last week, and essentially we have a First Minister who is defending the indefensible. Listen, had the Cabinet Secretary for finance spent less time wagging his finger at me, and Welsh Government more time pulling its finger out and actually pointing out the shortcomings of this spending review, the Welsh public might not be losing so much faith in Labour.

Let's move on to some more facts: £445 million in rail funding, roughly half of what we should be getting in HS2 consequentials alone over the spending review period, let alone to make up for historic underfunding by both Labour and Conservative Governments. Applying the First Minister's own calculations, Wales will lose more than £100 million in capital funding every year because of HS2's designation as an England-and-Wales project. Labour sources were putting it out there that the £445 million is more than Wales's share of rail funding had it been Barnettised. It simply isn't true. And, as the Wales Governance Centre put it:

'Any suggestion that this funding in any way compensates Wales for the loss incurred from HS2 is obviously unsustainable.'

Now, isn't the Cabinet Secretary for finance's admission that the reason we're not getting more money is because we have got nothing to spend it on a damning indictment of Welsh Government for failing over many years to make the case for spending on Welsh infrastructure?

Well, this is a good first step to addressing the historic underfunding when it comes to real rail infrastructure, and let's not forget this is not devolved. This is not devolved. This is a UK Government responsibility, and it is important that we can move on, that there is a pipeline of projects, and that pipeline of projects was mentioned by the Chancellor on her visit to Wales last week. It is important that we recognise that other things were delivered in this spending review. For years we asked for support to remove the coal tips and to secure those coal tips. Now we have had that additional money, £118 million, to support those communities while they see around them the instability in terms of those coal tips as a result of climate change. The important thing to remember is that we've got to absorb this money. What we've done is to make sure that we have the people available and ready to go in those communities, these jobs in those communities, and the same thing can be applied to rail as well. You can't switch these things on overnight. We have done our job in Welsh Government to prepare, to make sure that things are in place, ready to go, but there was always a recognition it would take more than three years to build some of those train stations.

What I saw last week, and I'm still seeing it now, is you're 'First Minister: mission accomplished', and that is a very dangerous position to be in. And on coal tips, what we have still is UK Government agreeing to pay only £1 in £5 of the money that's needed to put right a long-standing injustice. And when it comes to Wales, let's be honest, there was nothing comprehensive at all, was there, about the spending review. There's been no change to the broken system, which entrenches the unfairness of rail investment, no change to the 10-year borrowing limits of the Welsh Government, no change to the reserve limits, no change to the outdated funding formula.

Now, the First Minister, when pushed, did say in an interview at the weekend that she does want to see a review of funding. Hallelujah. Plaid Cymru has been calling for this for so many years, so that we can pursue that vision of fairness for Wales. Without fair funding, a fair funding formula, all we have is a backroom deal between Labour's Welsh and London branches, an agreement that won't make life too difficult for the other by asking for what is actually owed. In the words of the Chancellor herself, Welsh Government got what it asked for. Now, the First Minister told me last week, here, that she was unaware of what was in the spending review, despite her video, which seemed to have been shot that day, suggesting that she did. But isn't the truth that she didn't want to tell me because she was embarrassed about asking for so little and getting exactly that?

You talk about nothing changing from last week. Nothing has changed from last week from what you're saying. We warned last week that, whatever the UK Government offered, Plaid would complain. And here they are, absolutely on cue. Let me tell you that, when it comes to a mission being accomplished, my mission is never going to be accomplished. I will always ask for more in relation to Wales. I will always make sure that we are insisting on our fair share. And it is important that we keep on asking it, which is why it is right that we will continue to ask for a formula to make sure that we do get a fair share. You call and you call and you call, and you never deliver. You call for independence. That is something that the Welsh public don't want to see. But, if they did see it, let me tell you, you would be scrambling around for money that you could never find. And I tell you what: your communities would not thank you for that.

The future generations Act is something only a Welsh Labour Government would have done, putting people, planet and long-term thinking systems into law. Ten years on, it's still driving change, from universal free school meals to green community projects. It's not just policy; it's the Welsh red way of doing government.

Diolch, First Minister. So, 2025 marks the tenth anniversary of the Act, a landmark piece of legislation and a mindset that gives us the ambition, permission and legal obligation to improve our social, cultural, environmental and economic well-being. It gives regard to the long term. We have one Wales and one planet. We need to tread lightly and sustainably. You know that a priority for me is to protect our natural environment for future generations to enjoy, and know that many other countries are very interested in this Act. So, do you agree, First Minister, that the Act is a pioneering example of how Wales leads the world in terms of forward thinking, and it's a great approach to governance? How can we support public authorities to think long term when they are dealing, at the moment, with the here and now? Thank you.

Thanks very much. The Act has been a pioneer and it's a leading example of future generations policy internationally, and that is influencing countries worldwide. In 2024, the Act won a World Future Policy Award for being a leading example of future generations policy. We're a leading member of the Wellbeing Economy Governments network. All of these things are tied to the Act.

And you asked about how local authorities can work and use the Act. Well, they use the Act by using the five ways of working as a role model in terms of future-focused thinking. That supports the focus on prevention. That insists on looking at the long term. It's one of the five ways of working within the sustainable development principles. So, it's about making sure you meet the needs of today without sacrificing the generations of tomorrow.

First Minister, in the 10 years since the introduction of the future generations Act, nearly a third of our nation's children are living in poverty. Foodbank use is through the roof, and working families are facing taxes at their highest ever level. If we can't prevent future generations from being on the poverty line, what is the point of the commissioner? First Minister, does your Government have any plans to re-evaluate the Act or restructure the commissioner?

Well, thanks very much. I can't believe a Conservative is talking to me about child poverty. It went up very significantly under the Conservatives. Now, let me talk about the 50 recommendations to the Welsh Government. In most of the recommendations—. The commissioner has done a report recently and will be looking at the recommendations of those reports. It looks like we are making progress in many areas to do with the well-being goals, in particular perhaps on air quality. But obviously, there is always more to do and there are many indicators where we know that the trend is not going the right way and we need to do more. But if you look at things like child poverty, obviously, and things like free school meals, things like the fact that we are supporting people who are on benefits with their council tax, all of those things are things that help to reduce child poverty, and over the course of the past few years, we've spent £7 billion on supporting people who are struggling with their bills and living in poverty.

We're investing over £6.1 billion in local services this year, including a new £30 million grant to transform pathways of care. We understand that decent care isn't a luxury, but a necessity. This Welsh Labour Government is backing carers, backing families and laying the groundwork for a national care service.

Thank you for the response. Well, last week, we had the Westminster Government's fiscal review, and the failure of the review to provide fair funding for Wales has been recorded extensively, and is known to at least the majority of the people of Wales. But what has received less attention is the complete failure of the review to fund the care service. Indeed, local authorities in England will see their budgets being squeezed, which is likely to lead to less money for the care service there. So, what assurance can you give us here that the care sector in Wales will not suffer as a result of the funding that will come to Wales, and should the sector expect to see an increase in its budgets?

Thank you very much. This, of course, is something for future budgets, and the major challenge, of course, in terms of social care is finding adequate numbers of care workers, and that's why we are in our fourth year of our commitment to fund the real living wage for the social care workforce. And in addition to that, we provide £32 million to Social Care Wales to support the recruitment and retention of staff. So, we're doing what we can here in Wales. We have invested in the care service and, of course, decisions will have to be made in terms of where we will want to invest in future. 

In March, the not-for-profit Care Forum Wales—which, as you know, represents independent social care providers across Wales—published research showing the apparent correlation between councils paying the lowest care home fees and hospitals with the highest percentage of patients unable to leave hospital due to a lack of available beds, or bedblocking. Health boards with the highest rates were Betsi Cadwaladr in north Wales and Hywel Dda. The two councils with the highest percentage of patients waiting for beds so that they can be discharged were Anglesey and Gwynedd. Although they were amongst the lowest care-fee payers, they're also bottom when it comes to Welsh Government local government funding.

Conwy, another of the councils at the bottom of the Welsh Government's funding league, had a higher level of bedblocking, despite being a higher payer, but it does have the oldest population in Wales. And despite paying the lowest amount per week for care places, Denbighshire had the lowest percentage of hospital patients in north Wales waiting for care beds, but still above the Welsh average.

What, therefore, if any, action are you taking with Care Forum Wales to finally get to the bottom of this and get it sorted?

Thanks very much. There are lots of factors that contribute to the difficulty in getting people out of hospitals, and you're right, some of it is perhaps to do with care home fees, but actually some of it is simply that it's more difficult to recruit people to work in the care sector in some areas compared to others. So, I don't think these things are black and white; I think there are lots of different issues that we have to consider, but certainly the key thing, as far as I'm concerned, is that we make sure that those people who do work in the care sector are paid, and are paid the real living wage, as we have provided for.

Whilst I appreciate the setting of social care fees is complex, there are huge discrepancies in the value of individuals' care entitlement, with Wrexham consistently at the bottom of the 22 local authority areas, and for the current financial year, the bottom four places on the table are taken up by north Wales local authorities. And it's also apparent that health boards aren't always following Welsh Government guidance on a costing methodology. We have national regulatory standards and we have a national regulator, but we still have this inequality faced by some of my most vulnerable constituents. What plans does the Welsh Government have to address this unfair situation?

Well, if you've got evidence that they're not following guidance, I think it would be really helpful to see that, so we can chase that up. I think the important thing for us to do is to make sure that we do give as much support as possible. We're trying, of course, as you know, to try and create a more national approach, where there is a system that everybody understands where they stand. That national body, that national approach, it is advancing—we are further ahead in that, compared to England—but the bottom line here is that there is a need for more money in the system, and that is very difficult. Obviously, in an ideal world, we would like to see that being grasped by the UK Government, but it is a difficulty for us. Ideally, it would be good to do it with them, but it is clear that this issue is going to be something that we are going to have to take seriously, and I hope that the fact that we are on a journey in relation to creating a national care service is something that I hope people appreciate, but at some point, there is an issue to address in relation to how we fund care in future.

We’re working hand in hand with the UK Labour Government to stand up for home owners and deliver real change through the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024. For the first time, people will have the right to challenge unfair estate charges and demand full transparency. It's a major step forward, and a consultation on implementation will get under way later this year. Two Labour Governments delivering fairness and accountability.

Residents in Cwm Calon in Ystrad Mynach have just had their third increase in as many years to the charges they pay, and, frankly, Meadfleet provide a disgracefully substandard service. I think they need an opportunity to change their management company and make the complaints that are necessary to get the improvements that they want. Unfortunately, the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act has yet to be operationalised in that regard. We are still waiting for the regulations to happen in order to operationalise it. Alistair Strathern, Labour MP for Hitchin, has raised this in the House of Commons, and he has introduced his own private Member's Bill that goes further than the leasehold and reform Act. What he is calling for is that new estates must not have unadopted land that is transferred to estate management companies. Currently, the Competition and Markets Authority say 80 per cent of new developments are subject to leasehold. And he says that we need to think about what more we can do to prevent more unadopted estates from becoming the norm before we act. There are too many in Wales that are in that position.

The Senedd Petitions Committee has come out with this report, 'The Welsh Government should commit to the adoption of the maintenance of new housing estates by local authorities'. The title says it all, but there are some very good recommendations in there. So, a couple of things I would like to see are, first of all, a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government on how she would like to respond to that report, and for the First Minister to speak to the UK Government to operationalise those things in the leasehold and freehold Act, so that these scandals across Wales and across the UK can be prevented from happening in the future.

Thanks very much, Hefin, and thanks for championing and advocating tirelessly for leaseholders within your constituency. I think they've faced very long-running issues with estate management charges, and you've set those out today. Look, I'm really grateful to the Petitions Committee for the work on the future of estate management charges. People are struggling with the cost of living already without this kind of thing on top.

I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government is going to report in July on the recommendations that the committee has made, and there'll be an opportunity for you to have a debate at that point. What I can say is that, in relation to the work that's already been done with the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act, those rights, as I say, are starting to be operationalised, and we are going out to consultation now, but there is an intention by the UK Government to go further with a new leasehold and commonhold reform Bill, and that's due to be published by the end of the year. So, hopefully, there's an opportunity to plug in some of the issues that you're concerned about into that.

Following on from what Hefin David just said, it is very important that we get to grips with this problem, which is Wales wide. It's affecting residents across my region in the same way as it is in Caerphilly. What is often the case is that residents are also finding that the works promised by these people for the increases that are championed are not actually being fulfilled. So, that is another problem that we have there. I welcome the document that's already been outlined by Hefin David. There are some good suggestions in there, and I welcome anything that's been done already by both Governments, but, actually, more needs to be done.

One of the things that some of my residents have said is that, in new housing estates, they are paying huge annual fees for parks, roads and verges, and everything else, whilst also paying council tax. This is essentially a double tax on residents. So, I was wondering, First Minister, what considerations the Welsh Government has given into looking into granting a council tax reduction, perhaps, to residents in new housing estates to reflect that double charging? Diolch.

Thanks very much. These are some of the things that'll be picked up by the Cabinet Member when she responds to that report. I do think that things are heading in a better direction since the introduction of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act: better rights to extend a lease or purchase the freehold; increasing transparency of service charges; scrapping the presumption that leaseholders will always pay their landlords' legal fees; banning the use of leasehold for new houses; and increasing rights for freeholders who pay estate management charges. So, all of those are coming—that's a good thing. But as I say, there is an intention to go even further to plug the gaps that were left by the last Government.

We're on course to deliver 100,000 apprenticeships this Senedd term, supported by £144 million of investment, and that's backing real skills, real jobs and real futures. Our national campaigns are challenging old stereotypes, and they're making apprenticeships a first-choice path for young people and employers alike. Our apprenticeship vacancy service is helping businesses to find the talent they need, and in south-east Wales alone, over 4,000 apprenticeships were started last year. We're creating opportunities, we're growing our economy and giving the next generation the tools to succeed.

Thank you for your response, First Minister. I’m sure that you’ll agree that apprenticeships are incredibly valuable routes into the workplace for those who perhaps feel like university and further studying is not for them. Yet this Government’s decision to slash the apprenticeship budget by 14 per cent is having a damaging impact, with a 20 per cent drop in overall apprenticeships. That means more than 900 fewer people seizing apprenticeship opportunities.

I want to focus specifically on construction apprenticeships this afternoon, as that sector has seen a staggering 48 per cent decline in uptake. First Minister, that’s 205 fewer construction apprenticeship starts compared with the same quarter last year. And let’s be clear, this sharp decline is down to the Government’s budget cuts and the decision to remove the level 2 foundation apprenticeship. Research has found that, in this first year, and after the removal of level 2, there were 1,075 fewer construction apprenticeships compared to the previous year.

I must also take this opportunity to thank and pay tribute to my colleague Samuel Kurtz, who has been doing some stellar work in holding the Government’s feet to the fire when it comes to apprenticeships. First Minister, will your Government reverse these brutal budget cuts and bring back the level 2 foundation apprenticeship, as this is ultimately the right thing to do for our future students and for our economy going forward? Thank you.

We’re investing £144 million in quality apprenticeships this year. That means that we are on target to deliver the 100,000 apprenticeships during this Senedd term. That is not to be sniffed at. That is something that other areas are looking at us with envy. And let’s not forget that we had 14 years of austerity; we had to make some tough decisions. But let me tell you that £144 million invested in apprenticeships is something that I’m very proud of. And don’t forget that that’s on top of the 100,000 that we delivered last Senedd term. So, if there’s an area that I think we should be proud of in this Government in terms of delivery, it is this one. It is particularly heartening to see, for example, that 11 per cent of the people who undertook those apprenticeships had a disability or learning difficulties. We know that that’s an area that we have to address. You’re quite right, apprenticeships are a really good route into employment for people who don’t take those traditional academic paths.

A diagnosis like MND is devastating, and when it hits a young person, it hits even harder. That’s why this Labour Government is working with the strategic clinical network to make sure that health boards deliver the best possible care through our quality statement for neurological conditions. We’re driving improvements across the board, so that every person, no matter their age, gets the support, dignity and outcomes that they deserve.

Thank you for that response. As you may be aware, my team and I have been supporting Kyle Sieniawski and his family. Kyle is 13 years old; he turns 14 this week, so pen-blwydd hapus, Kyle. He is believed to be the youngest person in the UK diagnosed with motor neurone disease. He has been in hospital since January. His family are desperate to bring him home to be cared for, but sadly, they have been unable to access any grant funding for essential adaptations as their current property is unsuitable. As a result, they have had to put the family home up for sale, and they have no idea how long it will take until they are able to live together as a family.

It is not an isolated case, sadly. Access to secure and accessible housing remains a major challenge for many people living with MND and those affected by it, with existing support often falling short, as Kyle's family have, unfortunately, seen, and with some really callous and heartless responses that I've seen. So, how are the Welsh Government putting in place support to ensure that people with MND and their families do receive that support?

Thanks very much. Motor neurone disease is an extremely cruel condition and it usually affects people who are over 50, so when you hear about somebody of Kyle's age, obviously it's a double tragedy, and I'm really pleased that the Cabinet Secretary was able to visit Kyle in hospital. What we're trying to do is make sure that we do all that we can in relation to supporting people with motor neurone disease; there are about 200 people in Wales living with it. We’re spending a lot of money and working with teams in the care and research network—clinical teams—and we are doing what we can, in particular in relation to getting them to work with paediatric teams as well.

What I get is that time is of the essence for these people. You will know that we do have a significant fund—the housing and care fund. It has got a budget of £60 million. Obviously, if they're saying that there is a problem with the house being adapted, that is difficult, isn’t it? We’ve always had an issue with how quickly we can move things on, and I know that that is an issue that the Cabinet Secretary is concerned with, but we are putting considerable money into this. The fact is that the network now—the care and research clinical network team—is considered a beacon site within the United Kingdom when it comes to motor neurone disease trials. That was not the situation a few years ago, so things are improving.

Tackling child poverty is this Labour Government's mission. We were the first nation in the UK to roll out free school meals to every primary school child, putting money back in families’ pockets and making sure that no child goes hungry in the classroom. From fuel vouchers to the council tax reduction scheme and the single advice fund, we’re using every lever that we’ve got. Since 2022, we’ve invested over £7 billion to support families.

Thank you very much. As you will know, by 2029, Wales will have the highest child poverty rates in the UK. Within Wales, the rates are shocking, for example in the region that we represent. In Carmarthenshire, for example, some 30 per cent of children are living in poverty; in Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire, it is in the region of 32.5 per cent. We know that these numbers are exacerbated because of the two-child benefit cap, with some 65,000 children in Wales affected by that cruel policy introduced by the Tories, which is being continued by the Labour Party.

When Plaid Cymru called for this cap to be abolished, we were derided. Every Labour Member in this Chamber, and every Welsh Labour MP in Westminster, voted against our motion to abolish it. We understand now that you want to remove the cap. So, can I ask you, First Minister, what discussions have you had with the Westminster Government in order to abolish this cap? Are you confident that Keir Starmer will listen to you?

Thank you very much. We are concerned about child poverty, and the best way to reduce child poverty is to ensure that those who have children have access to good-quality jobs. That's why growing the economy is so important, so that they can have those jobs and can earn that money to help their children. Of course, we are not content with the situation in terms of the two-child benefit cap, and we've made that very clear for many months. That was something that came in under the Tories, and it is a policy that we've always opposed.

I raised this issue with Liz Kendall last week, with the Minister who's responsible for social justice in the Welsh Government. So, we are raising this issue. I don't think anyone in the Labour Party wants to maintain this policy. It's just a question of where the funding comes from and when that funding can come in. No-one who joins the Labour Party likes the values associated with the Tory policies that brought that cap in. So, it is a question of where the funding comes from, and of course, there will be efforts, we all hope, to ensure that it will be abolished.

Thank you, First Minister. 

The next item will be questions to the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery. The first question to the Counsel General is from Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you, Mabon. The Welsh Government sought permission to appeal the Court of Appeal judgment to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Supreme Court refused permission. The Welsh Government, of course, accepts and respects the decision.

Thank you for the response. The whole question of Wrexham's LDP and the associated court case has set all sorts of precedents, with implications for every local authority in Wales. Take away all of the noise surrounding the issue, the fact that the ruling was in favour of the councillors and against large developers and this Government makes it clear that local democracy should be respected. Other LDPs that were heavily amended by this Government were challenged by councillors, but ultimately adopted because councillors were told that they had to adopt them or risk being taken to court. Does the Cabinet Minister agree, therefore, that the democratic voice of councillors should be respected on issues delegated to them, even though this Government might disagree with that, and what does this ruling mean for the other LDPs and future development plans in Wales?

Thank you, Mabon. It's a very complicated set of issues that arises as a result of this. For Wrexham itself, there are three things that Wrexham—. First of all, I should make it very plain that this is a decision of the full council. It can't be delegated to a cabinet or to a cabinet member, so it has to go to a full council meeting. And then, for Wrexham itself, they have three courses of action, as I understand it. They can ask the Welsh Government to withdraw the plan and start again; they can leave the current LDP as an emerging plan and continue from there, to go back through the process; or they can ask us to adopt the plan for them. It's a matter for them to decide which of those to do.

We've always taken the view as the Welsh Government that the council should adopt its own plan and not step in across them to do that, although the Welsh Government has the power to do that, just to be clear. Much of the discussion with Wrexham was about the fact that we didn't want to do that; we wanted them to do it. We accept the court has decided that the rules are different to the way we've been interpreting them, and that's something that has to be taken into account going forward. We'll have to look again at what those rules look like and how to adjust the system for that.

In the meantime, Wrexham has no plan in place. The difficulty for Wrexham then is that, in resisting speculative developments, not having a plan in place is a real problem, because they don't have a plan with which to resist speculative developments. The real issue here is how we can work with Wrexham council to get a plan that will enable them to resist speculative development and have the kind of development that they and we both want in a timely fashion. At the moment, there's no quick route to that, but we are very happy to work with the council to get into that position.

The other plans have been adopted, so there isn't an option for them to unadopt the plan at this point. Wrexham is the only council in that position in Wales. The local government Cabinet Secretary and myself are very keen indeed to work with Wrexham to get them back into a position that suits all parties. Just to be really clear, the issue here is to get Wrexham council into a position where it has a plan that the people of Wrexham can rely on, and then they can resist speculative development applications. They're not in that position at the moment.

Diolch, Mabon. I, along with other Welsh ministerial colleagues, have raised the importance of adherence to, and reform of, the Sewel convention directly with UK Ministers. We've stressed the need to strengthen it and to ensure that the convention is respected and functions smoothly.

Thanks for that response. We have a large number of legislative consent motions coming in front of us, with the UK Government legislating on areas that are devolved, with very little Welsh scrutiny or voices being part of that process, even though the implications of these Bills will have huge consequences on the lives of the people of Wales. The latest LCM in front of us is the Employment Rights Bill. However, clause 151 provides the Secretary of State with the power to make consequential provisions in relation to the Bill. This includes Henry VIII power, which enables the Secretary of State to amend, repeal or revoke legislation, which includes an Act or Measure of this Senedd. Does the Cabinet Secretary agree with me that, by handing over powers to Westminster to amend, repeal or revoke Acts or Measures passed by this Senedd, not only does it completely undermine the legislation and this legislative body, but it is also in contravention to the Sewel convention? What steps, therefore, is this Government taking to ensure that Sewel is not only respected, but is set in stone and that we should not see such clauses again?

Diolch, Mabon. So, we've gone through, as you know, a period of considerable instability in recent years, during which compliance with the Sewel convention by the previous UK Government was pretty much treated as optional. We have a large number of examples where the Senedd voted in a particular way and was then ignored at Westminster. We've worked very hard with this UK Government to make sure that the Sewel convention is respected, and at the moment, we don't have the—. The Senedd has not refused permission that has then gone ahead, or the other way round. So, I'm very pleased to have got to there. We will continue to fight to stay there, and that's very important. It's very important.

Let's just be really clear: the Government might be recommending the acceptance of an LCM, and the Senedd might vote against that, and we would expect the UK Government to respect the wishes of the Senedd, not of the Government. That's not an easy position to be in if you're a Government that wants it to go ahead, but we've been very clear that that's our position. We obviously seek to make sure that the Senedd will vote the way the Government wants it to vote, given the negotiations that go on, but if the Senedd didn't do that, then we would be very keen that the Sewel convention is respected. That's the fundamental of it, isn't it?

Of course, then, behind the scenes, we have long conversations. Each individual Cabinet Secretary, and myself as Counsel General, have long conversations on each individual LCM proposal that comes forward. Well, it's not an LCM proposal, it's an Act that comes forward, and then we have—. It's even down to what requires an LCM, because, actually, we don't always agree with the UK Government. They sometimes think a provision doesn't require one that we do think requires one. So, right from the get-go, there's a conversation about what we think.

We make common cause with the Scottish Government sometimes, where we have a similar problem there. So, there have been a couple of examples of that recently. And we had a very, very difficult one recently that just involved the Windsor framework as well. So, there are many, many conversations behind the scenes.

I don't disagree with your analysis. We don't like Henry VIII powers being given to UK Government Ministers. We take a pragmatic approach about the LCM as a whole, but I make no secret at all in conversations with Government Ministers, and neither do colleagues sitting in the Government make any bones at all, about the fact that we're not happy about it. But in the end, we have to make a pragmatic decision about the Bill as a whole and what it looks like. You've got a very good example there. We want the Employment Rights Bill to apply to Wales. We want workers in Wales to have access to those mechanisms. We're not happy about the way it was done, but in the end, the pragmatic decision was made to recommend it.

There has been a lot of talk recently from Ministers about fighting the UK Government. Last week it was the First Minister talking about funding issues. This week it's the Counsel General talking about more constitutional matters. The reality is that this isn't the way that a constitution should operate. Ministers should not be arguing and struggling and fighting over the very basic allocations, whether it be of funding or of legislative authority. To me, the very fact that the Welsh Government feels it has to argue in this way demonstrates that the structures and processes we have in place at present simply are not fit for purpose. Do you therefore agree with me, Counsel General, that what we actually need is a reform Bill that actually places the Sewel convention on a statutory basis and establishes clear relationships between our Governments and Parliaments?

Thank you, Alun. So, as you know, we think it's a progression and that we're unlikely to get there in a single step, because of the way that devolution has occurred in Great Britain, in fact, not just the United Kingdom, and the asymmetric nature of that devolution settlement. Until that's sorted out, fundamentally, we will continue to have—whoever is in power—a conversation. The devolution settlements are complex, they are not uniform, there are ragged edges et cetera, et cetera.

And I don't think I did say 'fight'; I said 'conversation with', just to be clear. If I did say 'fight', I didn't mean to say 'fight', I meant 'conversation with'. We have arguments—I'm happy to use the word 'arguments' as well—because we don't see eye to eye on some of it. Actually, the devolution settlement is too complex, and it's very difficult for people to interpret.

But as a first step, the UK Government's manifesto commitment to develop a memorandum of understanding to strengthen the Sewel convention offers an early opportunity to support the convention's effective operation. The Deputy First Minister is engaging in detailed discussions on the draft MOU with the UK Government and the other devolved Governments in the months ahead. We think that placing the convention on a statutory footing would offer important safeguards for devolution, as recognised by the constitutional commission. But as the Deputy First Minister said in the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee last week—and I know you know this, Alun—our priority is to focus on what can realistically be achieved within this Senedd term. So, we want to put our serious efforts into getting the memorandum of understanding on the table first, but I don't disagree at all with your eventual analysis.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Tom Giffard.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Returning to yesterday's report by Baroness Casey on child sexual exploitation and grooming gangs, the report notes, and I quote:

'We...sought data from the Department of Health and Social Care...and the Government of Wales on how many cases of child sexual abuse or exploitation they see in health services but have only been able to obtain data from Sexual Assault Referral Centres (England).'

Can the Counsel General explain why the Welsh Government was either unwilling or unable to provide Baroness Casey with the data she asked for?

The report only came out yesterday. The First Minister made it very plain just now in First Minister's questions that we are highly supportive of the report and we will do everything in our power to comply with it. So, going forward, we will make sure that happens. I don't have information about why that sentence was included in the report, but I can absolutely assure you, and the First Minister has just assured the Senedd herself, that we will, of course, co-operate with the report and ensure it has all the information that it needs.

Well, it's clear from the report that you didn't co-operate with this report, and I think it's reasonable to ask questions as to why that didn't happen. One theme that does run through the report, though, is the inadequate data held by the Welsh Government in this regard. So, it says, for example:

'In England, the number of assessments identifying child sexual exploitation has fallen every year since 2017/8 and is now over 30% lower than six years ago. This data is not available in Wales.'

Another part of the report says:

'Data in relation to serious incidents relating to children was provided to this audit by the National Child Safeguarding Panel. This data is not available in Wales.'

It goes on to say in the report, on page 94:

'During this audit, a recent example of this issue was raised with us where a 13-year old girl had been raped by three different men but was on a child protection plan for neglect.'

Do you accept that Welsh Government data keeping was inadequate and meant that you were unable to contribute to this report and that also contributed to an inability on the Welsh Government's part to get to a sufficient grip of the issue and understanding of the scale of the problem in Wales? If so, will you apologise for that?

Tom, I know you want to leap to various conclusions based on wording in a report, but the wording of the report doesn't say what you then inferred, actually. Just to be clear, in Wales, we've already implemented several of the recommendations for the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, including, with partners, developing the first 10-year strategy for preventing and responding to child sexual abuse. The strategy is about to be released for public consultation.

I do not know why the report, which was out yesterday, says what it says about data availability in Wales. I don't know why that data wasn't available, and neither do you. I've already told you that we have been very clear that we will support the inquiry in full, and that we will co-operate with it. I haven't got anything more to add to that. We will support the inquiry in full, and we will co-operate with it.

I'll tell you why, because you didn't provide the data. It's pretty clear—

You absolutely don't know that.

—in the report. It asked you for data, and it says it has been unable to obtain that data from you. Now, Darren Miller wrote to the First Minister in January—it took five weeks to get a reply—asking the Welsh Government whether it would publish all the correspondence with stakeholders regarding the operation of grooming gangs in Wales, publish correspondence with the police forces about grooming gangs in Wales, publish correspondence with local authorities and with social services in regard to the operations of grooming gangs in Wales. The Welsh Government refused to do that on all four counts, instead giving a flippant three-sentence response to Darren Millar.

I think what's clear from the report and from your answers today, quite frankly, Counsel General, is the Welsh Government isn't treating this issue, or hasn't treated this issue, with the sufficient seriousness and urgency it so clearly deserves. So, will you commit to publishing all that data that Darren Miller requested today? And equally, I will mention that Darren also asked the First Minister whether she would meet with Emily Vaughan, a grooming gang survivor who was transported and raped across the country over 1,000 times—completely shocking—but, for some reason, the First Minister didn't commit to meet with Emily and Darren so that she can share her story, and I'm unsure why that is. So, will you add your voice to call on the First Minister to do that, to make sure that she does meet with these survivors? 

Of course I'm not going to commit to publishing correspondence relating to child sexual offences between us and the police, because I have absolutely no understanding myself of the content of that documentation, and you can quite easily understand that that documentation might well contain details that would not be suitable for publication. It's not a leap of faith to understand that that might be so. I'm happy to review that, but it's not a leap of faith to understand that that documentation might contain issues that are not fit for publication. That's quite clearly the answer. The rest of the questions have already been answered by the First Minister.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Adam Price. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Counsel General, will you outline whether the UK Treasury decisions on comparability factors and project designations under the Barnett formula are, in principle, amenable to judicial review? Specifically, does the recent decision to recategorise the £6.6 billion Oxford to Cambridge East West Rail scheme from 'England only', as stated in the 2020-24 statement of funding policy, to 'England and Wales', removing an estimated £360 million of consequentials, create a justiciable issue? If the change was made, as it ostensibly was, without consultation or adequate reasoning, what legal hurdles would the Welsh Government face in bringing a case, and what remedies might be available?

So, my understanding is that the scheme in question was part of an England and Wales pipeline. We've discussed this a number of times in First Minister's questions. Heavy rail is not devolved to Wales. The schemes that are produced are often produced using local transport grants in the first instance, and then, once they're ready, are transferred into the pipeline. I don't understand exactly why the Oxford and Cambridge one took so long to transfer, but that's clearly what's happened there. For me, a much more important point is that the pipeline contains sufficient schemes in Wales to satisfy the need in Wales for railway investment, and so we have concentrated our efforts as a Government on trying to make sure that that pipeline is fit for purpose, and we've had news, as you know, about the pipeline for Wales in the next spending review, which the First Minister rehearsed only today in First Minister's questions. So, my understanding is that the classification is correct, that it was indeed transferred late, but I don't think that's something we want to particularly take to court, but that the actual issue here is to make sure that the pipeline for England and Wales contains sufficient investment for the Wales part of that, to make sure that the people of Wales have the right level of investment. And can I say that I very much welcome the step change in that level of investment in, well, it's not even a year, since this Government's been in power? 

Isn't the key point, though, that the East West Rail project was originally publicly listed as 'England only', and it was for four years? Didn't that published designation create a legitimate expectation in legal terms on which Welsh budget planning relied? And if so, does the Treasury's, I have to say, as yet, completely unexplained reversal, affecting a scheme, after all, let's remember, whose physical works are wholly in England, with no direct or indeed indirect benefit to Wales—. That seems to me to amount to a breach of procedural fairness, or potentially even cross the Wednesbury threshold of irrationality, because it's a perverse decision, and that's why no real explanation has been proffered. So, asking you, as Counsel General, what documentary evidence of detriment would you need to assemble—and in reliance, in terms of the facts that I've just presented—and would you support issuing a pre-action letter compelling the UK Government to disclose the reasoning behind the reclassification?

No, I don't think that that would be a good use of the Government's resources at all, Adam. As I said, I don't understand why it was delayed in its transfer from the local planning to the national planning, but the national planning is on an England-and-Wales basis. So, any scheme in England that's got heavy rail in it that's being invested in by the UK Government would be on an England-and-Wales basis, and, actually, so would any scheme in Wales be on an England-and-Wales basis. So, a line with nothing touching England would also be on an England-and-Wales basis. The real issue for us is that there aren't any of those second ones. We've been seriously underinvested in, and what we now need to see are those investments coming into Wales. We need to make sure that the pipeline is an England-and-Wales pipeline and not just an England pipeline, as it was under the previous Government. And, as I explained, I'm very pleased to see that pipeline starting up in this three-year spending review. We will be working very hard indeed to make sure that that pipeline continues on into the future.

I would go so far as to say—and might I say that this is a personal view; it's not one that I've discussed with Cabinet colleagues particularly—that I personally would like to see heavy rail devolved to Wales, with the funding to go with it, or at the very least put into a Wales region so that you could see the funding upfront. So, even if it wasn't devolved, the region was 'Wales' and not a region that includes part of England, because that has muddied the waters for sure. But, really, our efforts are being put into making sure that that pipeline includes Wales projects—that the England-and-Wales pipeline includes Wales projects.

Turning, if I may, Counsel General, to the 1.2 percentage point rise in employer national insurance from 6 April earlier this year, Wales has received £185 million via Barnett against an estimated £257 million annual cost, leaving a recurring £72 million shortfall. The statement of funding policy states that devolved administrations should suffer no detriment from UK policy decisions. In your view, as the Government's Counsel General and chief legal adviser, is there a credible legal route, whether through judicial review or by other means, to secure full reimbursement for this amount? What factors would determine whether that policy wording is legally enforceable, and what steps can you advise to protect Welsh public services from this funding gap?

Thank you, Adam. I think it is a clear breach of the funding policy, and the finance Minister has been more than plain that he also regards it as a clear breach of the funding policy. The question you're asking me, though, is is it worth trying to take some sort of judicial approach to putting that right, and I think that our view is that it isn't, because that will involve an enormous amount of expenditure, it's quite a sledgehammer, and we think that there are better ways of having that discussion, and I would continue to think that. I think that, actually, taking action against the UK Government on such a thing, you would need a very high bar indeed to want to go down that path. In the meantime, we take all of the inter-governmental mechanisms, the inter-governmental ministerial groups, for example—the IMGs, as they're called—to raise the fact that we think that it's a clear breach of the funding statement, as do the other devolved nations who are in the same position.

Thank you, Janet. The Welsh Government prioritises the ethical, safe and legal use of AI technologies in its work. The organisation works with multiple subject matter experts, including the Responsible Technology Adoption Unit, and takes a social partnership approach in its use of AI.

Thank you. I think you've answered by actual question before I ask it. ChatGPT has 400 million active users who access the app once a week. It was downloaded 280 million times in 2024. One in six businesses are implementing at least one AI application, and AI is becoming widely used in all professions and in people's day-to-day lives. However, the High Court has recently asked UK lawyers to stop using AI following fake case law citations. One case contained five fake cases as evidence citations. This and the risk of unwitting copyright breaches is a cause for some concern. So, could you clarify what use the Welsh Government are making of AI in all of your work? Clearly, there's too much for you to tell me now, but I'd be grateful if you could write to me, just to advise me on that. And also, on the legal advice taken, I guess, as we all start to experiment with AI, there could be some resource implications for us and for you as a Government. Thank you. 

Thank you, Janet. It's a really important question, and I just want to give my own perspective on a lawyer who uses ChatGPT to produce an argument with fake cases in it who hasn't looked up the case law that they intend to rely on in court, because I think what you've got there is not rubbish AI, but a rubbish lawyer. That's the same as we used to do when Google first came out—people would say, ‘Don't Google it, do your own research.’ Well, obviously, do your own research. ChatGPT is a very useful way of getting a skeleton argument together. It gives you some ideas and so on. But any lawyer who has relied on that in court should, frankly, be pilloried through the streets, in my view, because one of the things you ought to have in a good lawyer is a slavish adherence to the small print, as one of my teachers once said to me. So, anyone who hasn't cross-checked their references, as I say, what you've got there is a bad lawyer, not bad AI.

In the Welsh Government, we're already delivering AI solutions internally. We're at the vanguard of testing Microsoft 365 Copilot in Government, and innovative work is being undertaken by our data science unit. Last month, I'm delighted to say, the data science unit, the geography team and Cadw were joint winners in the innovation category at the government geography profession awards—who knew they happened? The award was for their pioneering use of AI to identify areas of woodland from historic maps. So, some really good work there.

We are, though, determined to do this in social partnership, and we're leading activities to help ensure AI is used in the best ways across the Welsh public sector. I highly recommend, on the Welsh Government's website, a report from February 2025, if you haven't seen it already, Janet—you may well have, because I know you're interested—which is around using AI responsibly and ethically in the public sector. It talks about the work we've done with the Welsh workforce partnership council and their working group on this, and it talks about working with the Centre for Digital Public Services to improve AI literacy and awareness in the Welsh public sector. We've also got an AI commission for health and social care prioritising the safe, ethical and effective adoption of AI for the sector, and they're developing guidance resources and training for staff and leading a national conversation about AI use in the sector. If the Llywydd doesn't mind me saying so, in a recent conversation with her, we discussed the use of AI in Senedd and Government systems as well. This is something that's happening, and so what we need to do is get ahead of it and make sure we've got the guidelines in place.

I've started my own game in my own head as I sit here, starting to work out whether any of the speeches I hear in this room have been generated by AI. I think I might have heard one over the last two or three weeks that may well have been generated by AI. I'm not looking anywhere at this point, but it's becoming a game of mine in my own head. Test me on it to see if you can get away with it or not.

 Question 4, Rhys ab Owen.

Diolch, Rhys. The Welsh Government has long been consistent in its opposition to the UK internal market Act and we continue to work with the UK Government to explore opportunities for reform, so that the Act and the wider internal market better reflect the devolution settlement.

Of course, you'll remember, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, that the internal market Act was refused consent by both the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments, but was pushed through regardless. Now in 2022, your predecessor as Counsel General, Mick Antoniw, issued a written statement calling the internal market Act

'an unwarranted attack on devolution and the right of the Senedd to legislate without interference in areas devolved to Wales.'

More recently, the Deputy First Minister has made clear that the internal market Act is the reason why Wales's deposit-return scheme has been delayed. Now, a Welsh deposit-return scheme would undoubtedly have assisted the Welsh Government in reaching its statutory target of 75 per cent of waste being recycled this year. In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that they couldn't interfere with the internal market Act because we didn't have legislation to test it. Now we see legislation not being able to go through because of the internal market Act, so we seem to be in a catch-22 here, Cwnsler Cyffredinol. How are we going to get out of this mess to allow the Senedd to pass legislation within devolved areas at a faster pace, and also to defend our devolution settlements? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Rhys. It's a really important point. At the moment, there is a review of the UK internal market Act 2020 being carried out by the UK Government. The Deputy First Minister and I have both been involved in part of that conversation—he a little more than I, in truth, because it's about some of the practical implications of it. I'm sorry to say, though, that that review does not include the financial assistance powers. We have long called—and it remains the Welsh Government's position—that those financial assistance powers should be repealed, because they stretch straight across the devolution settlement, and we are opposed to them.

We are, nevertheless, involved in the review of the rest of UKIMA. Those conversations are ongoing, and they include things like—. Astonishingly, the previous Government absolutely refused to do this, but it is not clear at all, where one of the devolved Governments wishes to depart from a market position—the deposit-return scheme is a good example—what the process for claiming the exemption is. There is no clear process. That process I've seen—. I was actually at the meeting where the Scottish Government was told it couldn't go ahead with a glass DRS, and that was done on the whim of the then Scottish Secretary of State—it was literally a whim. We then asked repeatedly for a process for claiming exemption, and that is one of the things we very much hope will come out of this.

We've also very much called for the inter-government co-operation arrangements to be put in place so that they function properly, but we continue to be crystal clear that the financial assistance provisions should be repealed. We absolutely accept there's a need for a UK market that functions, but, obviously, it must function in a clear and transparent way so that each of the devolved Governments understands what they need to do if they want to push the agenda further.

After all, the Welsh Government has led the way in a number of areas. Without us, there would never have been a ban on plastic bags in the rest of the UK. The Organ Donation (Deemed Consent) Act 2019 is another one. There are several. And it's in the UK's interest to have a devolved Government able to test out whether something is working and go that bit further. So, I completely agree with you that it needs to be sorted out. We absolutely accept the need for a governance arrangement for the market, but at the very least we have to have clarity about how you go about claiming exemptions.

Diolch, Rhys. Access to justice is fundamental to the rule of law and is, of course, largely a reserved area. I raise issues of concern in meetings with UK Government Ministers, and I'm pleased that preparatory work to bring forward a Bill to improve our own tribunals is under way.

Diolch, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, for that answer, and I know that you agree that the importance of a fair and accessible justice system cannot be overstated. However, more and more individuals are feeling that the justice system is reserved to those with the deepest pockets. In this age where individuals are feeling more and more left behind, it's so important that, in our legislative and legal systems, they feel that they can be represented in these areas, and that access to justice is maintained and protects those who have been or will be victims of injustice of any kind.

I am sure, with your previous role, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, and your current role, you're aware of the court case against those around the corner here, against Barratt Redrow plc, a firm responsible for many developments across Wales and the rest of the UK, including the Plasdŵr development here in Cardiff, which Rachel Reeves visited recently. I am sure you have been aware of the recent case involving Mr Gareth Wilson, a resident around the corner in Celestia, who's facing legal costs of over £30,000 and cannot appeal his case because he will be facing costs of over £100,000. I know you can't comment on that case, but if we put that to one side, surely that is not right—that the justice system is reserved to people with that amount of money at their disposal. What conversations are you having with the Ministry of Justice and with the legal professions to ensure that the justice system is available to all that need it? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Rhys. I very much share your concerns. I've had a number of conversations with UK Government Ministers, and those conversations have been in person and sometimes in inter-ministerial groups around—and I was very pleased to see—a movement in legal aid. It is not by any means what we want to see, but it's a start in the right direction. What we need to see is the restoration of legal aid right across the piece, and not just for criminal legal aid either, as you rightly say. I'm very concerned, for example, that people with housing disrepair in the private sector cannot get access to legal aid. That used to be something that people could access, and it was very useful, and it was withdrawn some time ago. Actually, even in criminal legal aid, people are astonished to find that they're asked to make a contribution towards defence and so on. So, I do think the system is parlous at the moment.

The other thing that's been made very plain to me by the Law Society in Wales—and I've met with them a number of times on this—is that criminal firms right across Wales are really struggling, because the amount of money they're able to make, if they do do criminal legal aid, is very small indeed, and the amount of money that you're able to earn as a fully qualified criminal lawyer is very low. People would be very surprised to find that average salaries are in the low £20,000s for fully qualified lawyers working in criminal justice. I mean, that just is simply something we cannot have carry on, so we have made representations—the Deputy First Minister and I have both made representations—about access to justice, both in terms of availability of legal aid to people in Wales—it's not devolved, but that doesn't stop us asking for the service to be reviewed for Wales, but—both in terms of access to legal aid for individuals in Wales, but, actually, really importantly, looking at the viability of legal firms across Wales. There's a virtual desert of legal advice west of Swansea, really. So, we've been looking to see what we can do with legal tech, to encourage hub-and-spoke models, to encourage surgeries out past where the firms are actually based, to encourage use of AI and other technologies, to make sure that we have access to that.

I spoke recently at a legal tech event, talking about what we can do to help firms right across Wales to access legal tech in order to be able to expand the reach of their services. I actually spoke with Lord Ponsonby and his advisers last Thursday—my time sense is terrible; very recently—and talked to the civil servant in charge of the legal tech fund about how we can access that for Wales, and I'll be making sure that the Law Society are able to access that on behalf of their members. So, there's a number of things we are doing, but, in the end, it's not a devolved area.

The last piece I wanted to mention was that my colleague Jane Hutt and I have been working very hard on making sure that the women's blueprint and diversion from the prison system works. We understand that there's a review under way of that, and we're making very sure that Wales's voice is heard in that review.

Diolch, Peredur. Rail infrastructure is not devolved to Wales, and the Oxford-Cambridge line is part of the rail network enhancements pipeline, so it's classified as an England-and-Wales project. We continue to make the case for a fair share of funding for rail infrastructure projects.

Thank you for that response.

Following on from Adam's line of questioning earlier, I just wanted to check—have I got this correct—that you're not going to challenge the decision to reclassify the East West Rail line, and therefore you are content with that decision. And even though you are content with it, have you instructed your officials to look at options of legal recourse to decisions made by the Treasury in this case, and also in the national insurance consequential situation? And do you agree with me that the Treasury acting as judge, jury and executioner in these decisions is not in the spirit of a partnership in power and that it is inherently unfair and should be reviewed and amended in line with the Holtham commission recommendations?

Well, I can start at the end and say 'yes' to that; we absolutely do think the Barnett formula should be reviewed. We've made that very plain indeed. We think there are a number of stages before you get there, but we have made that very plain. So, I can start by completely agreeing with you on that.

I'm sorry, I need to get into a bit more of the nitty-gritty about the rail funding, and it can be quite complex. So, until now, East West Rail has been identified as comparable in the statement of funding policy. The UK Government is now saying it will be delivered via the Network Rail England and Wales rail infrastructure enhancement programme, which is not comparable, and this has all emerged over the period since 2 June. We understand, following recent discussions at official level, that HM Treasury has initially identified the previous classification as a potential mistake, and they're in discussion with the Department of Transport on this matter. HMT are now considering how all of this impacts on overall comparability, but have confirmed that we have the same comparability factors as were used in the autumn budget in the spending review last week. This example perfectly illustrates what's wrong with the Barnett formula. So, going to your end question, it's a very good example of what's wrong with it, but, as I said in answer to Adam, from a legal point of view, it's very clear that heavy rail is not devolved to Wales, that it's an England and Wales, therefore, function. I don't think that it would best serve the Welsh public to spend resources on arguing with HMT about whether that's a mistake, or the classification—. I don't think that would get us anywhere. I don't think that we would have a decent legal argument to put up that it wasn't a mistake, and I think that we would ultimately fail.

Therefore, as I said in response to Adam Price, we've concentrated our efforts on making sure that the England-and-Wales pipeline has a Wales bit of it, and that that pipeline is fit for purpose. We have a three-year spending review for the pipeline now that's been announced, and we're very pleased about that, and we continue to make the case for that pipeline to be extended. We would then, eventually, be making the case that the Network Rail area should be Wales only, so that you have much more transparency in terms of the investment decisions. But, in terms of the legal case, I don't think that that legal case would be a good one, and I think we would be spending a lot of money not to get very far.

Finally, question 7, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Diolch, Andrew. I work closely with Cabinet members to ensure that the Government's priorities are being delivered in an integrated way. In South Wales Central, that means £66 million for affordable housing funding this year, a new south-east Wales metro, £1.2 billion in the Cardiff capital region city deal, and driving down waiting lists.

Thank you, Counsel General, for that response. One of the key parameters for economic success that previous Welsh Governments have highlighted that their activity has brought to South Wales Central is the Qatar Airways link from Cardiff Airport to Doha. It was my understanding that it was still a priority for this Government to secure the reinstatement of that link from Cardiff to Doha, but yet, to date, we have still not seen that airline come back to Cardiff since its suspension through COVID. Is it still, with nine months remaining of this Government's tenure before we go into dissolution, a priority for the Government to deliver that connection and bring Qatar Airways back to Cardiff Airport, and, if it is, how are you as the Minister for Delivery working with the transport Minister and the economy Minister to turn that into a reality? 

Thank you, Andrew. So, the way that my role works there is that I would be asked by two Ministers who have a cross-cutting issue to assist them to make sure that the Government works together in a harmonious fashion. Cardiff Wales Airport is a very good example of that. So, it's come to Cabinet a couple of times recently. I work very hard across the Government to make sure that both the legal advice around the support for Cardiff Wales Airport and specifics around the way that the Government puts its resources into doing that piece of work work well.

In terms of the specifics, I wouldn't have the specifics on the conversation with an individual airline. That would be a matter for the Cabinet Secretary for transport, but I'm very happy to ask him to write to you about the specifics. It wouldn't be for me to look at specifics. It would be for me to look at—. For example, if he were having those discussions and he needed information around skills or jobs or any other kind of support, then it would be my job to make sure that the Government was able to bring all that information to the table to make sure that the negotiation went well and we had a full set of things. But the very specific thing, unless I'm asked, I wouldn't know. So, I will ask the transport Secretary to write to you on that specific. I just don't have that information to hand.

I thank the Counsel General. 

Item 3 this afternoon is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd, Jane Hutt. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. There are two changes to this week's business. First, the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs will make a statement on bluetongue. Secondly, the statement on automatic voter registration has been withdrawn. Business for the next three weeks is shown on the business statement, which is available to Members electronically. 

Trefnydd, I'd like to request a statement from the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being regarding children and young people's mental health services in Wales. A local mental health charity in my constituency, called Megan's Starr Foundation, has contacted me because they have been asked to take on cases that actually belong in the hands of statutory services. They shared with me a case where they were contacted about a 16-year-old girl. The girl spent several nights in hospital following a second suicide attempt in three months. She's now experiencing terrifying psychotic symptoms, and yet child and adolescent mental health services only offered her a two-week support window and passed the girl on to Megan's Starr Foundation as a charity. Now they are concerned because this is not an appropriate or safe handover of care. It's quite clear that high-risk children are being discharged from CAMHS into the care of charities, and we must investigate why that is taking place. Therefore, I'd be grateful if we can have an urgent statement from the Welsh Government on support for mental health services so we can understand why this is happening and whether financial support could be made available to local charities and organisations who are taking on these extra responsibilities as well. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr, Paul Davies, and thank you for drawing attention to this very concerning case in your constituency. Can we recognise the really important role of those charities, national and local mental health charities? Of course, we support many of those charities with grants and support from the local councils for voluntary service. This is something that—. You've aired it today in the Chamber. It is for Hywel Dda, I think, to not only hear this particular case, but to look at this in terms of their services. And, of course, the Minister for Mental Health and Well-being, I'm sure, will also hear of this and would want to respond in terms of her vision, which is very strong and clear, for not only improving but sustaining and supporting mental health services for young people.

Trefnydd, I would like to ask for two statements, the first from the Minister for culture about an article that appeared recently on the BBC about the National Library for Wales and the fact that there are 2,200 items missing. Evidently, the response of the Government noted that it was a matter of accreditation with the National Library of Wales, but, of course, the Welsh Government does have a duty to ensure that our national institutions have sufficient resources to care for the national collections. So, I'd like to have a statement on that.

The second statement I'd like to request is regarding dentistry. As you'll be aware, there's currently a consultation taking place about the reform of NHS general dental services. It closes in three days. I've been contacted by a number of NHS dentists who have expressed deep concerns and have told me that they think this will be the end of NHS dentistry if the plans progress. Given the significance and seriousness of the concerns that have been expressed by people who've worked for decades as NHS dentists—they truly believe in the future of the service—. They've expressed concerns also that the consultation itself does not allow them to provide all the views that they'd like to express. So, I'd like to know how can we ensure that those views are conveyed and listened to by Government.

Diolch yn fawr. Heledd Fychan, and thank you for raising what was, in the public domain, of great concern—those 2,200 items missing. Those are all important to the heritage and the wonderful collections held in the National Library for Wales. And, of course, this is something that is highly regrettable. It has been brought to our attention and the audit is ongoing, but it is something I know the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership is very aware of when he also meets and engages with the national library, in terms of their responsibility and our monitoring of these situations.

In terms of your second question on dentistry, well of course this is the consultation setting out proposals for the new general dental services contract. Actually, the consultation's due to close on 19 June, imminently, and there have been a large number of responses. I think what's very clear is that, really, continuity of care by the same person is important for those with chronic disease, and, relating to those units of dental activity, the relationship between the patient and clinician is considered over once a course of treatment has been provided. These are issues that are obviously clearly being considered in terms of the contract. I think this really moves to the NICE guidelines as well, which have been in place since 2004. We want to see that guidance implemented to its fullest, so that we can create capacity for those with active disease, because they recommended longer intervals in terms of individual needs of the patient, and it's important that this proposal does not affect children.

I'd like to ask for two statements today. The UK Government has announced that it has launched a consultation on the regulation of the debt enforcement sector. This is something I really welcome, and I'm sure many of the Members will have experienced the distress sometimes caused by bailiffs to our constituents. So, the regulation, I am very supportive of. There hasn't been sufficient regulation of this sector, so could I ask for a statement on how the Welsh Government will be participating in the consultation process and what implications it will have in Wales?

Secondly, I wanted to raise again the issue of bank closures in this Chamber, because last week I got notification that the NatWest bank in Llanishen, in my constituency of Cardiff North, is to close in September, and this is the last bank branch in Cardiff North. We do know that many people do suffer when a bank branch closes, particularly the elderly and the vulnerable, and every time a branch has closed I've protested, along with the other local politicians in the area, and pleaded, but it's never had any result. So, I wondered if there could be a statement on what the Government could try to do to help in these positions and to engage further with banks to see if there can be some solution.

Thank you very much, Julie Morgan. I welcome that announcement last week that the UK Government recognises that we need to have enforcement. Of course, the Enforcement Conduct Board was set up in 2022, which was very welcome, but it was a voluntary accreditation scheme, so I very much agree that the only way this can be enforced, and to ensure that it is enforced, is to have independent statutory regulation of the debt enforcement sector in England and Wales. I know the Enforcement Conduct Board have met with Senedd Members here today, and we've welcomed the fact that all our local authorities, in fact, have signed up to the enforcement code of conduct and also implemented the council tax protocol in 2019. That was a really important step change in the culture of council tax enforcement in Wales, where we know the use of bailiffs has often caused concerns. So, I think the fact that the UK Government is now going to move to statutory underpinning of the debt enforcement sector is very welcome. Of course, there is consultation on this, and I'm sure that particularly our advice sector will respond, but we will be responding, because it's about consultation on the role of an independent statutory regulator, how it will be funded and how it will be held accountable to Parliament. I hope that across the Chamber we will welcome this and respond.

It's very concerning to hear that you're likely to be left and will be left in Cardiff North with no bank branches, with the recent announcement that NatWest are going to close their Llanishen branch in the latest wave of closures between September and February. And this is something that, across this Chamber, we have had so many examples of bank closures of this kind. I mean, we are looking at what banks should be doing. The decision to leave loyal customers—individuals and businesses—without access to branch face-to-face banking services is deeply regrettable, and I'm sure, again, that point is shared and that concern is shared across the Chamber. Regulation, of course, of banking is not devolved. There are opportunities to develop banking hubs, and some of you may have them in your constituencies, and that's something where I would urge you to engage with LINK, the cash point operator, which has a cash-access review service, and that can lead to recommendations for a banking hub. But I think the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning and myself will take this up with the UK Government as well, because this is regulated by the UK Government, and banks are closing and it is resulting in no bank branches in your constituency and many others.

Trefnydd, can I call for an oral or written statement from the Deputy First Minister, please, with regard to the alarming rise in rural crime in Wales? NFU Mutual figures show rural crime surged by 18 per cent in 2024, reaching £2.8 million, the highest in over a decade, with Wales the only UK nation to see such an increase. Organised gangs are using drones to target multiple farms in a single night, stealing all-terrain vehicles, global positioning systems and livestock, leaving farmers not just out of pocket, but fearful in their own homes. While I commend the effort of Welsh police forces and the Welsh Government-funded wildlife and rural crime co-ordinator, Rob Taylor, it is clear that more needs to be done; we need a co-ordinated Government approach to reverse this trend and support the victims of crime too. Understanding the relationship between reserved and devolved responsibilities, can I ask that you speak to the Deputy First Minister to ask that he sets out what further action the Welsh Government can take to safeguard rural communities in Wales?

Diolch yn fawr, Sam Kurtz, and thank you for raising these concerns about rural crime. The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs has heard your call, and he is happy to provide an update and statement on this. This is something also that I would say is my responsibility, linking to policing in our policing partnership board for Wales, which I chair, and engaging with police and crime commissioners across Wales. In fact, Dafydd Llywelyn is the lead police and crime commissioner for our PCCs in Wales, and I will put this on the agenda for my next meeting with him.

Firstly, I'd like to ask for a statement, please, from the First Minister on whether the Ministry of Defence are using any Welsh military bases or premises to train Israeli army personnel, and if that is the case, whether she will be raising that with the MOD and objecting to it on the basis that Wales has a statutory duty to be a globally responsible nation, and this is in breach of the International Court of Justice ruling on Israel's illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories.

I would also like assurances from her that Wales is not supporting the continuing genocide of the Palestinian people, by ensuring that no Welsh Government activities, partnerships and procurement practices for companies or activities are implicated in any unlawful occupation or military action by Israel.

Secondly, could I ask why the statement today by the Cabinet Secretary on local government and housing has been withdrawn? Will automatic registration be introduced by the 2026 Senedd election? Because we've had conflicting statements recently by Ministers on this, so I would like clarity on that, please.

Thank you very much, Sioned Williams, and thank you for raising that question for the First Minister. I will ensure that we get a response to that in terms of your first point, and also to say that you will be aware, of course, that the First Minister, in her role as leader of Welsh Labour, issued a public call on Saturday for peace in Gaza and an end to the suffering of innocent Palestinians, but as First Minister as well, she did join other leaders in making a statement and writing on this point.

I think this is something where we all join together in our huge concern about the ongoing conflict and humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and the current method of distributing aid, which is not distribution; it's using food as a weapon. Of course, I have issued a written statement calling for a lift on the aid blockade in Gaza and have stated that humanitarian aid should never be used as a political tool. We join the UK Government in calling for Israel to respect international law and allow the UN and other agencies to deliver life-saving aid to those in Gaza who so desperately need it. I also look forward to meeting next week with representatives of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. Julie Morgan is hosting meetings, I know, for all Senedd Members, and I know that the First Minister and myself will also be meeting with them. Hopefully, then, we can comment more on what we've learnt from that meeting.

On your second point, yes, the statement on automatic registration has been deferred. It's not been cancelled; it's been deferred. It's being rescheduled. Also, UK Government are working on automatic registration as well. But I will ask the Cabinet Secretary to—. We can make sure that we get it into the timeline in terms of the business statement.

Good afternoon, Trefnydd. Following on from what Sioned has just said, I'd also like to call for a statement from the First Minister, stating very clearly that this Welsh Parliament wants a stop to all of the arms going to Israel. It's really not enough to say that we all want peace. It really isn't. We need to really be clear and without any situation of misleading or having any doubt at all, this Welsh Parliament wants a stop to the arms going to Israel. So, I'd like you to really answer that question, please. Is this something you would support? That is a call from the Welsh Government to stop arms going to Israel.

Secondly, I just would like to ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Education concerning the campus at Gelli Aur, an amazing place that I visited two weeks ago. They're developing an academy there, a green skills academy, that will equip us for the future. So, I'd like to make sure that the funding to Gelli Aur continues. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr, Jane Dodds, and thank you again. It is important that we have these strong statements made by Senedd Members to stop arms to Israel, and that the Welsh Parliament expresses a view on that. Of course, that will be taken back in terms of not just the First Minister's response, as I was asked for earlier on, but also to look at this in terms of what is happening. I hope I can report back on that, again, in terms of the arrangements and the situation where we want to, as you say, Jane, be very clear about how we stop the war, how we stop the humanitarian disaster that is so cruelly affecting Palestinians in Gaza. Stopping arms is crucial to that, as well as, obviously—. Within international law, we have to recognise this call today.

On your second point, it is very welcome to see the fact that there's a really great partnership providing funding and support to Coleg Sir Gâr to set up their green skills academy. Of course, it was supported through the shared prosperity fund in 2023-25, generating awareness across the different age groups of the green skills route. During the project, young people were surveyed to understand their needs and awareness of green skills opportunities. I understand that Green 24 will specifically focus on the need for net-zero training and awareness in the public sector, and also that the green skills academy occupational qualifications and personal learning accounts are all managed within the funding budget by further education institutions and Medr.

Trefnydd, as you may be aware, there's been an aqua park in operation in Cardiff Bay for the past five years, but due to public health concerns over water quality, it can no longer operate. As a Vale representative, you have no doubt seen the headlines in that the Vale of Glamorgan Council has offered Cosmeston Lakes Country Park as an alternative location, a decision that has angered many residents.

As you will know, Cosmeston lakes is a designated nature conservation area and a cherished green space, valued for its tranquility and suitability for peaceful recreation. There are serious concerns an aqua park would not only attract large numbers of visitors, overwhelming the site's limited capacity, but also overwhelm the primarily residential road infrastructure.

However, the most pressing concerns relate to the potential impact on local wildlife. The lakes are home to nesting birds and water voles, both of which are highly sensitive to increased noise and human activity, and there's a real fear that the presence of the aqua park could jeopardise these vulnerable species. Protesters have also highlighted that signage around the lakes clearly—

Joel, you need to ask your question now, please.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. But I must protest here: if we actually had succinct answers from the Trefnydd, we wouldn't be here, running out of time.

You're being asked to ask your question within the time limit. You haven't yet even asked a question or requested a statement in that time limit. Please do so.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. Anyway, you know the concerns here. There are signs all around the lakes banning swimming due to the industrial legacy of the lakes. Can we have a statement on what the Welsh Government is doing to give people genuine powers to oppose these developments? Thank you.

Thank you for your question, Joel James. This is, of course, a matter for the Vale of Glamorgan Council.

Can I ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care on the Welsh Government's plans to improve the quality of care for patients suffering from PoTS, or postural tachycardia syndrome, in Wales? I'm very pleased to welcome to the Senedd today Siân Griffiths, who is a constituent of mine, and members of the PoTS UK team, who have been having discussions with Members about the importance of raising awareness of the condition, encouraging anyone who is suffering to reach out for support.

The figures are truly striking. Ninety-one per cent of those suffering from the condition in Wales are having trouble accessing care, and the impact that that has on the ability to go to work or school truly is serious. We need a clear care pathway for those suffering. Therefore, could I ask for that statement from the Cabinet Secretary to outline how the Welsh Government intends to improve the support available for those experiencing PoTS, so that the impact on their day-to-day lives is limited as much as possible?

Diolch yn fawr. Thank you very much, Rhun ap Iorwerth, for drawing this to our attention, and, obviously, having had discussions with your constituent, who is also with us today, and understanding—. We always understand from patients themselves what it is like to live with these very troubling conditions. Of course, it is of concern in terms of access to care, where a care pathway will of course help improve that access. So, certainly, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is here in the Chamber, and will look to that in terms of where it could fit in, in terms of a care pathway, to ensure we get the best treatment and support for this condition.

I'd like to request a statement, if I may, from the Welsh Government about bus stops. Sadly, when I travel around my region, it's clear that we need a greater focus on our bus stops. Many of them are simply not viable. They're in a state of disrepair, they're dangerous, and they're unsafe. There's one stop in Trellech in Monmouthshire where people get off the bus directly into a hedge. I was only talking to Mencap this lunchtime about unsuitable bus stops for those with disabilities, particularly in rural areas like Monmouthshire. I would like to request a statement from the Welsh Government about how they are working with local authorities to ensure bus stops, with some degree of urgency, are revamped, so there is availability for access for all, and disabilities are taken into account, and, most importantly, that they're made safe. We can't wait until a bus Bill potentially comes about in a few years' time. This stuff needs to happen now. Diolch.

Diolch yn fawr, Laura Anne Jones. I have to say again that this is a matter for local government, for local authorities, in terms of the provision of bus stops. But of course, I know that there will be design standards and guidance on that provision. Of course, we do look towards local authorities responding to our disabled people's rights plan, which has a whole section on accessibility to transport. So, I am sure that they will be seeing and hearing your point today, and this, hopefully, will be part of their response to more accessible transport and access to transport.

May I ask for an assessment and a written statement, please, from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government on the Dwyfor pilot scheme? There is concern on the ground that the pilot scheme doesn't have sufficient teeth and that there's been some slacking and that the funding allocated for the programme hasn't been spent in full. We need to see the outcomes of this pilot scheme in order to assess what's been successful and what needs to be strengthened. So, can we have a statement setting out an assessment of the Dwyfor pilot scheme, please?

Diolch yn fawr, Mabon ap Gwynfor. I will ask the Cabinet Secretary to respond to this. Indeed, it is something that I think would be very suitable for her oral Senedd questions.

Could I seek two statements, please, leader of the house? One is in relation to the road from Sycamore Cross to the Miskin junction of the M4, which I'm sure you're familiar with. It was a Welsh Government priority to build a new road linking those two points. That was dropped by the Welsh Government. It was a severely overengineered proposal that would have decimated the countryside. But instead of coming back with a revised proposal, the Welsh Government has left this critical piece of infrastructure to its own devices. Many obstacles now prevent traffic flowing along that road. Only today, I had a constituent highlight how an articulated lorry caused a blockage there for several hours, and there is real risk for emergency vehicles accessing the village of Pendoylan. So, we need a statement from the Welsh Government to understand if they will be bringing forward any new proposals to work with the Vale council to improve that bit of infrastructure and create greater passing places to allow traffic to flow.

The second statement I would like to see from the Welsh Government is from your good self as Minister for Social Justice on the way that council leaders conduct themselves. Because the Vale of Glamorgan Council leader, in relation to the issue that Joel James raised about Cosmeston lakes, has engaged with protesters and people who have genuine concerns there by saying that their concerns are 'malicious tripe', 'rubbish' and 'disinformation'—all language that shouldn't be used when engaging with people who have genuine concerns about the environment that they call home and they live next door to and a park that is held and cherished by many residents. Surely that is not the level of engagement that you would expect from a senior local elected politician. In your role as social justice Minister, who deals with these matters, surely you would want to set a higher standard for engagement for elected members when they engage with concerned residents.

Thank you for those two questions, Andrew R.T. Davies. Yes, I'm very familiar with the link between Sycamore Cross, Five Mile Lane, the A48 and the M4. I'm very mindful of the extensive consultation that took place, as you will recall, when more than one proposal came forward to create that link. It is something that there was extensive consultation on. I have to say there was huge opposition to the creation of a new road through that rural area. But again, this is something that, in terms of the use of that link to the M4, I know is well used. That is a matter for the local authority in terms of their management of that road.

I have nothing more to say on your second point. We must remember that this is about locally elected people and their roles in local government. Decisions are made, and obviously this was as a result of consultation and engagement.

Finally, Gareth Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Last week, Denbighshire residents heard the disappointing news that not a single road in the county will be reverted back to 30 mph from 20 mph following the Welsh Government's review last year. Denbighshire County Council have made this decision despite strong public feeling that a considerable number of roads should be reverted back to 30 mph, and despite many roads meeting the criteria in the Welsh Government's guidance for reversion back to 30 mph. Many local residents are understandably bemused by this decision and have contacted me to ask what's going on.

I'd be grateful for an update from the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales on how the Welsh Government is working collaboratively with Denbighshire County Council to ensure they are following guidance carefully, and whether the Welsh Government will review the council's determinations on each road and check whether the Welsh Government agrees that they have been compliant. Because we've got to remember that just 0.6 per cent of roads in Denbighshire are currently exempt, which is one of the lowest rates in the whole of Wales, and this is a direct consequence of your Government's decision to bring in the default 20 mph zone.

I sent a letter from constituents to DCC nearly two years ago, with a list of exemptions that I drew up with constituents. It's wrong that the council are making these decisions. So, I'm asking what direct responsibility the Welsh Government can exercise with the local authority to make sure that exemptions can be drawn up in the right and proper way for my constituents in the Vale of Clwyd. 

Thank you, Gareth Davies. There is nothing that's been brought to my attention this afternoon that is anything but the decision of a locally and democratically elected council making decisions based on the guidance that has been provided by the Welsh Government.

I thank the Trefnydd.  

Item 4 this afternoon is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice: the tenth anniversary of the Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Jane Hutt.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. Ten years ago, the people of Wales embarked on an extraordinary journey. Through a national conversation in 2014, we collectively answered a profound question: 'What kind of Wales do you want to leave for your children and grandchildren?' Their voices became the foundation of the groundbreaking Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and today I'm proud to celebrate the tenth anniversary of this pioneering legislation by showcasing how our chosen path has driven sustainable development throughout Wales. Over the past decade, the Act has fundamentally transformed how Wales's public sector prioritises the well-being of both people and planet. This anniversary provides us with a valuable opportunity to assess our achievements and chart our course forward.

The Act has revolutionised our approach within the Welsh Government, particularly through our procurement practices. The socially responsible procurement duty now requires authorities to deliver the four pillars of sustainability—economic, environmental, social, and cultural well-being—through all procurement activities. This transformation ensures that public sector procurement becomes one of our most powerful tools for building a more equal, sustainable, and prosperous Wales.  

Our continuous learning and improvement plan demonstrates how the sustainable development principle has become embedded in the development of key policies, like 'Llwybr Newydd'. This ambitious transport strategy centres around well-being ambitions, illustrating how transport can contribute to our well-being goals, through active travel promotion, decarbonisation efforts, and accessible transport solutions. The Act has been instrumental in Wales achieving second place globally for high-quality recycling, significantly contributing to our circular economy. This environmental success has delivered substantial economic and social benefits, while creating a more resilient, prosperous and globally responsible Wales. Our achievements have attracted major inward investment, including new UK-scale recycling facilities that have created hundreds of green jobs in Gorseinon and Shotton.

Beyond the Welsh Government, the Act plays an integral role in improving Wales's well-being through our public body partners. Last year, we extended the Act to include eight additional public bodies, bringing our total to 56. This expansion has broadened the scope of Wales's sustainable development agenda, with these organisations enthusiastically embracing and embedding sustainable development into their operations. Transport for Wales, one of our newest regulated bodies, exemplifies this commitment. In April, they published their first well-being objectives, ensuring their decision making benefits people, communities, the environment, local economies, and Welsh language and culture.

Guided by the Welsh Government's fair work principles, they became a real living wage employer, guaranteeing fair wages that enhance financial security, reduce inequality, and support local economies. Transport for Wales's community investment initiatives have been particularly impressive, investing in 44 sustainable impact projects and 22 legacy projects through collaboration with 54 partners, including charities, social enterprises and voluntary organisations. Over four years, this work has generated an indicative social impact return of £7.6 million, creating green spaces, reducing social isolation, fostering volunteering opportunities, and promoting cultural projects that celebrate Welsh heritage. 

The Act's impact extends beyond formally regulated bodies. In this week alone, Medr announced their accreditation for paying their workers the real living wage. They join a growing band of real living wage employers in Wales. In the private sector, major companies including Bluestone, Dŵr Cymru, the Principality and the Football Association of Wales are aligning their corporate strategies with the Act's principles.

The Act has garnered international recognition as a showcase for well-being policy. In 2024 it received the prestigious World Future Policy Award from the World Future Council, recognised as a leading example of future generations policy influencing countries worldwide. In 2025 Welsh Government, as a member of the Wellbeing Economy Governments initiative, was honoured with the well-being award for making meaningful and effective contributions to well-being in communities globally through the Act.

I want to highlight how the Act is transforming local well-being in every Welsh community through our public services boards. These boards unite committed local public service leaders to assess and address their areas' well-being within our well-being goals framework. In their well-being plan, Gwent PSB committed to becoming a Marmot region, using collaborative, evidence-based action to reduce inequalities. This initiative is accelerating progress toward addressing the root causes of health and related inequalities across Gwent. Following the successful pilot in Gwent, I am pleased that yesterday we announced that Wales will become the world’s first Marmot nation, ensuring we have a healthier Wales. North Wales PSB members established the north Wales research and insight partnership, bringing together public, private and voluntary sector representatives to drive collective action. Through this collaboration, they've built trust, integrated objectives and developed joint projects like the innovative children's university.

Dirprwy Lywydd, while we may not fully understand the Act's long-term impact for years to come, we already see transformative changes in how Wales approaches sustainable development. The Act positions citizen well-being as the primary driver of change throughout Wales. This community-level transformation was beautifully demonstrated during the Prif Weinidog's recent visit with the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales to Star of the Sea, a local arts and music venue in Borth. There they learned how the venue installed solar panels with Welsh Government energy service support, to supply electricity to the local GP surgery and powering the local chapel. This project embodies the Act's essence by addressing multiple well-being goals simultaneously. The benefits extend far beyond carbon reduction and financial savings, demonstrating how local energy schemes can utilise the values of sustainable development to create positive change. It represents a truly collaborative, long-term approach where communities connect climate action with vibrant culture and improved health outcomes.

Finally, 2025 marks the year we light up the future and renew our decade-old promise to future generations. By continuing to implement the Act and drive progress towards our well-being goals, we remain committed to delivering for everyone in Wales—for people, for the planet, for now and for the future. Across every Welsh community, local leaders are using the Act to benefit their communities and secure better lives for future generations. This collective effort ensures that our pioneering legislation continues to create meaningful, lasting change that will resonate for generations to come.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. Ten years ago, we were promised that the landmark well-being of future generations Act would help to transform our society and secure a better future for Wales's young people, but that was a fantasy. We now know, thanks to the Wales Audit Office, that the Act is not driving system-wide change, which is its entire purpose. The auditor general pointed to failures in the Act's implementation by the public sector. Some public bodies, despite having well-being objectives, did not link them to their daily operations or delivery and do not actually monitor them. This means that numerous public bodies in Wales's well-being objectives are not offering any meaningful direction whatsoever. Despite these findings, the future generations commissioner has made repeated claims about the Act's success and that of his office. Apparently the Act is responsible for greener transport and the new curriculum, which should come as a great surprise to many of your Cabinet colleagues. In fact, there is no compelling case that any of the successes listed by the commissioner were as a consequence of the Act or the commissioner, and it is very likely that they all would have happened regardless.

Cabinet Secretary, in your statement, you pointed to the world-leading recycling rates, but is it not the case that these would have happened regardless, that Wales was already on track, because of policy decisions that had nothing to do with the Act? The auditor general has repeatedly called for Welsh Government to evaluate the Act. Five years ago, he called for a review of the Act to explore how barriers to implementation could be overcome and how Wales could remain at the forefront of actions to improve well-being, but no such review has yet taken place. Now, here we are at the tenth anniversary of the Act and Audit Wales is asking for a review, yet you have not announced one. Cabinet Secretary, in your statement, you state that we may not fully understand the Act’s long-term impact for years to come. Isn’t it time we found out? Will you now order a review of the Act’s implementation and the effectiveness of the commissioner’s office?

Cabinet Secretary, how do you respond to those who say that the Welsh Government is great at creating plans and strategies, but useless when it comes to delivering real improvements to people’s lives? If you are truly committed to improving the well-being of future generations, will you now undertake a thorough review of the Act and ensure that it is focused on outcomes? Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch yn fawr, Altaf Hussain. I’m disappointed, really, in your questions today. I don’t think they reflect the positive report that I have made in my statement today in terms of the engagement of those 56 bodies who are engaging fully in delivering on the well-being of future generations legislation. It is disappointing, I have to say, and I don’t often say that to you, Altaf Hussain, and I hope that there will be some more positive responses, indeed, from your party in terms of the importance of the Act, which, of course, now marks its tenth anniversary.

I have led Welsh Government’s national plan to highlight the benefits of the Act and to enable Welsh Government and others to recommit to the Act, so today is an opportunity, isn’t it, for ourselves and public bodies to recommit to the Act. And part of that plan is to create an oral history project to capture and project stories about not only the creation and implementation of the Act, but capturing individual reflections on the difference the Act has made in real examples. We worked with the Open University and the future generations commissioner’s office to develop a now publicly available e-learning package, called ‘You, me and the future of Wales’, and we have delivered that national day of action to focus attention on the Act across and outside of Wales, called ‘Light up the future’, which I have already mentioned. And, of course, it is important that the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales and the Auditor General for Wales, at their action summit on the twenty-ninth, were engaging with public sector leaders, witnessing the dedication and thoroughness with which they deliver their well-being plans.

Of course, this is about how we can ensure that we work through our five ways of working, how we collaborate between the Welsh Government, the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales and all those bodies who engage with this. And, of course, we are looking at ways in which we can understand how we can continue to implement the well-being of future generations Act, and I look forward to the work that’s going to be undertaken by the Equality and Social Justice Committee, which is also looking at post-legislative consideration of the Act.

I do think it is important that—I’ve mentioned many of the areas driven by the Act in my statement—within Welsh Government the Act is shaping the way we develop and implement policies, the five ways of working, ensuring that our policies are delivered in a collaborative, long-term manner. And I’d also like to say that it has impacted on every area of Government, from free school meals, the young person's guarantee, homelessness prevention and child poverty to the national forest. Let's remember that the Act is more than just legislation; it's a framework for a different, more innovative way of working. And I'm pleased that the Act is influencing the way that those outside of Government are working, including those in the third and private sectors, as I have identified.

Thank you for the statement, Minister. As a member of the Senedd's Equality and Social Justice Committee, I will be able to scrutinise the Government's response to the report of the commissioner in more detail than the very little time we have had to do so today, and to make comments on the tenth anniversary of the Act. We, as a committee, will start that post-legislative scrutiny in the next few months. It's work that's much needed, I think, especially in the wake of the Government's failure to review the legislation in accordance with the calls of the auditor general and the committees of this Senedd for many years. So, the discussion stemming from that will be extremely important and will need to be considered as a matter of urgency by the Welsh Government.

Plaid Cymru has always supported the ambitions and aims of the well-being of future generations Act. The Act offers a bold and hopeful vision for Wales, rooted in sustainability, equality and the ethos of preventing the negative and harmful effects of policies on our nation. But 10 years since it set this admirable and important goal in such an innovative way, it appears that the Welsh Government has not succeeded in achieving that adequately, and there is evidence for that that is very clear, as is the consensus supporting that position.

The latest report on well-being in Wales, for example, paints a worrying picture: life expectancy for women is falling; behaviours that contribute to a healthy lifestyle have decreased; the ethnicity pay gap has increased tenfold since 2019; the disability pay gap, as we heard, of course, in detail in the recent report by the Equality and Social Justice Committee, is far too large in Wales—the biggest gap of all the countries of the UK; the well-being and mental health of children is deteriorating; the number of Welsh speakers has decreased; and our biodiversity has not improved for over a decade. All of these facts about the state of our nation are a blow to the core aims of the Act. So, despite the guidance of the Act, it's clear that the Government's focus has not changed sufficiently to ensure that these core goals steer its work, and perhaps are being seen by the citizens of Wales to be steering its work.

'An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure',

so goes the old saying. And with Welsh public bodies languishing amid a lack of adequate funding, the preventative focus has never been more vital. The lack of progress on child poverty, which was underlined again recently in a report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, and the harmful impact of child poverty on all aspects of children's lives, which was illustrated so powerfully by Save the Children Cymru's 'Power of Voice' research last week, are proof of the fact that the preventive focus is inadequate. So, what new action is the Welsh Government taking in terms of its own policy decisions and in working together with the Westminster Labour Government to ensure that the aims of the Act are not undermined in future, particularly in terms of preventing child poverty?

Do you agree with the commissioner that the economic strategy of the UK Labour Government, in focusing only on growth, is putting well-being at risk? If so, how will the Welsh Government ensure that its economic plans do achieve Wales's well-being goals? Bearing in mind the huge investment in weapons, how will you ensure that you are in keeping with the duty to be a globally responsible nation? 

The commissioner also refers to the decline of trust in our public institutions, emphasising the need to ensure that people's voices are heard. Could you provide examples, therefore, of plans that are in place to support democracy and opportunities for people to contribute or have their say? When, for example, will we be assured that the automatic registration of Welsh voters—something that will increase participation in our elections—will come into force?

And finally, what, in your opinion, would be the nature of the most effective change to the Act in order to ensure that it is more effective in giving direction to its own policies, and also in terms of the public bodies that are meant to implement the Act? Plaid Cymru believes in the values of this legislation, but values are not enough. It's clear that we need to see more leadership from the Government as a result of the Act. Do you agree, therefore, that this means strengthening the Act, giving the commissioner appropriate enforcement powers, and putting communities at the heart of decision making in a more meaningful way, for example, by securing the right to buy community assets? Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr, Sioned Williams, and thank you for those important and searching questions about the well-being of future generations Act, our tenth anniversary. I think it is helpful to look at the report—the report from the future generations commissioner, the 'Future Generations Report 2025', and, indeed, the Auditor General for Wales's report, 'No time to lose: Lessons from our work under the Well-being of Future Generations Act'. This is, of course, what we're scrutinising and considering today, lessons from our work under the well-being of future generations Act. And I welcome those reports. They're crucial to helping us understand and bodies under the Act understanding how they can be held to account, how they can continue to deliver on the well-being goals.

I was very taken—I think we all were—by the future generations commissioner's report and the way he has focused on 'Cymru Can', those missions, where we see the findings and the assessments that he's making in those areas. On the day that the reports were published, I wrote to both Derek Walker, the future generations commissioner, and Adrian Crompton, to thank them for their reports, and, of course, laid a written statement. We will be responding to the 50 recommendations within the 'Future Generations Report 2025' by the end of October.

We recognise, in terms of the 56 public bodies in Wales who are subject to the duties of the Act, that these bodies themselves, including local authorities, health boards, the national museum and library, our national park authorities, are themselves looking at the impact of the Act on the delivery of sustainability through their well-being objectives. I've touched on Transport for Wales and numerous other examples, public bodies, such as the exemplar decarbonisation work happening at the National Library of Wales in Aberystwyth. There's a landscape and environment for assessment and reporting of well-being for public bodies. It has changed over the last 10 years, and we're working to respond to the recommendations within your report.

I look forward to engaging with the Equality and Social Justice Committee inquiry into post-legislative evaluation of the well-being of future generations Act. Indeed, I wrote to the Chair of the committee to welcome the inquiry. As part of the preparations for future evaluation of the Act, an Economic and Social Research Council policy fellow joined our sustainable futures division in Welsh Government to design an evaluation of the Act, to deliver the first stage of what is likely to be a multi-year evaluation. This will, of course, in terms of the report of the work that will come forward, and the inquiry report, the report from the committee, help inform and shape the design of any future evaluation of the Act.

I have given a number of examples of the impact of the Act, with public body case studies—I've used Transport for Wales. But I would like to just return briefly to those public services boards that have really driven this forward. I've mentioned Gwent PSB agreeing to become a Marmot region, and it's interesting how those principles very much link to the well-being of future generations legislation. The principles provide a framework to inform the actions to respond to the challenges faced across Gwent. Many of the challenges that you have expressed, the challenges that we do face as a nation, will be addressed as well, as Wales becomes a Marmot nation, but they're very much linked to refocusing and accelerating progress, looking at reducing the root causes of health and related inequalities, and this will help Gwent PSB deliver their wider well-being plan.

I just want to quickly also acknowledge the great work that’s being delivered by Carmarthenshire County Council—Pentre Awel, an innovative £87 million development delivered by Carmarthenshire. You will be aware of that, and I’m sure many in that region—the 83 acre site at Delta Lakes, and a really great, collaborative scheme, which will create over 1,800 jobs, apprenticeship opportunities and boost the local economy. It’s a partnership led by the community, the county council, Hywel Dda University Health Board, universities and colleges, and part funded by the Swansea bay city deal. I also think we have got real opportunities in terms of the way forward as we have this post-legislative evaluation, this work that is being undertaken by this research fellow, and the response to the reports from the commissioner and, indeed, the auditor general.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement today.

Thank you very much for your statement. It is an important milestone, I think, the tenth anniversary of the future generations Act here in Wales, and it has had international recognition in terms of its importance and value, which is very good to see. One of the aspects that I think clearly illustrates the approach that the Act requires and the benefits that it can deliver, Cabinet Secretary, is around the preventative health agenda, because I think we're all aware that physical activity, for example, is very beneficial in terms of health and well-being—it's important in terms of the long term, it's very important in terms of prevention—and also joining up the health and well-being sectors with grass-roots sport and the key deliverers of sport and physical activity. So, I just wonder if you would agree, Cabinet Secretary, that perhaps one important focus around health and well-being would be to try and achieve greater integration and joining up between those two sectors: health and well-being, and our sports and physical activity sectors in Wales.

Diolch yn fawr, John Griffiths. Well, of course this is all about the five principles, the five ways of working, joined-up government, linking in terms of prevention, early intervention and engagement. I think the fact that we're now moving to be a Marmot nation will help us take this forward. I think it is important. You mentioned the fact that the well-being of future generations Act is being perceived internationally, that the Act has influenced the UN declaration on future generations, and, most recently, the EU has appointed a Commissioner for Intergenerational Fairness, Youth, Culture and Sport. That commissioner is taking a keen interest in the Act, and has met with us recently to discuss how it works.

I think it is important to look also at the fact that we do have clear milestones, which are very relevant to addressing these issues. It is, for example, looking just at one or two of those national milestones, which we consulted on, to increase the percentage of adults with two or more healthy lifestyle behaviours to more than 97 per cent by 2050, and to increase the percentage of children with two or more healthy behaviours to 94 per cent by 2035 and more than 99 per cent by 2050. We have those milestones. We have our ‘Future Trends’ report, identifying ways in which we can support decision makers to think about the long term, to understand those factors, and of course joining up health and well-being with all the responsibilities that we have, not just in terms of Welsh Government, but all those public bodies who have responsibilities under the Act, makes that health and well-being link so clear.

I was actually really excited when this Act came into being, and more so the fact that we had a Future Generations Commissioner for Wales. We had Sophie Howe at the time, and I have to say, very, very productive during that time. I believe that she was really proactive.

However, we are now 10 years down the road. I would like to endorse everything my colleague Altaf Hussain has said. The whole point, I believe, is there should be a review of this Act, but also of the role of the commissioner. We still have this situation, and its own 'Wellbeing of Wales' report announced, that employment rates in Wales remain lower for women, at 70 per cent, than men, at 76 per cent, the percentage of households successfully prevented and relieved from homelessness has fallen, whilst the numbers of individuals in temporary accommodation have increased. Life satisfaction and anxiety levels for adults have deteriorated compared to the previous year. 

I believe this is strong evidence that Welsh Government are not making strong enough progress against the seven national well-being goals, which were fundamentally set out in the future generations Act. Instead, the Welsh people are facing inequality and that gap is widening. What greater evidence do you need to show that the Welsh Government and the future generations commissioner are failing in their obligations? 

I take it that that's your question. 

There was a budget of one—

Was that the question? 

No, I'm coming to it now. 

Now, please, because you've gone way past your time. 

One million, six hundred and eighty thousand pounds going forward: I believe this money would be better spent on our health inadequacies, and I believe that the role of a Future Generations Commissioner for Wales should be reviewed and perhaps stopped altogether. Thank you.

A very disappointing, again, contribution from the Welsh Conservatives, from Janet Finch-Saunders. I think you have to look at the context in which we've been seeking to influence and improve the outcomes and the well-being of Wales as a result of 14 years of austerity, which has had such a harmful impact on our community health and well-being.

I do think it is important just to recognise that we are assessing our progress towards our 50 national indicators and well-being milestones. We publish our assessments in our 'Wellbeing of Wales' report. I hope you have read the recent report, published in September 2024, the first since we changed the definition of prosperous Wales goals to include fair work, as we recognise that importance. Of course, the 2024 report shows we're making progress in some of the areas that you're very concerned about, I know, Janet, towards well-being goals, for example, on air quality. I'm sure that you welcome that. But we have to recognise that some indicators aren't moving in the right way, and we continue to improve their progress towards the well-being goals.

I'm sure that you will also recognise the fact that we have great benefits as a result of the ways of working case study of GwyrddNi, empowering communities in Gwynedd, which I'm sure you'll be interested in. GwyrddNi spent two years involving 500 people from across Gwynedd in community climate change assemblies and workshops. They included 650 schoolchildren, co-creating community action plans. I don't know if you're aware of that, Janet Finch-Saunders, but, from those plans, stronger community connections and individual benefits emerged, and all sorts of outcomes as a result. The future generations commissioner himself has had many case studies of that kind. I know that you will be recognising the fact that Wales has been so successful in terms of the circular economy. Let's face it—sustainable development, despite all the challenges of the last 14 years of austerity, has been at the heart of—[Interruption.] Sustainable development has been at the heart of Wales's success on a circular economy. I know you welcome that, Janet.

Trefnydd, I welcome the opportunity for us to discuss this today. It's an Act that I welcome. Certainly, it's captured the imagination of communities across Wales, but I share the frustrations outlined by my colleague Sioned Williams just in terms of the fact that it doesn't have the capacity to really do what it needs to do when it comes to issues like planning, in particular. There have been examples where planning committees, such as on Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council, have turned down applications based on the Act. But then, when it comes to appeals, that then changes because the economic value of something like minerals outweighs the impact on health.

So, can I ask: what further would you like to see, as a Welsh Government, change in order for the Act to be meaningful for communities, because my fear is that they're losing faith in it? They understand it, they're excited by it, but they don't see that it actually changes things and that they are listened to when it comes to big decisions that impact future generations.

Thank you, Heledd Fychan. Well, I think it is important that we now look to the evaluation that I've outlined today, and also to the work that's going to be undertaken by the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and look at the Auditor General for Wales's report as well. I will be responding to that. I've given many examples and I won't repeat them today in terms of the impact of the five ways of working, looking towards the well-being goals that we seek, using the milestones and the national indicators.

But I think it is important just to remember what this Act is about: it's about using a broad definition for sustainable development. And we're the only country, nation, that is doing this, in this way, to improve social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being by acting in accordance with the sustainable development principle. People and organisations have embraced it, and we need to look at that overarching aim of the Act in terms of current and future generations, to ensure that we have intergenerational justice at the centre of this legislation.

I'm very pleased that we're having this debate here today about the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the future generations Act. I believe we have led the world in the creation of this Act, and it is a prime example of our commitment to create a Wales that is sustainable for our future generations. I believe it does have the framework to provide a driving force to work in a more ambitious way. The Cabinet Secretary referred to the conversation that started it, and I can well remember that, and the excitement of all the young people who were in the Wales Millennium Centre that we were going to think about their future in everything that we did. And I'm also very pleased to be part of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, and looking forward to studying it.

But I'm particularly pleased about the importance placed on internationalism in the Act, and how it encourages us to be globally responsible and to think about the global impact of all our actions, when we're working to improve our own well-being, but we're also thinking of all those people around the world. And in a world that is so divided and full of war at the moment, I think this is so important, that we think of those principles of the future generations Act. So, could the Cabinet Secretary give us some examples of how Wales is working in an international way to promote a globally responsible way of working, and what impact she feels that is having in the world?

Diolch yn fawr, Julie Morgan. Well, a globally responsible Wales is one of our key well-being goals, and it is important to think back to those conversations that we had with young people. I think that well-being goal has had a major influence on the development of our curriculum, which will enable our children and our young people to grow up as ethically informed citizens. Global citizenship has been a key part of the curriculum, and a globally responsible Wales has also drawn a connection internationally with countries now who are looking to see whether they can emulate what we're doing. But global solidarity is a moral imperative. It's not about charity, but partnership; it's not about aid, but mutual respect, and that's why we've built global responsibility into the Act.

So, can I just very briefly say, can I mark the fact that it's Refugee Week this week? We had a wonderful nation of sanctuary awards last night, with truly inspirational people who we welcome to Wales, who are making such a contribution. The strength and resilience of people seeking sanctuary, and the enormous contributions they make to Welsh life and in our communities across Wales. But very much on an international basis, we felt that we were in Wales, but we were in the world last night; it was such a strong feeling. The nation of sanctuary vision, set out in the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan', a Wales where everyone, regardless of their background, is treated with respect, dignity and humanity. I would also say we're very proud of our Wales and Africa programme, which, of course, is a clear demonstration of our globally responsible Wales goal, our well-being goal in the well-being of future generations Act.

I like to think that I'm a fairly positive, upbeat person, and, actually, when I talk about this Act to anybody, it is with a real sense of pride and celebration. There's always more to be done, and it's really sad, I'm afraid, to hear from the Conservatives that they're so down on this. We really need to build this up and to really see the benefits that it's bringing. Wales was the first to declare a climate emergency. The UN head of sustainable development said, 'What Wales is doing today, we hope the world will do tomorrow.' That's really something we should mark and be proud of.

Far too often, decisions by governments are very short term. This Act does not allow it; this Act will stay with us, we very much hope, and it makes sure that things are sustainable. There is, of course, more to be done, but I'm really proud of things like the basic income pilot for care-experienced young people, the transition basic income pilot as well, which I hope will be developed. Wales's potential is extraordinary, and this Act helps us to build on it.

I'm bound to mention that the one area that we still need to do a lot more on, amongst many others, which of course hasn't been resolved, is around child poverty. So, really, in terms of future generations, if we want to see future generations being able to fulfil their potential, we've got to make sure that those children are not living in poverty. So, can you say to me when we are going to be able to introduce something, for example, like the Welsh child benefit payment, which will help our children here in Wales, but could be incorporated into that Act as well? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Well, thank you so much, Jane Dodds, for again expressing that enthusiasm, that sense of pride that we have with our well-being of future generations legislation. It's a real sense of pride. I mean, there are so many times when people say, 'We're looking at what you are doing, Wales.' This is Wales that we're proud of, like the Wales we were proud of last night with our nation of sanctuary awards.

And, yes, I remember Lesley Griffiths actually declaring Wales as the first nation to declare a climate emergency. We were always first to do this, weren't we? There are so many social policies that, actually, have been shared by not just Welsh Labour, but other political parties, yourselves and Plaid Cymru. We have been very clear about social justice, and I really thank you for your support for the basic income pilot as well, where we're now beginning to get the results of the evaluation.

So, we have a long way to go in terms of tackling child poverty, but we have our milestones and indicators and a monitoring framework, and we're also very clear on what we think should be done in terms of reform of social security, ending the two-child benefit limit, and also working towards ways in which we can look at how we can use our powers and levers in terms of tackling child poverty.

It really is a landmark piece of legislation and a mindset that I believe values our country and planet, along with being socially responsible and a kinder place. The zero-carbon new council houses that are being built, the sustainable community schools, recycling and also creating local places for nature. These are all things that we've delivered in partnership with public authorities, and it's been despite a background of cuts to welfare and funding. I really think it is making a difference.

Can I ask you though, when the UK Government makes decisions on non-devolved matters, such as Welsh pensions, can we ask that they have regard to the future generations and well-being Act, so that they are invested in sustainable projects such as housing here, community energy and regenerative agriculture, which are the principles that we like in Wales? Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr, Carolyn Thomas. Thank you for again reminding us in this Chamber of ways in which we have embedded the sustainable development principle in our programme for government in terms of net-zero homes and our fantastic net-zero schools that now are being built, and our local places for nature.

In terms of the UK Government having regard, I mean, there has been interest in the well-being of future generations legislation. I think, over the road, there is a conference, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference, where I know there are people who want to come over and talk to us about the well-being—. They're probably raising it in the conference now, and wanting to consider, in different parts of the UK and the world, indeed, how they could introduce the well-being of future generations legislation. I recall meeting politicians from India who came to find out, because they wanted to develop this in their region, and again look at the opportunities. Let us not underplay the impact that it has had, certainly on us in Government, in terms of every policy that we’ve brought forward in the programme for government. When we look to the long term, we look to our future generations as well as the ones that we serve today.

And finally, Rhys ab Owen.

Diolch yn fawr. Much fanfare and, if I may say, hyperbole is used to describe this Act. It's been described as 'world leading' and as 'the envy of other countries'. However, 10 years on, not one other country has followed us. If it was such a success, Trefnydd, I'm sure other countries would have passed similar legislation by now. I'm not convinced that the examples you've given today have happened because of the Act, or that they wouldn't have happened if the Act wasn't in place. We must acknowledge the Act's weaknesses, and I don't think that's come across in your datganiad today. The main trouble with the Act is it has no teeth. A High Court judge described the Act as 'vague' and 'aspirational', it couldn't be used for judicial review, and one of Wales's most senior lawyers, a KC, described the Act as 'virtually useless'. I'm unaware of any campaign group that has successfully used the Act to challenge a public body. On its tenth anniversary, therefore, Trefnydd, does the Welsh Government have any plans to give the Act some teeth, so that it can be used practically by local communities? Diolch yn fawr.

Of course, I am very much aware that you have been a sceptic on this Act, Rhys ab Owen, and I remember a robust debate that we had on this. Can I just say, the Act has influenced other nations to embed sustainable development and future generations into their governance? The Parliament of the Balearic Islands in Spain passed a well-being of current and future generations Act in 2023. Were you aware of that, Rhys ab Owen? And also, Scotland, Ireland and, as I've mentioned, a state in India, Maharashtra state, are developing future generations proposals.

We've already mentioned the fact we've won these world awards. Awards are nothing if they don't actually change things for people's lives, but I do look to the importance of the Equality and Social Justice Committee's post-legislative review of the Act and, indeed, the response that we will make to both the future generations commissioner and the auditor general. And can I say to colleagues across the Chamber that this has been a really important statement, a really important time for scrutiny, questions, praise, endorsement and also challenge? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

Item 5 this afternoon is a statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs on bluetongue, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd. In partnership with the livestock and the veterinary sectors, Welsh Government has been successful in keeping bluetongue serotype 3—BTV-3—out of Wales this year. However, the advent of an all-England-wide bluetongue restricted zone, an RZ, from 1 July, has obliged Welsh Government to review its approach to bluetongue control. No longer having a two-county buffer between potentially infected livestock in the existing RZ in England and the Welsh border increases the risk of disease incursion into Wales, either through the movement of infected livestock or the ingress of virus-carrying midges from across the border.

Bluetongue is a viral disease of ruminant livestock. The disease does not infect people and cannot be spread in meat or milk. It is spread by biting midges. It can cause sickness in infected livestock, reduce milk yield, and reduce the reproductive performance of livestock, including the loss of infected lambs and calves. In the most severe cases, it can cause death. All of these impacts can have a detrimental effect on farm incomes. I am extremely concerned about the economic and farmer-well-being impacts of dealing with sick animals and the livestock productivity and the fertility losses associated with severe bluetongue, as has been observed in many affected European countries.

I appreciate that there are differing views about the future approach to bluetongue control in Wales. I held a bluetongue round-table meeting with senior representatives of the livestock and veterinary sectors on 5 June. I listened to their views to ensure I had a balanced and informed perspective. I considered those views carefully before deciding on a proportionate policy for future bluetongue control in Wales. As announced in a written statement on 12 June, my decision is to work collectively to hold back the disease for as long as we can. This is a finely balanced decision. Given the lack of consensus around the round-table members and the uncertainty around the impact of the disease on livestock-dense areas like Wales, let me make clear that I cannot and will not in all good conscience simply invite bluetongue into Wales.

First and foremost in my mind are the potential risks of economic and farmer well-being issues caused by dealing with severe bluetongue. I also want to allow more time to observe the severity of the disease in England and for keepers to vaccinate their herds and their flocks against the worst impacts of the disease. All representatives at the round-table were unanimous in their support for vaccination as the best method for protecting livestock and for reducing the impacts of bluetongue. All agreed that promoting the vaccine was an important shared priority over the coming weeks.

With a view to facilitating the free movement of fully vaccinated animals where this would be appropriate, the Welsh Government will continue to closely monitor vaccine development and effectiveness in co-operation with the other administrations across Great Britain. Officials are also continuing to work closely with vaccine manufacturers, the Veterinary Medicines Directorate and representatives from industry and veterinary sectors in Wales and across Great Britain to understand both the supply and the demand and to highlight tools to aid vets and farmers in developing farm-specific strategies to protect their herds and flocks and to make decisions on the use of BTV-3 vaccines. Of course, I cannot guarantee that my decision will be successful in keeping bluetongue out of Wales forever, but I do believe it provides the greatest chance we have of doing so for as long as possible.

We are dealing with an evolving and dynamic disease picture, so I have committed to keeping this policy under regular review, based on the evidence on the ground in Wales and in other parts of Great Britain. I believe that this is the only pragmatic approach in these circumstances. And to be clear, the new approach to bluetongue control enables animal movements between England and Wales where possible. As our understanding of the disease has evolved, we are able to take a much more informed and risk-based approach. So, from 20 June, in line with the latest risk assessments, livestock will be allowed to move from the current RZ—the restricted zone—in England to live in Wales, subject to obtaining a licence to move and, crucially, a negative pre-movement test at the keeper's expense. This is to allow farmers to source business-critical animals like herd and flock replacements.

In addition, we are putting in place arrangements to allow livestock to move to and from shows and sales in the current RZ from 20 June, subject to licences and either pre-movement or post-movement testing as appropriate. These policies will continue to apply after 1 July. Based on the previous risk assessments, moves direct to slaughter can continue, with the proviso that from 1 July, receiving abattoirs in Wales must be designated and meet the appropriate licensing conditions to handle bluetongue-susceptible animals. We currently have five designated abattoirs in Wales. Any other interested establishments are encouraged to apply for designation to take account of the changes from 1 July.

I have been asked why we're introducing new controls that apply to the current RZ before the all-England RZ comes into being on 1 July. The simple answer is that this is an evidence-led decision. Temperatures are increasing and the risk of the virus replicating in midges and being transmitted to livestock is escalating, particularly along the Monmouthshire and Powys border with England, the Wirral and north-east Wales and along the M4 corridor. As we are in an ever-evolving disease situation, the Welsh Government will work with the Animal and Plant Health Agency to review guidance and to update websites as necessary.

I do recognise that the bluetongue control measures we are introducing will be challenging for business, including livestock markets and abattoirs, and I'm also aware of the importance of the autumn sales in the farming calendar. So, we will keep our policy on these matters under review and we will adapt to any changes in circumstances. My officials are meeting again with representatives of the Livestock Auctioneers Association and the British Meat Processors Association over the coming days to discuss the impacts and to consider practical risk-based solutions.

In conclusion, Llywydd, I am adopting a proportionate and pragmatic response to the uncertain risks that are posed by bluetongue. I have acknowledged the need for business-critical livestock moves between Wales and England and ensured that the abattoir supply chain is secure. I am absolutely committed to encouraging livestock vaccination, and I am fully committed to reviewing our approach to controlling bluetongue in line with emerging evidence. Success in holding back this potentially destructive disease will depend, as always, on our collective endeavour. It will be the hard work of the Animal and Plant Health Agency, the laboratory at the Pirbright Institute and the ongoing support and co-operation of the livestock and veterinary sectors. I will continue to work with the sector and all partners in this shared endeavour. Diolch, Llywydd.

I refer Members to my register of interests. I must begin by expressing my deep concern, because the way this issue has been handled by the Welsh Government falls far short of what our farmers deserve. To be clear, Members of the Senedd have received no technical briefing, neither from the Deputy First Minister's office nor from the chief veterinary officer on this decision or the science behind it.

There has been no economic impact assessment, despite the far-reaching consequences for our rural community. And perhaps most troubling of all, the decision was issued via a written statement on a Thursday afternoon, just after the Senedd week had ended, ensuring no scrutiny, no questions and no answers until today. It took seven days from the round-table to issue last week's written statement, and a further five days before the Senedd could debate it. That delay did not go unnoticed, Deputy First Minister, by the farming community. It left farmers facing a weekend of confusion and anxiety. I've heard from auctioneers, market operators, producers and farmers, all of whom are desperate for clarity.

Let's consider the practical impact of this decision. We all understand the importance of protecting Welsh livestock from bluetongue, but the measures imposed are not only excessive, they're unworkable. Requiring pre-movement testing for all live imports, even vaccinated animals, might look reasonable on paper, but in the real world of Welsh farming, it's chaos. I've spoken with a farmer in mid Wales now facing a bill of at least £18,000, just to bring their own sheep back from England, a field that is only five miles down the road. That cost covers testing, the transport delays, logistical headaches—and that is not an isolated incident.

Auctioneers have contacted me with serious concerns. Livestock markets, already under strain, now face collapsing confidence. Movement restrictions are sowing uncertainty at the height of the trading season. This isn't protecting the industry; it's paralysing it, where a lack of stock will make many marts unviable. Matthew Nicholls, an auctioneer operating on both sides of the border, posted a video outlining these concerns. It has been viewed nearly a 0.25 million times, and if you haven't seen it, Deputy First Minister, I strongly suggest you and your team do.

Consider the wider cost: vaccinating all livestock in Wales would amount to over £32 million; £6 per cow, £3 per sheep or goat. That is a staggering financial burden for an industry already struggling with high input costs and poor weather. And let's talk about the science. The Cabinet Secretary speaks of holding the disease at bay, but the disease does not respect borders. By imposing a deadline date, the Welsh Government may inadvertently increase the risk of bluetongue entering Wales, just as we saw with COVID, when fixed deadlines often undermined containment efforts. This could well invite the disease into Wales, something the Deputy First Minister says he doesn't wish to do.

This decision is out of touch with farming reality, and it is neither proportionate nor pragmatic as you say in your statement. It's not just me saying this, industry voices across the board have criticised the policy for its sheer impracticality, its cost and its bureaucracy. I haven't even touched on the major concerns around testing and lab capacity, which could completely derail this Government's plans. To date, there have been 260 confirmed cases in England, which has nearly 20 million sheep and cattle. That's 0.001 per cent.

Llywydd, we all want to keep bluetongue out. We all want to protect our herd and our flocks, but even the Deputy First Minister has said that he cannot guarantee that this approach will keep bluetongue out of Wales, all while being impractical, bureaucratic and costly. The Deputy First Minister has said the policy will be kept under review, but with no clear time frames. Therefore, I urge the Welsh Government to urgently reconsider its position and move Wales into a restricted zone alongside England. While the industry acknowledges that this approach isn't perfect, it does recognise that it reflects the reality of animal movements, the shared nature of the threat and the need for co-ordinated policy across the border. Diolch, Llywydd.

Diolch yn fawr, Sam. Llywydd, there were many points made in that, but I'm not sure which of them were actually questions, apart from would I take it away and reconsider right now the decision we've come to. And the answer to that is, 'Reluctantly, no, but this policy will be kept under live and regular review.' You'll notice that what we've said, Sam, is that it's live and regular review. So, if the evidence changes on the ground, we can revisit this policy and come back to it.

One of the key choices here in what I've described as a finely balanced judgment is whether we stand and try to keep this disease out of Wales for as long as possible, partly, as I explained in my opening remarks, to enable the avoidance of the costs that will be incurred by farmers and the well-being impacts on farmers of dealing with this disease if it gets into Wales, partly also in order to make sure that we can line up and better understand the supply and demand of vaccinations, which all around the round-table, even though there was a difference of opinion on the right way forward, agree is the right way forward.

So, what we are doing here in effect, Sam, difficult as this decision is, finely balanced as it is, is we think there is a fighting chance here to hold this back, at least for some time. We've been successful in this in Wales because of all the partners working together and because of the use of vaccine, and that may get us to the point where we don't incur massive costs and impacts on the farming community because we have invited this disease in. So, I would simply urge you to reflect the difference of views that are being expressed by people across the sector, including, by the way, the veterinarian advice as well. So, on that basis, I just ask you also to reflect, but we will keep this under review.

Can I just clarify one thing that I think you may have misunderstood from the policy when you talked about a farm that, if I understood you, was now looking at massive costs in transferring animals back and forth across? I may have misunderstood, so I just want to clarify the issue of cross-border farms. Cross-border farm movements, as we've done in previous areas where we've done this, are able to happen. There will be no testing requirements for movements to and from land within a farmer's combined holding. So, we'll use the existing TB rules we have in place for movements to linked holdings, such as the rules around temporary land associations. I may have misunderstood, but I want to put that clearly on record, because one of the things that will be of concern is where farms straddle the border, are on both sides of the border, so there is a way forward on that.

You've explained to us that part of this rationale is to buy time, but I have to say, 'Where have you been?' We've known for months and months, if not years, that bluetongue is on its way. Is it now that you’re thinking that you need to buy some time and get the infrastructure in place? I mean, I’m really worried if that is the case, I have to say, and I do honestly believe that you’ve made the wrong call on this one. Yes, we know that bluetongue is going to bring with it worry, disruption and concern, but I really fear that your decision and your policy decision this week will bring even more worry, even more disruption and even more concern in its wake. Of course we all want to keep bluetongue out of Wales, but we all know that it’s coming, and the fact that you’re emphasising—. I counted five or six times in your statement, that you will review your approach; of course I welcome that, but that in itself says that you yourself know that it’s coming. I honestly believe, given the scant resources available to Welsh Government and its bodies and the sector more widely as well, that that should be focused on getting ready for the inevitable on the vaccination and managing bluetongue when it comes, rather than ploughing it into a costly testing and licensing regime that’s going to cause total chaos and total havoc.

We know that Welsh farms won’t be able to source their breeding stock now, largely as a consequence of this. There are questions about welfare issues for animals, you know, tack sheep will more likely stay in Wales and we know, with the fodder crisis, that that could mean huge issues further down the line. I’m told that pre-movement test samples are valid for 10 days and that movement has to be completed within seven days of sampling, but I’m also told that, currently, it can take between five and 10 days to get the result back from the lab. Now, I’d imagine that that might even get a bit longer with the increased demand as a consequence of this policy decision, meaning that farms could actually be notified of whether they’re clear when the period available to move the animal has already expired. Now, this is what you’re introducing here. It’s going to disrupt the functionality of the whole agricultural ecosystem and that in itself could be more damaging than dealing with bluetongue.

So, a few questions, then: have you calculated the projected cost to the industry of this proposal that you’re bringing forward, and if you have, what support is being considered to offset some of that burden? Is there the capacity required out there in terms of laboratories and testing to make sure that this system can function? And what assurances can you give on the turnaround time for obtaining a movement licence and getting the test results? And on vaccine, yes, what discussions are you having with relevant stakeholders to make sure that there’s a secure supply and that there are distribution channels available for Wales? Are you considering, for example, a centralised procurement and distribution scheme so that we can reduce some of the costs to the sector and make sure that there’s equitable access, as well, to the vaccine? Because I don’t want to see a free-for-all and some sort of survival-of-the-fittest approach when it comes to vaccines in Wales. And finally, Deputy First Minister, if bluetongue is found on the Welsh side of the border, then what’s the plan? Will you incrementally be moving the restriction zone further into Wales, or if it does happen, will you then immediately move to an all-Wales restricted zone, which, frankly, is what I think you should’ve done in the first place?

Llyr, thank you very much for those questions. Again, I come back to the point that this is a finely balanced decision that I’ve come to, but we will keep it under live review, and we are able to adjust the policy, then, based on if things change on the ground. But you do say, ‘Where have we been?’ We’ve been keeping the disease out of Wales, Llyr, working with the sector, working with the Animal and Plant Health Agency, working with veterinarians. We’ve been successful, over many years, at keeping this disease out of Wales, and that, Llyr, is where we’ve been, and that’s what we’re going to continue to try to do. It is not inevitable, as you and Sam seem to be saying, that the disease will now walk in the door. What we are trying to do is keep that door as firmly shut as we can, to heighten the possibility that we can keep the disease out. So, it’s not inevitable, but it is a heightened possibility as soon as the border is snapped out to the England-Wales border.

And just to say as well, keeping it under review, as I’ve said, is not to do with—. When you put words into my mouth saying that there is an acceptance that it’s when, or the scale of the change of the policy—. We are starting from the premise that we are going to work with all the sectors and the veterinarians and APHA to keep this disease out, not only to buy time but to increase the chance that we can keep it out. But if it doesn’t, we will change the policy and we will do it listening to and engaging with the sector, and in light of the evidence on the ground. So, it's not to accept that there's an inevitability, and it's certainly not to say that we have a date or dates where we will come back and say, 'Well, this is the date on which we will change the policy.' We will do this in a dynamic and a live way.

You raise some important questions there. Can I just turn to the issue of vaccinations, first of all? We do encourage farmers to discuss BTV-3 vaccinations with their vet to determine if it right for their animals. Just to say, the Ruminant Health & Welfare group have a range of bluetongue-related resources freely available online. These include tools to aid the vets and farmers in developing their own farm-specific strategies to protect the herds and flocks, and make decisions on the use of BTV-3 vaccines, if it's appropriate for them.

There are three BTV-3 vaccines currently permitted for use in Great Britain, subject to licence, and I've got to say, vaccination is a promising, I have to say, long-term option for disease control. Welsh Government is working with industry to promote its use in Wales. Just to add to that, in line with our commitment—ongoing commitment—to review policy in the light of new evidence, Welsh Government will be reviewing the possibility going forward—this is not immediate—of the free movement of vaccinated animals going forward. It's complex, it'll take some time to consider properly, but we do note that one vaccine manufacturer is reporting the potential of its product to protect against viremia in cattle. So, the science on the ground is changing literally as we speak. But what this approach does, Llyr, is it gives us that opportunity to retard the ingress of this, or possibly to even halt the ingress of this, whilst we also make sure that we have the supply in place for farmers to access.

You mention APHA capacity and laboratory capacity. Well, I recognise the concerns that have been outlined, and they're the same concerns that I have, but we know, from handling other diseases, including avian influenza and bovine TB, that demand on APHA is dynamic and it's difficult to protect. It will change from month to month and so on. And they have been breaking their backs to try and hold this back two counties within England. That work will now have to continue in a different way. It's not that it's going away, they'll have to keep on testing and monitoring. Movement licences will continue to be issued via the APHA central hub team, and Welsh Government will work closely with APHA and the other GB administrations on monitoring this, monitoring resources, ensuring that we can maintain that standard. 

Pirbright, of course, is the main laboratory facility that we have—the national reference laboratory for bluetongue. It's currently the only facility in GB authorised to test for BTV-3. Now, again, as with APHA and the demand—and it's difficult to predict demand—what we will do is work with the lab and the other GB administrations to address any issues, if they are reported to us. But at this moment, that is our go-to place for the lab testing. We are, by the way, exploring ways to develop additional capacity in Wales to improve laboratory resilience at a GB level, and Welsh Government will work closely with Pirbright and other GB administrations to monitor the resourcing of that as well.

There were several other questions you mentioned, including, I think, the economic impact assessment. In responding to this—. You started your question by asking, 'Where have we been?' Well, we've been keeping the disease out of Wales, Llyr. Where are we now? What has changed on the ground is the decision of the UK Government to snap out the restricted zone right to the England-Wales border. In response to that, we've met with the round-table, we've discussed with stakeholders, I've taken a decision, and we'll keep it under review. But given the uncertainty about what will now happen with the disease, and the possible severity of it, we do not know that, in livestock-dense countries like Wales, including the border areas, and the impact, I have to say, of bluetongue, not just the incursion into Wales, but actually on productivity and livestock health as well, and fertility, it is simply not feasible to conduct an economic impact assessment at this time. And this could change, literally week by week and day by day. But I think the important thing here is battling to retard the ingress of the disease, keep it out, if we possibly can, and, meanwhile, keeping it live under review. If we need to change the policy, I can give you that guarantee: as the evidence changes, we will revisit and review this in a dynamic way. 

It's very clear, Cabinet Secretary, from your oral statement today and your written statement last week that the decision on the bluetongue control measures that are being introduced on 1 July was very finely balanced, but I think it is important it's kept under review. It is very, very important that the agricultural sector remain vigilant to this disease and that they do continue to test and vaccinate. But you will appreciate the question that I think Llyr asked you around capacity is really important, and you just said you are exploring where you can get more capacity. I think farmers, if we want them to be vaccinating, if they are paying for this, they want to know that they are going to get those results back pretty quickly. So, perhaps you could say a little bit more about the capacity.

You’ll appreciate my constituency of Wrexham is a border constituency, and whilst this is a worry for all farmers right across Wales, for border farms that have land in both Wales and England, they will need to transfer their livestock. The right safeguards will need to be in place, but they are very concerned about how this will be done and who will be paying for it. So, perhaps you could clarify the Government's position.

Thank you very much. Yes, indeed, we'll make sure that we continue to engage with APHA and Pirbright on the speed of testing and monitoring, because we need to get those results back very quickly to farmers and their on-farm vets so they can take the necessary action, and that could be, as we say, making the choice, then, to actually vaccinate or other ways forward for that particular farm.

On the issue of costs, well, the costs of pre-movement tests and of vaccinations will fall to the farmer, and we recognise that this is a cost on that farmer. The Government doesn't provide support for individual business decisions on a farm basis. However, Government will be funding the not insignificant investment in APHA and the associated testing and monitoring of this. So, we will keep doing that, because this has to be a partnership. So, we will try to work with the farming community, and as I say, the other important thing is, as you rightly said at the beginning, this is not me drawing a line in the sand and saying, ‘This will be the policy from here and the way forward.’ We recognise that this disease will change, and in which case we will need to look at the evidence on the ground and change. I have to say, it's a terrifying experience as well being interrogated on this by my predecessor as the Minister here as well. But thank you for the question.

I draw Members' attention to my declaration of interest as a livestock farmer.

Deputy First Minister, could I reiterate the point that Sam Kurtz made? How bitterly disappointing it is that no availability was made of officials to elected Members on such a key decision that you have taken that, in my mind, puts the livestock industry here in Wales on the altar of stupidity. This makes no sense whatsoever. You should have gone for one zone linking England and Wales, because the trading routes of livestock are east-west, west-east, and that is of critical importance to the future of the livestock industry here in Wales. And to put it into context, this is a bit like telling a retailer, in the run-up to Christmas, that they can't get any of the goods that they need to help their customers get their presents—the goods that they need to keep their business going. Because we're going into the key breeding season, and we're going into the key restocking season come the autumn, so it is vital that you indicate today what sort of conditions you require to reverse this decision and actually get back to a sense of normality, so that those key trading routes can be re-established east to west, west to east, and we have livestock markets thriving, we have livestock farms thriving, and we have a country that actually is proud of its livestock industry, rather than a Government trying to shut it down with such foolish decisions.

Well, Andrew, I deeply regret the tone and the substance of your contribution, I really do. Because when you describe this as a decision made on the altar of stupidity, I look forward to the next time you actually speak to your on-farm vet, or you speak to the chief veterinary officer or any member of the veterinary profession, because what you're actually doing is saying that their evidence-led approach and input to this is stupid—stupid. [Interruption.] That's what you've just said. You've just described that. So, I do regret the tone of this, because as I described, Llywydd, this is a finely balanced decision. It's a decision that we will keep under review as well. It's not an altar of stupidity, and I'm certainly not going to get into political knockabout with this.

But let me just say to you, Andrew, the costs we can see, these are not simply the costs in this current mechanism that I've put in place, but, if you look at other countries across Europe, the costs in the Netherlands, where severe impacts of BTV-3 were reported, were in the order of €100 million. I will not in all good faith and good conscience open the door and invite bluetongue into Wales, because those costs will fall upon the Welsh farming community. So, please, let's just have a rational discussion about this, and I will keep this policy under review, as I've said so many times, but for now it is vitally important that we do our best to keep the disease out of Wales.

I met yesterday with Matthew Nicholls, who's been spoken about; I met with farmers and a local vet. There is concern around bluetongue, for definite, and there's an acknowledgement that there had to be a difficult decision to be made. But they were very clear that it's a 'no' to testing and licensing, for all of the reasons that have been expounded on this afternoon: the cost, and the time needed to wait for them.

So, I was keen to look at what a positive way forward could be. You've heard people say that, actually, we need one restricted zone, England and Wales together—now, that wouldn't be so difficult, I hope, given that you've got a colleague in the same party over in Westminster—but that vaccinations are the answer as well. We know it's a balancing act, but, for farms on the border, many of which I represent, and I know others here do, there is severe concern, severe stress on farmers. The mental health weight on them is already considerable, and this is another thing on top. So, would you please take away the positive suggestions that have come from this afternoon that we have an all-England-and-Wales zone, and that vaccination is put at the top of the agenda, not testing and licensing, and that you move that forward? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Jane, thank you very much indeed for those questions. I agree with you entirely—vaccination should be at the top of the agenda, but there needs to be an individual farm decision as well. I've highlighted some of the resources that are available for farmers, with their veterinarian, to see if it's appropriate for them and then use the vaccines. The decision that I've made so far will actually also give them the time and capacity to make that right decision. Many farmers do use vaccination already, by the way, on bluetongue, but this is an opportunity for others, if it's appropriate for them, particularly if they're introducing new livestock into their herds, to do exactly that.

And Jane, we may well need to revisit this. I cannot be clear on it. If we see incursions into Wales, if we see the evidence on the ground, we might well need to revisit it and, if we do, we do. But there is a fighting chance right here and right now that we can slow down or even stop the spread of this disease, as we've done over many years. What's materially changed—. And I regret the decision to snap out to the border, I have to say, because I think our discussions with UK Ministers were that it would be better to actually maintain a two-county cushion, buffer zone between us and where the disease was. But we understand the reality that the UK Minister was working with, and why that decision has been made. That doesn't mean we automatically then move to an all-England-and-Wales one, when we're trying, for the reasons I've laid out, to keep this disease out as long as possible. But it might come to that and, if it does, then we're going to have to revisit the decision based on the evidence on the ground, and we can do that in a dynamic and live way as well.

I simply wanted to say, because it hasn't been—. You touched on it, but it hasn't been stressed enough here today, I think. I've seen some communications on social media and so on that we now have a hard border. We do not have a hard border. What I've set out in the way forward here is that there is no ban on movements of livestock from England; there is no hard border. Stopping all movements will have a totally disproportionate economic impact on the livestock sector across Wales. That would totally disrupt traditional trading patterns for producers. So, what we've done here is that the majority of livestock can actually move from the existing RZ in England to Wales without restrictions currently. Due to the changes here, the increased temperatures, the risk of bluetongue transmission by midges, we will now move to a licence and pre-movement test approach, but the movements can still happen on that basis. Movements from the RZ direct to slaughter are allowed at any abattoir, provided that, once again, they're designated abattoirs. So, permitting these movements allows farmers to make business-critical decisions around sourcing replacement livestock, safeguards the abattoir supply, and safeguards the abattoir supply chain as well. So, it's not a hard border. This is going to be difficult, and I appreciate that. There will be costs for farmers. But, as I say, if the reality on the ground changes and we have a deep incursion of the disease in Wales, we can revisit this decision.

I'd just like to remind Members of my relatable interest.

Cabinet Secretary, as you well know, I'm against this decision that you've taken today, but I do have a couple of pointed questions. In extreme weather events—if you've got sheep on tack in England and you have an extreme weather event, which is inland, outside of your holding, and you need to move those stock quickly—how are you going to ensure that people can move those stock? Because tests are going to take about 14 days to come back, and, if you're on a floodplain, those sheep will be down the river and the levels will have gone down by the time you've had your test results back. So, I'd like to know what practicalities you're going to do around extreme weather events.

You also talked about the impact assessment, that it wasn't possible to do one before this announcement, which I think is a bit disappointing, considering the time you've had. But I'd like to know: are your officials still looking at doing an impact assessment, and, if it is done, will you publish it in full so the whole industry can see the impact it's going to have? And I also think it'd be very useful for all of us to have a briefing from the chief veterinary officer. So, if you could have that put in place today, I think that'd be very useful and it could answer a lot of the technical questions that we have, which you probably don't have the answers to.

And my final question that I'd like you to answer today: if the disease is found in Wales, are you going to have a county buffer system in place, or will you designate the whole of Wales together? Because, if you have a buffer system in place in Wales, that will massively, massively have a detriment on trade if it comes here. So, I'd like to know your answers on that, please. And, as I said, the technical briefing is needed, and I hope you can confirm that today.

James, thanks for raising that again, and my apologies, Sam, you raised it earlier on there. More than happy to make a technical briefing available, and simply to say, on the point that was made earlier on about the oral and the written statement: we released the written statement very early in order to give a heads-up of the decision that was coming, and we made arrangements immediately at that point to also bring forward an oral statement, so we could have these questions today. So, it's far from actually avoiding transparency; I couldn't be more transparent than putting myself here, available to answer these questions today.

On the tech briefing, Sam, which you raised—sorry I didn't answer that early on, but, James, I can answer it for you now—I'm more than happy to make that happen. It had always been my intention to do it, now that we have the details of this and we can get into some real, real detail with the CVO, and with others, on how this will work. Simply to say, on the issue of extreme weather events, if it's within the same farm, then animals can move, as I've described before, but otherwise we consider on a case-by-case basis. What we would aim to do, then, is support businesses within that scenario. But it's a case-by-case basis; there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach to this, James. You will well know that. It's an individual farm decision that you need to make. And the case where a river rises and affects several farms, which I think you're talking about there sotto voce, is exactly the thing that we will look at on a case-by-case basis. It's not just one farm, but who's affected by it. But I'll make that, Llywydd, technical briefing available to all Members.

Deputy First Minister, on several occasions today you've talked about a finely balanced decision, an evidence-based approach, making the decision based on information available to you, and there have been several questions today around the economic impact assessment. I'm not fully sure that you've given a full answer on that yet, why that assessment couldn't have been done prior to your decision. This is critical, because mid Wales farmers alone on the border—. And if you consider the Welshpool livestock market and the amount and significance of sales that are attracted from stock in England, this is significant for auctioneers and livestock markets. If you could not have done an impact assessment prior to your decision, can you outline why that assessment can't be done now and be made available, as James Evans asked for?

Yes, because the disease also has a dynamic characteristic to it. We've seen that in its incursion from the east of England as it's moved westwards. So, the severity of the disease, the spread of the disease, will all have different permutations, which makes it exceptionally difficult to do an economic impact assessment. I've already outlined why it was not possible now. We've had to make a clear decision in rapid order, I have to say, and try to give a maximum amount of time to people to prepare for these changes on 20 June and 1 July.

But, going forward, the disease could actually progress very slowly, without any great severity, or it could progress very fast, in which case the economic impact will be significantly different. So, Russell, this is not a classic, 'We are building a new agency or authority or building', where we can then look at demonstrable one-case scenarios of an impact assessment. In a month's time, it could look very different again. The focus now has to be working with farmers on vaccination, on the strategies for their farms, enabling them, if they want to actually move animals across from a restricted zone, to be able to do it within the new guidance that we'll bring forward, and that's where our focus very much is.  

Diolch for your statement, Deputy First Minister. I've met with farmers in my region recently that are now going to be unfairly penalised by this decision, despite the clear scientific consensus that bluetongue is spread by midges, not through direct livestock to livestock contact. They agree that this policy is a completely disproportionate response, and it's very hard to justify. This policy is extremely damaging to cross-border trade, as has been said multiple times now on this statement, especially at this time of year with the breeding, as has also been noted, particularly in cross-border counties like my home county of Monmouthshire. The market manager of Monmouthshire livestock centre has said the impending movement restrictions will have a catastrophic effect on the livestock industry on both sides of the border. It doesn't seem like you've listened to them, and, as many say, these disproportionate restrictions will cause far more damage than possibly bluetongue itself, but there seems to be no thought that has been given to the financial impact of this policy.

Deputy First Minister, you've got this decision wrong. It's not enough to keep these measures under review. How can you justify, Deputy First Minister, not undertaking an economic impact assessment on a national scale, or a more localised scale, when one needed to be done for a decision of this magnitude? And also why wouldn't you have gone for a one-zone approach to this when there is, as you've just said, no hard border? If bluetongue was to be found, Deputy First Minister, in Wales, would you have a county buffer zone or would you have one zone? There seems to be absolutely no common sense to this policy, and I ask you and I urge you to please reverse it now.

Laura, thanks for that question. We disagree, and it is a finely balanced judgment, but we disagree. If we immediately move to an England-and-Wales bluetongue zone now, we will invite the disease into Wales. And just to be clear what I mean by that, when we then have no testing and no licensing, and we have cattle imported from a restricted zone without those safeguards—without those safeguards—into deep west Wales or deep north-west Wales, then that is what we are doing. Now, I say to you, that's the consideration. For those who say we should snap it out now and do an all-England-and-Wales, we are, in effect, saying, 'Right here, as of now, on 1 July, we are opening the doors to bluetongue in Wales.' Now, that's a judgment that I've said I cannot do in all conscience. We need to actually work with the farming community, with veterinarians, with the auctioneers—who were at the roundtable, by the way, and there were differences of opinion. There was not unanimity, unfortunately. There was not consensus. There were nuances as well. And what I've tried to reflect in the decision we've come to now is a very pragmatic way forward, but it is a way forward that can be revisited based on the evidence on the ground, and, if we hold this disease back, then we'll have done really good for farming in Wales because, as I mentioned to you, a €100 million impact in the Netherlands of this disease being rife across the area. If we can actually hold this disease back, then we'll have done a good service to the farming community.

Llywydd, I think I've answered that question.

No more questions.

So, that concludes that statement. 

Item 6 is next, and this is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice on the women's and youth justice blueprints. I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Jane Hutt.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. We want to see a criminal justice system that is based on evidence and that considers the trauma that was caused.

This trauma-informed and evidence-based approach can prevent crime happening in the first place. We're committed to the fair and equal provision of devolved services, so everyone in the criminal justice system has the support they need to live successful, crime-free lives. Coupled with ensuring the justice system works in Wales, the Welsh Government is dedicated to working in collaboration to improve the justice system and promote a distinctly Welsh version of criminal justice.

This work improves outcomes for the often very vulnerable people involved in the justice system, helping to keep people in Wales safe and help those involved in the justice system to desist from crime. In this context, the blueprints for women's justice and youth justice embody our vision for justice. Through them, we are working with a wide range of partners to support and divert vulnerable people away from crime and towards better futures for themselves, their families and their communities.

We published the blueprints in 2019 alongside a five-year implementation plan, importantly in collaboration with His Majesty's Prison and Probation Service, the Ministry of Justice, policing in Wales, the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales and third sector partners. The blueprints set out a distinct approach to justice services in Wales, one that focuses on early intervention and prevention, and the blueprints focus on meeting the individual needs of those at risk of encountering the criminal justice system, diverting them away from crime, and providing holistic and rehabilitative support to those who do reach the criminal justice system. They are collective visions for how we want women and children's experiences of the justice system to be transformed, focused on ensuring a trauma-informed approach.

As of April 2025, the blueprints have moved into a new delivery phase as we look to build on the existing framework and continue to embed best practice, maintaining a joined-up approach, acknowledging the specific needs of women and children, promoting positive well-being and supporting successful long-term outcomes to reduce reoffending.

There's clear evidence the women's justice blueprint is making a difference. The ongoing collective effort of blueprint partners has developed new governance structures and delivered sustainable local solutions to meet the complex needs of vulnerable women. The all-Wales women in justice board was established to provide strategic direction for criminal and social justice partners, ensuring effective delivery of blueprint strategic priorities. The UK Government has also established a national Women's Justice Board to reduce the number of women in prison and increase community support, which aligns with the blueprint. There is clear recognition of the importance of accessible, community-based spaces for women and female-only provisions. The all-Wales women in justice board represents the Welsh perspective alongside the national Women's Justice Board.

There are now diversion schemes in place for vulnerable women across all four police forces in Wales and co-commissioned integrated women's services through the One Wales service. Officials work with healthcare providers in English prisons, HMP Eastwood Park and HMP Styal, ensuring women from Wales serving custodial services can remain on Buvidal, a medicine to treat opioid dependence. And we provided £65,000 of funding towards independent domestic violence adviser support for Welsh women in these prisons, acknowledging that many women in custody are survivors of domestic abuse.

Progress has been made towards developing training and guidance, ensuring best practice. A continuing professional development, accredited gender-responsive and trauma-informed practitioner-skills training package has been developed and delivered to over 840 multi-agency practitioners across Wales. An engagement programme for magistrates, sentencers and other key court professionals across Wales has also been developed, building confidence in community-based sentencing options.

The proposal to establish a residential women's centre is a key element of the women's justice blueprint. It's disappointing that the centre in Swansea, set to open in 2024, is still not open. The centre will be a real asset for women in Wales, providing therapeutic and rehabilitative services as part of a trauma-informed approach. It will allow women to stay closer to home and maintain crucial family ties, especially with their children, addressing the underlying issues that contribute to their offending behaviour, such as mental health issues, substance abuse or domestic violence. The Welsh Government continues to advocate for the opening of the centre, with the ultimate goal of significantly reducing the number of women in prison.

Turning to the youth justice blueprint, over the last 15 years there has been a dramatic and sustained decline in the number of children offending and being brought into the formal criminal justice system in Wales. There has also been a significant reduction in the number of children receiving custodial outcomes. This is testament to the preventative and diversionary approaches well established by youth justice services, the growing adoption of the children-first evidence base and effective partnership working.

Since its launch in 2019, the youth justice blueprint has delivered a range of work building on these achievements to further support children and young people. This includes expansion of the forensic adolescent consultation service offer, including enhanced case management to all youth justice services. This psychology-led multi-agency approach recognises the trauma young people have experienced. The pathfinder report, entitled 'A Child First Pathfinder Evaluation—Ceredigion Youth Justice and Prevention Service', has been published. Findings informed the development of a youth justice prevention framework for Wales.

My previous blueprint statement in 2023 set the ambition to embed trauma-informed practice in the secure estate in Wales, and I'm pleased to confirm that this has been achieved by drawing on the trauma-informed Wales framework. The Youth Justice Board published their annual statistics in January 2025. These statistics show a continued positive trend of fewer children entering the youth justice system, with the number of first-time entrants into the youth justice system in Wales down from 1,386 in 2013 to 422 young people in 2023. Moving forward, the youth justice prevention framework will provide a single view of what works to prevent offending, and how we are supporting vulnerable children towards fulfilling crime-free lives.

Finally, Llywydd, joint governance arrangements have provided a structure for direction and oversight of implementation of the blueprint. The Youth Justice Board provided senior leadership, owing to their specific expertise. Moving forward, greater emphasis will now be placed on continuing to strengthen the role of the Wales youth justice advisory panel, or WYJAP, which is jointly chaired by the Welsh Government and the Youth Justice Board. It brings together, on a national level, strategic partners involved in the operation of the youth justice system and preventing offending by children, to support the effective oversight of the youth justice system in Wales.

And whilst we have achieved a huge amount of positive change through the blueprints, we could achieve even more if we had a fully devolved justice system. That's why we remain committed to pursuing the case for the devolution of justice. Having justice delivered by one Government in Wales will allow us to embed a truly integrated approach to this area, with social justice at its heart, rather than justice being split across the so-called jagged edge between the UK and Welsh Governments.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. The justice blueprints are long overdue and the re-evaluation of most, if not all, of the objectives in the implementation plans was supposed to be delivered several years ago. However, you have said this afternoon that the blueprints have moved into a new delivery phase as you look to build on the existing framework and continue to embed best practice.

I welcome the positive steps being taken to prevent women and young people from entering the criminal justice system, however, it is unclear whether the blueprints have had any impact upon recidivism. Cabinet Secretary, rather than making yet another futile attempt to urge for the devolution of justice, something that only Labour and Plaid politicians think is a good idea, don't you think we should be taking action to ensure the UK Government and Welsh Government work together to tackle reoffending rates?

What are you doing to establish a residential women's centre apart from expressing disappointment? While I welcome the funding for Buvidal, what are you doing to ensure offenders get the best possible treatments for drug and alcohol addiction? Presiding Officer, at this point, I must declare an interest as a patron of Brynawel Rehab. Residential rehabilitation offers the best treatment for addiction. Cabinet Secretary, what are you doing to ensure that females and young offenders have access to residential rehabilitation?

Looking at youth offending, we must celebrate the fall in young offenders over the last decade, but we still have hundreds of children and young people requiring custodial sentences. With overcrowding at Parc and Usk, it is increasingly difficult to ensure that Welsh young offenders are housed in Welsh institutions. What discussions have you had with UK Cabinet colleagues about ensuring that there is capacity in Welsh young offenders institutions? The previous UK Government were investigating the use of skill schools. Is this something that you support and have you discussed this with the Ministry of Justice?

Finally, Cabinet Secretary, the latest crime statistics highlight the fact that black children continue to be over-represented numerically and proportionately. Evidence appears to point to involvement in cross-border criminal gangs, such as county lines. What steps are the Welsh Government taking to ensure that young people are educated about the risks of gang involvement, and how are schools and colleges working to ensure that young people don't fall victim to the predatory nature of these criminal gangs? Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch yn fawr, Altaf Hussain, and thank you for acknowledging the important role of the blueprints, the women's justice and youth offending blueprints, and also acknowledging that they are delivering. And I think that this is important in terms of your questions about justice, because the devolution of justice would enable us to have full capacity over the levers that we need to deliver youth justice in Wales. Indeed, I think that this is something that we are now making progress with in terms of discussions and engagement. We're exploring the devolution of youth justice. And I was very pleased that the devolution of youth justice was something that the First Minister has raised with the Prime Minister. We've also discussed the importance of progress in this area with a number of Ministers, and the Deputy First Minister had a positive meeting only last week with the Lord Chancellor to discuss actions on the Labour UK Government's manifesto commitment to explore the devolution of youth justice. So, now we await the move forward, which officials are taking, optimistic that we'll have something positive to say on this matter soon. But we've also continued to undertake preparatory activity. This is not about making the case for the devolution of youth justice, it's preparing for the devolution of youth justice, and we have a justice research programme, continued engagement with experts, those with lived experience of the justice system and regular meetings with the justice trade unions. 

It is important to recognise the fact that we have reduced the numbers of young people who are pulled into and engaged in the youth justice system. I think that this is something where we know that it's an opportunity for us to learn what works in terms of the youth justice blueprint. I was very pleased recently to visit with Sir Nic Dakin, who is the UK Government youth justice Minister, the Cardiff youth justice service at the John Kane Centre—that centre is responsible for youth justice—and learning with the young people themselves, using virtual reality technology, how young people are actually navigating realistic scenarios, which, importantly, allow them to explore the consequences of gang involvement in a safe and controlled environment, and that also reflects on your last point. But also, I was very interested in the Bwlch Youth Centre, the Carmarthenshire youth justice service, I visited last year, which was deemed to be outstanding. I've already mentioned the important work of Ceredigion youth justice service, which actually has led to our youth justice prevention strategy. 

I will just say on the residential women's centre that we continue not just to advocate but to call for the opening of the residential women's centre in Swansea. I met Lord Timpson on 9 June. I pushed once more for the opening of the centre in Swansea. Also, I know the Counsel General raised this last week with Lord Ponsonby. It's very welcome that the independent sentencing review led by David Gauke is firmly supportive of increasing the use of non-custodial sentences for offenders, with exceptions, and found these rehabilitative programmes embedded within it to be the most effective way to reduce reoffending communities.

The proposal to establish that centre, of course, is a key element of our women's justice blueprint, and we will continue to move forward with this as we have a centre available. I'm glad that I have been invited to sit on the women in justice board that has been set up by the Lord Chancellor to focus on alternatives to custody and support the board in ensuring that the unique circumstances in Wales are properly understood.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for your statement. Your vision of a justice system that is evidence based and that gives central consideration to the role of trauma in terms of victims and offenders is praiseworthy and attractive, but the evidence still demonstrates a significant gap between that vision and the situation on the ground. By 2023, 5,034 people from Wales were in prison—the highest figure ever, increasing the percentage to 171 per 100,000, the highest in western Europe—with over one in four, 28 per cent, imprisoned over the border in England. How do you assess the impact of keeping prisoners so far away from their homes on rehabilitation and post-release services, and is reducing the reliance on English prisons a specific priority for the Welsh Government?

In 2023, almost 20 per cent of women from Wales who were sentenced were imprisoned for a month or less. The MoJ anticipates that the number of women from Wales who are imprisoned will increase from 245 to 285 by 2027. In addition to that, a letter from the Minister for prisons this month confirms that the residential women's centre project in Swansea is currently delayed without a new opening date. In light of that, are you convinced that the steps that you have outlined today will be sufficient to reduce short-term imprisonment for women and reverse the increase in terms of the imprisonment of women that the MoJ anticipates in Wales?

Almost two decades since the Corston report, the MoJ doesn't have public data on pregnancy or caring responsibility for Welsh women who are held in custody. So, can you confirm that you have now had a specific commitment to collect and publish that fundamental data, so that we can measure the impact of short-term sentences on children?

It is encouraging that the number of young people coming into contact with the justice system for the first time has fallen to 422 in 2023, but across England and Wales, the percentage of reoffending among children and young people increased to 32.3 per cent in 2022-23, actually overturning the trends at that time. Without specific Wales figures, we cannot know where or why the risk of reoffending increases. When will we be in a position to publish reoffending data for Wales, so that we can target resources in a more detailed manner?

The lack of speech and communication therapy undermines preventative work. Correspondence between the association of speech therapists and your department notes that no speech and language therapist is funded by youth justice teams in north and mid Wales and that current contracts are due to come to an end. So, what assurance can you provide in terms of access to speech and communication therapy more generally, and what conversations have you had in order to make this a statutory requirement through the MoJ?

The spending review showed that the MOJ's capital budget will fall by 2.1 per cent per year in real terms until the end of the decade. So, how will this cut have an impact on the blueprint priorities, particularly the women's residential centre, and also expanding preventative programmes for young people?

You said in closing that it was the jagged edge that was the greatest barrier. 'Delivering Justice for Wales', your report last year, demonstrated that negotiations were ongoing on the devolution of youth justice and probation. So, what practical or policy issues are still to be resolved before these powers can be devolved? Do you expect to see this happening during the current Westminster term? Without Welsh data, without sustainable resources and, most of all, without full devolved powers, the aim of having a proactive justice system, one that is trauma informed, will fail on that jagged edge. Give us a reason to believe differently, Cabinet Secretary.

Diolch yn fawr, Adam Price. As you say, it's crucial that our justice system and policy driving and developing our justice system are evidence based. I would like to pick up on your point about data, and recognise that this goes back to the important work that's been undertaken by Dr Robert Jones at the Wales Governance Centre, and the fact files that he has produced where he had to seek that data through freedom of information requests. At the very first meeting I had with James Timpson, the new Minister for prisons, I said—and I met with Dr Jones as well—that we need to address this.

This is one of the first things that the UK Government could do to enable us to plan for the devolution of justice. We need to have that data for Wales. I am encouraged by the fact that, at official and ministerial level, this is now being addressed, and I would hope to be able to report on progress in due course, because it's really important in terms of both the women's justice blueprint and the youth justice blueprint as well that we do have that access to data.

I think your questions relating to how we can address the evidence that has come, indeed, through the statistics, as well as through contributions and research undertaken, as I've already said, by Dr Robert Jones, about how we can reduce short-term imprisonment, how we can actually divert women and the justice system away from custodial sentencing, are very important. So, I have welcomed the independent sentencing review.

The second part of that review identified those measures that aimed to address the prison capacity gap, so that it created a more supportive, effective system for both offenders and their victims, because that is the preventative, trauma-informed approach to justice. It's addressing the underlying causes of offending, stopping crime happening in the first place, but also to seek alternatives to a custodial sentence, which, of course, has been the key aim and goal of the women's justice blueprint, and indeed the goal of Jean Corston with her pioneering report, which, as you say, was two decades ago. One of her key recommendations was the development of residential women's centres. The evidence is there. The Equality and Social Justice Committee has progressed that as well, and I seek implementation of the pilot in Wales through our engagement now with the UK Government.

You also drew attention to the report undertaken by the Equality and Social Justice Committee on speech, language and communication needs, and I spoke about this at the debate that we had on that important report. It is something that local health boards are responsible for, because it's based on population health needs and determining the best way to meet their population needs. But also, we’ve set out that it would be for youth justice service teams to provide further services relating to speech, language and communication needs. It’s important, again, that we look to the response and the responsibilities and the funding opportunities of the UK Government. In fact, many local authorities are now using the Turnaround funding scheme to help address gaps in terms of services, and that includes speech, language and communication needs.

I’ve talked about the diversionary schemes that are now in place across the whole of Wales. Let’s look at what we have been able to do to enable women, particularly in terms of the women’s justice blueprint, to keep out of custodial sentences. The women’s pathfinder whole-system approach, helping women to address issues such as mental health at every stage of the justice system, diverting them away from unnecessary and disruptive custodial sentencing and giving trauma-informed training to staff working with women, and speaking to women and staff on the front line, just shows how improvements in personal outcomes from those referred can be so important. But I think the importance of what we’re also doing now in terms of strengthening family ties for women in prison reflects a key priority within the women’s justice blueprint. And we do fund, of course, the Visiting Mum service, run by the Prison Advice and Care Trust. 

Finally, in terms of your questions today, this is about how we have been able to work together with the blueprints. It has been jointly with the UK Government Ministry of Justice, HMPPS. But it’s about, actually, the providers in Wales who are delivering on that reduction in terms of youth offending and diverting both women and young people away from the courts and custodial sentences. We have a long way to go. It’s really important that I share this with you this afternoon so that you can see that we want to close that gap between our vision and the situation on the ground.

Before I go on to some of the things in your statement, I just want to clarify that we are now going to get the data that we need that previously was provided by Dr Robert Jones, because he has now been prevented from getting this information via the Data Protection Act 2018. We must know whether we are making any dint into the racism inherent in the offending rates, because this really is a disgraceful statistic and is a clear reason why we need to have the devolution of justice. That, for Altaf Hussain's benefit, is in order to join up the dots between training, education and health, to ensure that people are not reoffending and that we are not sending them to prison in the first place. So, I am very pleased with the work going on at the women's centres in Cardiff, run by Safer Wales and the Nelson Trust. They're doing an excellent job of keeping people out of prison and helping them reintegrate into the community if they have left prison recently.

I think what I'd like you to say a little bit more about is the important work you're doing with the Magistrates' Association to stop people being sent to prison completely ineffectually for a minimum of one month. Anything short of a year is a complete waste of time in terms of rehabilitation, and it enables women to lose their jobs, their homes and their children. So, it is really a disaster and a complete waste of public money. I wondered if you could say anything more about why we still have seen no progress on the Swansea women's centre as well.

Thank you very much, Jenny Rathbone. All I can say at this point, in terms of disaggregation of data, is that I feel that we're making a great deal of progress on that front, because there's a recognition that we cannot manage, develop and plan services without that disaggregation of data. I'm confident that we are on track to get that positive outcome.

I'm glad also that you have referred to the disproportionate representation of black, Asian and minority ethnic people. Indeed, Altaf Hussain raised that as well. It can be young people, it can be young men, and it's something, again, where I'm pleased that we have not only got the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan'—the Welsh Government—but also the criminal justice agencies have also adopted an ant-racist Wales action plan, and we need to see the positive impact of that.

The work of sentences is crucially important. Your report was vital. It showed how we had to raise awareness among the judiciary of the impact of custodial sentences for Welsh women. So, there's been a number of engagement events, training, raising awareness with sentences, magistrates, about community-based options. Over 270 people have been reached with this work, and sentence engagement is a priority of the blueprint. But also sentences have got this range already—access to a wide range of non-custodial options for women: deferred sentences, unpaid work, electronic monitoring, community sentence treatment requirements, rehab activity requirements. We have those options available all across Wales. Custody should be the last resort, if needed at all. I'll always recall visiting HMP Eastwood Park with former Counsel General Mick Antoniw, and meeting the governor who said, 'The majority of women in this prison have been trauma informed, are victims themselves of domestic abuse, poverty, substance misuse.' We have got an absolute responsibility to drive home the awareness of those alternative sentencing options, and I do support the independent sentencing review in terms of the ways that they're taking this forward.

Can I just say, in terms of non-residential women centres, how much I agree with you about those day centres, such as the Nelson Trust centre and the North Wales Women's Centre in Rhyl? Of course, I've visited many of these centres—they provide that support to manage to overcome substance misuse, but also provide childcare support, help with the cost of living, access and information. Last week I was able to visit the St Giles Trust and meet women with lived experience of the criminal justice system, who were now volunteers and getting placements with employers, and looking towards the opportunity to be able to rebuild their lives, and also the lives of their children, and move into paid employment. So, there is much good work that's ongoing in terms of how we support, and particularly support, women, as well as young people.

Just in terms of the issues in terms of the Safer Wales work, the funding that we give to Safer Wales, we can see the direct support to women in the criminal justice system, and in advocating and identifying particular opportunities for not only employment support, accommodation, but better options in terms of their lives and the lives of their families.

Most of the issues I was going to raise have already come up. What I particularly support about the youth justice and the women's blueprints is that they have women, children and young people, and their specific and unique needs, at the heart of the justice response.

I particularly wanted to bring up the issue of care-experienced young people. I think we all know that the evidence shows that young people who have been in care are over-represented in the prison population. I am sure the Cabinet Secretary will remember a visit we made together to Parc prison, where we saw care-experienced prisoners who put on a play about their experiences of being in care, which was very moving. So, I wondered if she had any comments or any proposals on how we would try to prevent so many children in the care system from ending up in prison.

I add my voice as well to the issue about the women's blueprint and the residential centre. Adam mentioned Jean Corston. I was in Parliament in 2006 when that very powerful report came out. The progress really seems to have gone in the opposite direction, so I do hope—. All the voices here today are saying we need to move, we need to move on this residential centre, so I want to add my voice to that.

Thank you very much, Julie Morgan, and thank you for drawing attention to the over-representation of care-experienced young people in prison. Indeed, we visited Parc prison and met care-experienced prisoners who were engaging and sharing their experiences, with support from a staff member who was enabling them to explore this through drama. I also remember visiting other prisons where care-experienced prisoners have actually set up their own groups to work together to overcome the issues that have affected them.

But the issue is about how we prevent care-experienced young people from being pulled into the criminal justice system, and I would turn now to the radical manifesto for care-experienced young people. That is something that, of course, you started in your former ministerial role, and now Dawn Bowden, as the Minister for Children and Social Care. Indeed, cross-Government, we’re meeting with care-experienced young people, even very recently, to hear about their experiences in life and how we can provide those alternative opportunities, which is all about the youth justice prevention framework.

In fact, the youth justice prevention framework has just been published, and it is about evidence about what works to prevent children and young people coming into contact with the justice system. I hope Members will see this, because it is actually a single, joined-up view of how we prevent young people getting involved in criminal behaviour, and very much based on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which leads us in Wales.

Thank you for adding your voice to call for the opening of the residential women's centre, recalling your engagement with Jean Corston and your long-term campaigning for this provision, where I believe Wales could show the way in terms of the delivery of that centre.

The shocking inequalities we see in our criminal justice system that have been talked about this afternoon really show it is not fit for purpose, and it is disproportionately harming certain groups of Welsh people in particular. So many reports, so many books and commissions have detailed and evidenced the detrimental effect of the jagged edge of devolved and reserved powers and responsibilities on some of our most vulnerable citizens. When I asked you directly before the last UK election to confirm your position on devolving justice for the sake of these citizens, you told me you were preparing for the devolution of youth justice. Well, that was in 2023, and you have reiterated it again today. So, when are we going to see action now that Labour are in power in Westminster? Why are your Labour colleagues in Westminster denying Wales and the Welsh Government the means to help ensure it has a justice system that embeds early intervention and prevention, giving you the powers you need to do so? I really want you to let us know why. Adam Price asked this question and we didn't get an answer. What is the block here?

I just want to reiterate the point made by Adam Price and others on the lack of support available for young people with speech and language difficulties, who we know are vastly over-represented in the criminal justice system. This was mentioned again to me during a committee visit to Parc prison just yesterday. So, I'd like to know how you're going to address this unacceptable situation. What progress is going to be made? The answer you gave previously was that it's other people's responsibility. This blueprint is your responsibility, and this is a key part, I think, of intervention and prevention, isn't it? 

Thank you very much, Sioned Williams. There's no question about our commitment as a Welsh Government about progressing—it is about progressing—the devolution of justice to Wales. I've outlined how we are delivering in terms of the blueprints, but it is our ultimate objective to secure the devolution of justice, and that would include policing as well as youth justice and probation. All of that was advocated by the Thomas commission, and more recently by the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales, chaired by Rowan Williams and Laura McAllister. But we've always known that this would need a phased approach, and that's why the steps—. We welcome the fact that the UK Government manifesto identified youth justice and probation as strong candidates for early devolution, because of the fact that those services dovetail into existing devolved services. 

So, devolution could allow us to offer those services, and it's a start, it's a phasing of the delivery—. Devolution of justice will allow us to focus on local challenges in Wales. I've already outlined how we're having meetings with the UK Government—a positive meeting last week with the Deputy First Minister and the Lord Chancellor, and meetings that I've had with Lord Timpson as well. I just welcome the fact that I can have the questions to me today, to make sure that there is understanding and recognition publicly that we are calling for this and working towards this. Indeed, of course, in relation to the Equality and Social Justice Committee report, we responded positively to that in terms of our responsibilities as a Welsh Government.

We're almost out of time on this statement, but I can squeeze in two more questions, if I can have short questions and short answers. Alun Davies.

I'm grateful to you, Llywydd. I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for her statement this afternoon. I have no doubt at all about her commitment to these matters. However, it is some years since I published the first of these blueprints, and it's some years since Lord John Thomas published his investigation into the state of criminal justice in Wales. It was unsatisfactory then, it is unsatisfactory today. I think we need to move away now from reporting on these matters, and outline how we are going to move forward. It is no longer viable for the Welsh Government to simply administer these matters. We need progress. Too many people are suffering too badly in this country to allow us to sit back and not pursue these matters with great vigour.

So, I hope, Cabinet Secretary, that you will be able to make a statement to this place explaining how the Welsh Government intends to take forward these matters, introducing policies that will enable us to address the fundamental issues facing, particularly here, women and young people in the criminal justice system, but creating a criminal justice system that is fair, delivers social justice and enables us all in Wales to have a decent criminal justice system that serves our needs and not somebody else's.

Thank you very much, Alun Davies, and thank you for, indeed, initiating this in terms of the blueprints in your former ministerial role. I think what is positive and what we must look to is the fact that, in terms of the residential women's centre, this was actually a proposal that was approved by the former Government as a pilot for Wales. It's been developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Justice and key partners. You now have a women in justice board. In fact, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language attended a meeting of that, and one is due shortly. They are looking at alternatives to custody. We've got a place ready to open here. So, I believe we've got every opportunity now in Wales, with the independent sentencing review, to make the case to take this forward, and there were very encouraging meetings that the Deputy First Minister had in terms of devolution of youth justice.

I want to add my voice of support to the Welsh Government's aim of achieving a fully devolved justice system as soon as possible. The blueprints absolutely demonstrate how we have a very different approach here in Wales, focusing on identifying where support can prevent offending and reoffending. You've referred to the significant amount of work that was done with the previous Conservative UK Government, and it is essential that collaboration continues with the current Government at pace. I share many colleagues' concern, and your own, around the building identified several years ago now for a residential women's centre in Swansea still not being open. Having visited HMP Eastwood Park and spoken with Welsh women, it's very clear how much that centre is needed. I actually firmly believe that provision is also needed in north Wales, where I've spoken to constituents who have female family members in HMP Styal. So, whilst I appreciate the focus is ensuring the centre in Swansea is opened without any further delay, I just wondered if you'd had any discussions with the UK Government around such a provision for north Wales?

Thank you very much, Lesley Griffiths, and thank you for your role and engagement, formerly in a ministerial role, but your commitment—long-standing commitment—to the women in justice blueprint. Indeed, I've mentioned the north Wales women's centre, as it predates many of the women's centres that have been opened more latterly in south Wales. I, indeed, also visited HMP Styal and met the women from north Wales, who, really, in terms of their circumstances—life circumstances—one questions why they were in prison at all. And that's the same when we went to HMP Eastwood Park. I think it's the point that Adam Price made about short sentences. We've got an opportunity now, with the independent sentencing review, to address that. But, again, I think if we can get the pilot going in south Wales, then make the case for north Wales to follow on.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

Item 7 has been withdrawn.

Item 8 is the Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Wet Wipes) (Wales) Regulations 2025. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for climate change to move these—Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Llywydd. I move the motion. I'm very pleased to be here today to introduce the Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Wet Wipes) (Wales) Regulations 2025 to reduce the environmental damage that's caused by the disposal of wet wipes in an irresponsible manner.

In 2023, 21,000 wipes were collected by Marine Conservation Society volunteers across 92 miles of UK beaches during their Beachwatch event. By 2024, the number of wipes collected had risen to more than 26,000. There should be no place for wet wipes amongst the pebbles and the sand and the seaweed on our beautiful Welsh coastline. A recent survey found that 22 per cent of people admitted to having flushed wet wipes into the sewerage system. Despite awareness-raising campaigns like Dŵr Cymru's 'You Can Stop the Block', a large volume of wet wipes are still entering the natural environment due to inappropriate disposal. These wipes often contain plastic, which are a well-recognised, significant contributor to harmful plastic pollution in our rivers and oceans.

So, by introducing this legislation today, we are taking another step in our commitment to reduce the environmental harm caused by plastic and microplastic pollution. This pollution, as we all know, is visible, its impact is tangible, and it's long lasting. Taking decisive action will encourage manufacturers, retailers and consumers of the need to continue our shift towards reusable and non-plastic products. Now, it's been evident, Llywydd, from previous debates in this Chamber on plastic pollution, that there is wide cross-party support for such action and, therefore, I am encouraged that Members will support the regulations being debated today based on previous debates.

Turning to the regulations themselves, we have used powers under the Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Wales) Act 2023 to bring forward this legislation. Wet wipes containing plastic will be added to table 1 in the Schedule to the Act. From 18 December 2026, it will be an offence to supply or to offer to supply wet wipes containing plastic in Wales. This 18-month transition period will allow manufacturers the time to adapt their businesses. Now, we understand that some people with certain health needs rely on medical-grade wet wipes that do contain plastic. An exemption for such wipes that are designed or manufactured for use in connection with medical care or treatment has, therefore, been included.

It should be noted that, under the single-use plastic product Act, the ban does not extend to business-to-business supply, as the Act only covers supply to consumers. Therefore, wet wipes for specific industrial use, where plastic-free alternatives are either unsuitable or do not exist, are not included, but we will continue to encourage these sectors to further innovate to reduce plastic content in such wipes or to seek alternatives.

Let me conclude by reiterating that banning single-use plastic products like wet wipes is part of our ongoing drive to reduce the damage caused by microplastic pollution. We take this action to protect and maintain our natural habitats and our health and well-being.

I am pleased to move this motion, and urge the Chamber to support.

It's not often that I say this, but thank you very, very much, Cabinet Secretary, for bringing forward your statement today, and, indeed, this ban. This has driven me barmy over the time—. Certainly, in the last five or seven years, we've raised so many times in this Chamber the issue of wet wipes. Eleven billion wet wipes are used throughout the UK. They are reportedly behind 93 per cent of blockages in UK sewers. Dŵr Cymru have stated that 2,000 sewage blockages in Wales are caused each month by non-degradable wet wipes. These wipes continue to contribute to a significant number of sewage blockages, causing overspills. And, first-hand, I've witnessed where hundreds of fish have died as a result of these blockages that then pollute our rivers.

Microplastics or nanoplastics have been found in rivers, soil, sea, and have even been ingested by organisms. Now, in 2019, it was noted that half of all insects found in the River Taf contain nanoplastics. Stephen Ormerod has stated that densities of plastic particles on the river bed can be as much as 0.5 million particles per square metre. All of this is shocking and highlights the serious problem that we have with plastics.

I believe, as a nation, we have a problem generally with wipes. As a child growing up, I remember there wasn't such a thing as wet wipes. People would use reusable cloths, and there were ways that—. But, again, in those days, there were terry nappies—terry cotton towelling nappies. But now, it's fair to say that—. But we've got to be really careful when innovation brings new and easier ways of doing the jobs we need to do. Just as with the removal of plastic straws, disposable vapes, I have long campaigned—well, we, the Welsh Conservatives, have long campaigned—for these regulations that make single-use wet wipes containing plastic a prohibited single-use plastic product for the purposes of the 2023 Act. I only wish it was coming in in December of this year, but we have to be grateful for how you've worked to get this through. So, thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Cabinet Secretary.

I don't have any further speakers, but you are welcome to respond to those thanks, Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Thank you, Janet, as well.

Can I just say a few words? First of all, thank you, Janet, but thank you also, everybody in this Chamber, for the strong cross-party support that there has been for this throughout. We've built a little bit of time for the manufacturers to get this right, because we want manufacturers to shift their production into more sustainable ways forward. But, you're right—the blockages in the sewers, the pollution in the rivers and oceans, is something that we really need to move on and tackle.

In closing this debate, I'd like to thank my fellow Members of the Senedd for taking part in this very brief debate today, and thank them for the meaningful points that they've made.

We know there's big public support for this action as well, and this is just another step forward in our attempts to deal with plastics and microplastics. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed.

The Procurement (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 are next, and to move the motion on these regulations is the Cabinet Secretary for finance, Mark Isherwood—no, not Mark Isherwood; Mark Drakeford [Laughter.]

Thank you very much, Llywydd—I think.

I ask Members to support the Procurement (Wales) Amendment Regulations 2025. The Procurement Act 2023 came into force on 24 February of this year, changing how public procurement works across Wales. The Act helps to ensure that every pound goes further for public services and for communities.

The regulations in front of the Senedd this afternoon provide Welsh contracting authorities with a clear process to determine whether a contract is exempt from the procurement Act. By offering detailed definitions and calculation methods, these regulations enhance understanding, consistency and the efficient use of resources. The regulations will also make a minor amendment to the Procurement (Wales) Regulations 2024 to address comments received from the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee on the Procurement (Miscellaneous Amendments) (Wales) Regulations 2025. I am, of course, grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their continued consideration of these regulations. I ask Members to approve the regulations before the Senedd today.

 Chair of the the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mike Hedges.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee considered these draft regulations on 12 May. The Welsh Government subsequently provided the committee with a response to its report, which was considered on 2 June.

The committee's report contained eight technical points. Two of these points note inconsistency between the English and Welsh text, and this is not the first time that I've got up and said that about legislation, so can I urge the Welsh Government to try and ensure that there is consistency between the English and the Welsh? One identifies potential defective drafting and the remaining five points highlight matters that the committee considers require further explanation. As regards reporting point 3 and potential defective drafting, the committee's report identifies incorrect references to 'sub-paragraphs' when we believe that the reference should be to 'paragraphs'. The committee's report notes that this error already occurs in the 2024 regulations. The Welsh Government disagrees with our interpretation of its 'Writing laws for Wales: guidance on drafting legislation', and whilst recognising the merits of the technical point raised, it told the committee that it is not minded to make any amendments.

Reporting point 4 notes the first of two places where the committee identified inconsistency between the English and Welsh texts. In regulation 3(4) in the definition of 'reorganisation', there's an inconsistency in the expression used in the Welsh text conveying the meaning of the phrase 'other than a minimal or incidental change'. The other language equivalence issue is noted in reporting point 8. Again, in regulation 3(4), in the English text, it appears to be that 'of the preparation' has been mistakenly repeated twice in the sentence. The Welsh Government agrees with the committee on both matters and intends to correct the errors prior to the regulations being made, should the Senedd approve them this afternoon.

Finally, I will address reporting point 1 in the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee report, which identifies a matter that the committee considers requires further explanation. Once again, in regulation 3(4), in the new regulations 45E(9) and 45F(9), the term 'date of contract award' has been defined with the same meaning for both of those regulations. However, the same term is already in use in several places in the 2024 regulations. The committee asked the Welsh Government to explain whether the term 'date of contract award' bears the same meaning in the existing regulations as given by the definition for the new regulations. The committee is concerned that the lack of clarity could lead some people to consider that the meaning of 'date of contract award' differs across the existing 2024 regulations and those new regulations. In response to this point, the Welsh Government told the committee that it does not agree that there is any ambiguity, however, that it will look to make an amendment in the future set of regulations in early 2026 to clarify the definition. Diolch.

The Cabinet Secretary to reply.

Well, Llywydd, as I said, I'm grateful to the committee for the careful way in which they have scrutinised the regulations. The Welsh Government provided, as the Chair has said, a detailed response. There are a number of places where we were able to propose changes to meet points made by the committee. In other places—the committee's view of the difference between a 'sub-paragraph' and a 'paragraph', for example—we didn't feel that those points required a change to the regulations, but I'm grateful for the points that the Member has made. And where we have indicated that we will make corrections to ensure that the English and Welsh texts are entirely consistent with one another, we'll do that, just as these regulations respond to points made by the committee in relation to earlier regulations laid before the Senedd.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. There is no objection. We do not need to move to a vote. The regulations are agreed. 

That brings today's business to a close.