National Assembly for Wales

I call the National Assembly to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, and the first question, Hefin David.

Yes. The Wales and borders franchise is due to end in October 2018, and we have started the process of procuring an operator and development partner, who will also operate services and develop the south Wales metro.

I’d like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for that, and note, with thanks, the statement that was made this morning on rolling stock. Within the statement, the Cabinet Secretary said that, on core Valleys lines, passenger operations—which includes from my constituency—making use of diesel-only traction will be phased out, and conventional electrification, stored-energy systems, and hybrid systems would be considered. I have met with Arriva Trains Wales, and they said that, in the short term, though, that’s not going to be possible—there is a shortage of rolling stock and a shortage of carriages, so people are standing up. Now, given the damning report that listed failures of the UK Government’s electrification of the line, that isn’t allowing diesel rolling stock to be transferred temporarily to Valleys lines. I’d like to know whether the Cabinet Secretary has a plan for that, and could he also elaborate perhaps on whether the Wales and borders franchise will include new rolling stock as part of the franchise?

Well, there are a number of important points that the Member has raised, and, of course, some of the problems that have recently been highlighted could be avoided if we could have responsibility, powers, and a fair settlement devolved to Wales, so that we can ensure that the needs of passengers are met in the full. Now, it’s up to Arriva Trains Wales to appropriately manage capacity on the current franchise terms, but we have also provided additional rolling stock to Arriva Trains Wales to assist in overcrowding on many lines, including those that the Member has identified. Whilst there is a very limited diesel rolling stock currently available, we are in dialogue with the rail industry at the moment, to try to identify solutions that could deliver additional capacity in the short term.

Now, the majority of routes and services within the Wales and borders franchise, including the Valleys lines, are dependent upon the £180 million Welsh Government support every year, in terms of franchise subsidy payments and funding for additional services and rolling stock. Arriva Trains Wales lease the vast majority of rolling stock used on Wales and borders services from two privately owned rolling stock leasing companies. And I understand that four of the pacer trains used predominantly on the Valleys lines are owned by local authorities in south Wales.

Now, the Member will know from the statement that’s been issued today by me that, with the new competitive dialogue taking place with the four bidders for the next round of the franchise, fresh criteria will be put in place that enables growth in terms of passenger numbers to be met, by an increase in the amount of rolling stock that’s available, and not just in terms of quality, but also vast improvements in terms of the quality of rolling stock.

Cabinet Secretary, you’ll be aware, obviously, that the Welsh Government’s stated ambition is to deliver a new not-for-profit rail model, but the current bidders, as you’ve outlined, to become the Wales and borders operator and development partner won’t themselves be not-for-profit companies. So, clearly, there’s a potential for some misunderstanding. Now, I want to see a proper model, which sees profits reinvested in the services and infrastructure, and a truly not-for-profit model, and others, such as the RMT union, have similar ambitions. Will you confirm today that you share that general principle, and will you provide details on what you are doing to move towards that goal?

Yes, of course. The Member will be aware that there are restrictions in place, through legislation from Parliament, that prevents only not-for-profit operators from bidding for the franchise. But we have designed the procurement system as such that it does not disadvantage any not-for-profit bidders, should they wish to come forward—none have, but what we have done is design a solution that fits with our limited powers. We are seeking changes to those powers, to enable, potentially, Transport for Wales, for example, and another not-for-profit operator in the future, to run the services that could be part of a future franchise. But, for the time being, we have designed a model—we’ve been as innovative as we possibly can—to ensure that as much of the franchise through concessions in the next round can be operated on a not-for-profit basis. The process of competitive dialogue will also place, right at the forefront of deliberation, service quality for passengers, rather than profit motive, and I would share the aspirations that the member has outlined today—for all money to be retained within Wales and to be reinvested in the network. It’s what passengers expect from their public services.

Yes, the green economy underpins our programme for government commitment to introduce new legislation for the environment. Our aim is to position Wales as a low-carbon, green economy, to support projects that help reduce the impact of climate change.

Diolch. Greening our economy is an important part of our efforts to tackle climate change here in Wales, and, last month, I attended a public meeting sponsored by Stop Climate Change Chaos. I took their pledge to speak up on climate change and use my role as an Assembly Member to drive action on climate change. I note with interest the different approaches taken by different UKIP AMs on this issue—on one hand we have Caroline Jones joining me in taking that pledge to speak up on action for climate change and making sure it’s addressed, and well done. On the other hand, though, we had David Rowlands last week and the remarkable ode to climate change denial that took place in this Chamber. Would you agree that that UKIP approach will not be taken up by the Welsh Government, as those short-term solutions cannot be taken seriously on this important issue?

I’d like to thank the Member for his question. Whilst other parties might be inconsistent in their approach to climate change, we will remain absolutely resolute in our determination to meet our international obligations and, indeed, to grow the green economy, which is of enormous value to communities right across Wales. In terms of green energy, we know that many jobs in some of our most rural parts of Wales—particularly in the north-west and in the west—heavily rely on that sector, and we will do all that we can to grow that economic priority sector.

Minister, I have asked successive Cabinet Secretaries and Ministers in this institution to actually start delivering on some of the rhetoric that they’ve talked about, especially on microgeneration in the green energy sector, and, to do that, we need a grid that can allow people to connect to it. There are many, many people who would wish to generate—or play a part in generating—green energy projects, especially farmers and landowners, but they just cannot get a grid connection. And unless Western Power Distribution and the other grid providers provide those facilities, then you are not going to be able to deliver on this part of the economy. So, what discussions are you having to develop a coherent strategy to upgrade the grid here in Wales, so that, ultimately, small and medium-sized green energy projects can, if they wish, connect to the grid and play their part in the green economy?

Well, of course, in terms of these responsibilities, it falls into the hands of the Cabinet Secretary for environment and natural resources. We work closely in terms of identifying the barriers for green growth, including green growth in the energy sector. Perhaps the biggest opportunity that we have—and the Member highlights the potential of this sector—perhaps the greatest opportunity could come with the autumn statement, if good news is presented later this month in regard to the tidal lagoon in Swansea bay.

Cabinet Secretary, why not embrace the excellent opportunities that exist in responding to the challenge of climate change—these positive economic opportunities? What is the Government doing to promote hydrogen fuel cell technologies in the economy at the moment? I understand that fuel cells were originally devised in Wales, as it happens, but, by now, those hydrogen fuel cells are a way particularly of powering vehicles and even trains that can run on the new metro that is being proposed for south Wales. The technology is in place and the capability is there, so now what is required is funding and support in order to make the technology something practical that people can use in their daily lives. This is a way of turning renewable energy into something that can be used across Wales.

Well, the Member is absolutely right, and I’m pleased that we’ve been able to give support both in terms of advice and guidance, but also financial resource to Riversimple—a company that the Member may be aware of—which is at the forefront of research, development and innovation insofar as hydrogen cell engines are concerned. This is a growing area of interest for innovators and particularly universities right across the world. The Member is also right to say that we should be embracing the economic opportunities that the growth in the green economy present, and the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and Waste and Resources Action Programme study found that achieving a greener economy in Wales could provide economic benefits of more than £2 billion a year. This immense contribution to the economy would also produce jobs with a higher gross value added, and also drive research and development in the Welsh economy, which is what we so necessarily need right now. And in terms of a WRAP and Green Alliance study, there’s a prediction that up to 30,000 new jobs can be created in Wales through the development of, again, a more circular green economy. So, it’s absolutely vital that we continue to invest, through our green funds, and continue to provide advice and guidance to businesses within the green sector to grow and to prosper.

Questions from party spokespeople now and, first this week, Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Adam Price.

Diolch, Lywydd. I think, Cabinet Secretary, we’ve seen again overnight, haven’t we, the way in which political consequences flow from an economic agenda that has failed to deliver change for the majority of people. So, would he agree that now is the time really for bold, big ideas that have the potential to deliver transformational change for our country and our people? In this spirit, I note that Greater Manchester has announced it is bidding to for the World Expo, the Olympics for business, if you like, which hasn’t been to mainland Britain since the first one, the Great Exhibition of 1851. They’re competing, in the case of the 2025 expo against Paris and Osaka, and it’s by no means certain that they’ll succeed. So, could we explore the possibility of Wales bidding for the next available slot, which will be in 2027-28? What more exciting, compelling idea than bringing the expo home to the birthplace of the industrial revolution here in Wales?

Can I thank the Member for his question, and say that he is right—events overnight have certainly led to us needing to focus more attention on economic growth being relevant to all people in all communities? And this follows considerations, which I know the Member has had, since the referendum as well. And in part of the development of the new economic strategy, I think it’s essential that we do refocus our attention on areas of high unemployment and where there are opportunities, not just to access jobs and to access wealth, to also experience opportunities create more wealth within their own boundaries. That economic strategy will be presented in the new year to the First Minister, but I think the Member is also right that we do need to offer big, bold ideas, such as the Newport convention centre, which is a facility—the first time that we will experience a facility of its type in Wales—that could offer opportunities for hosting major events such as the expo, such as the World Travel Market, which I was at this week in London, such as the sports personality of the year awards. And not just cultural events, but business events and sporting events as well.

On this theme of big ideas, the Bevan Foundation yesterday launched a powerful report that made the case for designating the whole of the south Wales Valleys as an enterprise zone. Is there an opportunity to go even further here and actually seek permission from the UK Government for the whole of Wales to be made an enterprise zone, and for us to have the corporation tax powers that are being offered to Northern Ireland, for us to have research and development tax break powers, and the powers to have holidays for national insurance employer contributions, particularly in those areas like the south Wales Valleys, where there are particular economic challenges, giving thus to Wales the kind of competitive advantage that we need if we’re to close this historic economic gap that we’ve faced for generations?

Yes. I read the report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation with great interest, and whilst I think the idea of an enterprise zone for the whole of the Valleys has merit, I do not think that that would offer a silver bullet solution to Valleys communities. And I think more needs to be done over and above such a suggestion to actually address some of the structural problems that continue to affect not just Valleys communities, but many parts of Wales that experienced a decline after the loss of significant jobs in the 1980s that were associated with manufacturing, with the mines, with the steel industry for example. We’ve got a good story to tell thus far, in terms of our economic performance. We supported and created 140,000 jobs in the last Assembly term. We also ensured that we avoided the sort of blight on communities that was experienced in other former industrial areas of the UK, insofar as youth unemployment was concerned. Here we created 15,000 jobs for young unemployed people. As we move forward, I want to place the focus more on the quality of jobs that we create and also have a more sensitive economic strategy to recognise some of the problems that exist—some of the more idiosyncratic problems and unique problems that exist in many communities that have not benefitted equally from the economic growth that we have experienced as a nation. This is a big challenge and that’s why I’m consulting as widely as possible on what the new economic strategy should contain. I’d welcome the Members’ views on the economic strategy and I’d also welcome input from all parties and stakeholders.

As I say, that will be produced in the new year and will be presented to the First Minister. But it will be building on what is a proud, good record for Wales in recent years, but it will aim to address, as I say, some of the more structural problems. Meanwhile, the work of the Valleys taskforce continues. I know that the idea of designating the whole of Wales an enterprise zone was touted, first, I think, by Matthew Parris. I think we need to consider all levers at our disposal and all opportunities that the Wales Bill, and whatever devolved powers in the future, could present to us.

Finally, can I urge the Cabinet Secretary to look, not just at the economic gap between Wales and the rest of the UK—indeed, the rest of Europe—but also the economic gap within Wales, absolutely, particularly at a time when many people in the Valleys and rural Wales feel as distant from the centres of power and wealth as the people of the midwest or the rust belt feel from Washington DC? So, will you consider the case for creating powerful new regional development corporations, focusing, particularly, on the needs of those areas of Wales, in the Valleys and rural Wales? It worked here in Cardiff bay, did it not, in microcosm? Should we not extend that same leverage to those areas in Wales that need it so badly? Would he also consider the case for creating regional capitals within Wales, which could be centres of public administration and business services, and, indeed, even the idea that you see in many commonwealth provinces, the idea of a vice capital—we might need to look a little bit at the branding—[Laughter.]—where even this Parliament could actually sit for some of its time as a symbol of our commitment to spreading wealth and power to every part of Wales?

As I say, it’s about making sure that there is relevance to what we do in all parts of Wales. As I’ve spoken on numerous occasions now about the area that I personally represent in Wales, I think sometimes the north-east feels distant from this institution and somewhat removed from the process of devolution. I would agree as well about regional economies and the importance that urban areas have in giving them identity and attracting investment and generating economic wealth as well. It’s important that, within any regional economy, there are centres, towns, that can be identified as capitals of those regions. Insofar as Wales is concerned, we are reaching that point with Cardiff, with Swansea and with Newport. I think it’s central that we identify local authorities and towns elsewhere in Wales that are willing and determined to take on the challenge of becoming regional capitals. I think that’s absolutely central.

I’ve spoken on numerous occasions as well about the fact that, I hope, through the new economic strategy, we can look at using more place-based interventions. In the work that I’m carrying out, under the chairmanship of Alun Davies on the Valleys taskforce, we’ve been open-minded about the interventions that are required within the Valleys. As I said earlier to a previous question, I think we can’t afford to look at an all-Wales strategy, without also looking at some of the nuances of the regions. Therefore, we need to ensure that we don’t approach every region with a one-model-fits-all approach. That’s why I think it’s important that, within the context of the work that’s taking place at the moment on the economic strategy, we also look at the regional economies and what it is that each of the regions require, because it may well be that what’s required in North Wales is different to what’s required in Mid and West Wales and within the city regions of south Wales.

The Welsh Conservatives’ spokesperson, Russell George.

Diolch, Lywydd. Cabinet Secretary, I would be grateful if you could outline the benefits and the costs associated with the decision to locate the headquarters of the Welsh development bank in the north-east of Wales and also to outline what discussions you’ve had on this with Finance Wales.

Well, my latest discussions took place yesterday. The Member will be aware from my committee appearance last week—and this actually relates to the questions and the points that Adam Price has just made—that I do have concerns about ensuring that national institutions such as the National Assembly for Wales and Welsh Government have a presence right across Wales, and that no part of Wales feels excluded. And, in carrying out a mapping exercise, it was found that there are part of Wales where there is less presence, and I think it’s essential that we do what we can to make Government and to make this national institution relevant to all people equally. And for that reason, I think it makes sense that we do decentralise whenever and wherever possible. For the same reason, I’ve said that, with Transport for Wales, my intention for that body is that that will be headquartered in the Valleys as well.

We need to learn from yesterday’s result in the United States and from the referendum that many people in many communities feel that national institutions, national polities, are too far removed from their communities. It’s essential, therefore, that what we do becomes more relevant, more apparent and more accessible to them.

Well, Cabinet Secretary, you won’t have any disagreement from me. I firmly believe that we should be moving out of this place and across to all areas of Wales. Finance Wales was telling the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee this morning that it’s becoming more and more difficult to retain and recruit staff. Now, there is a concern that, as a result of a proposed relocation to north-east Wales, those skills could be lost. There may be some staff from within Finance Wales who do not want to make the move, so clearly there is a potential issue of staff retention in this regard, and I wonder what assessment you’ve made.

If you look at north-east Wales, you’ll see that many, many people—hundreds of people in north-east Wales—travel across the border into England every day to work in major financial centres. They travel across the border to work at the Bank of America in Chester, they travel across the border to work at Marks & Spencer Financial Services, and to the banks and financial centres in Manchester. I don’t think that skills issues should be used as an excuse to stop the development of economic growth across Wales. If we know that there are skills available in parts of Wales, then they can be utilised for growth within those areas. But in terms of Finance Wales and the development of the development bank for Wales, I am conscious of the need to retain staff, and for that reason I had discussions just yesterday with Giles Thorley about ensuring that the presence in Cardiff for the development bank for Wales is retained, but that there are opportunities also, in the form of a headquarters in north Wales, to make that institution more accessible and more relevant to all parts of the country.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I think there’s probably another question there about what is it that ‘a headquarters’ means. Is it a wholesale move of staff to another part of Wales, or is it just a title as well? So, perhaps you could address that point. But the final point I’d like to make is: in the annual report for 2015-16, Finance Wales confirms that the remuneration of its highest-paid director was £404,000, compared to £216,000 in the previous year. That is a very high figure, and when we asked them about that, they attributed it to the extra pension costs contributed to the pension scheme. I understand that 30 per cent of Finance Wales staff are on the same pension scheme as well. So if, of course, staff do leave the organisation, there is the potential for a huge increase in costs there, so I’d be grateful if you could address that point and also have you addressed that point within the business case?

These are being examined as part of the options, and there are options on the table for the development of the bank and where it should be located. Insofar as what ‘a headquarters’ means, well there are two options: one, the wholesale transfer of staff and functions away from the capital to the new headquarters; or two, the second option would be to have a headquarters and, over a period of time, to grow that headquarters without necessarily losing staff at the current offices. So, we’re going to be considering both options, both the financial implications, but also the implications in terms of the retention of expertise and skills. But I need to be clear again that I wish to see decentralisation wherever and whenever possible, and I will look for opportunities to deliver services in different communities across Wales, so that Welsh Government and, I hope, the National Assembly for Wales and all of us become more relevant to people’s lives.

UKIP spokesperson, David Rowlands.

Diolch, Lywydd. I’m going to bring matters back now to the regional level that we talked about a little earlier on. I believe the Cabinet Secretary is aware of a group called MAGOR—Magor Action Group on Rail—which is campaigning for a station in Magor in Gwent. They have been engaged in this project for a number of years and have been successful in obtaining funding from several organisations. I understand that they are now seeking a Welsh Government grant to match-fund the project to a governance for railway investment project 3 study stage, which I believe is a sum of something like £80,000. They hope to complete this stage over the next few months. Is the Cabinet Secretary in a position to indicate whether he is willing to provide this funding?

Well, I can’t do that on this occasion, because we’re still assessing the merits of the application. I think what the group has done so far has great merit. I think the work that they’ve carried out has been incredibly valuable in terms of informing Welsh Government what it is that the communities need in order to create a more connected environment. And so we will give very sympathetic consideration to that application, but I can’t today say whether it will or will not be approved.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. If you’re still thinking of funding, can I be as impertinent as to ask if he may consider totally funding the GRIP 3 application, which is probably in the region of £160,000? I raise this possibility, Cabinet Secretary, because it can be noted that this station has actually been indicated on the South Wales East metro plan several times, and it has a very real chance of being the first manifestation of the metro project in the South Wales East region.

For the same reason that I’ve already given, I couldn’t give any guarantees about whether I’d be able to fund the full £160,000. I’m sure the Member is sympathetic to the reason why. I can’t do that because the application has not been thoroughly scrutinised yet. But in terms of stations, well, the metro project does have flexibility built into it so that there can be extensions and there can be amendments to the service provision if, for example, new social infrastructure is incorporated into the South East Wales regional area and then the metro map can be amended accordingly. So, I’m sympathetic to the cause. I will look thoroughly at the application, but I’m not in a position to give the go-ahead today.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary, but I would have liked to have been able to take back a little bit more of a positive message to these people. Are you in any way able to give me some sort of indication as to the possibility of this happening, or not?

I would very happily meet with the Member and the group that he talks of, because I think they have made a very strong case, as has the Member, for support from Welsh Government. I would happily discuss their aspirations and the application with them.

In 2015, we published an initial scoping report into reopening this line. Subsequently, we funded a further appraisal of the regional transport needs, which is currently being finalised. I am pleased that we have included further development funding in the draft budget.

I’m grateful for that reply. Picking up on a point well made by Adam Price earlier on that communities in Mid and West Wales’s need to feel more integrated with the prosperous areas of south-east Wales, does the Cabinet Secretary agree that the rebuilding of this railway line could make a contribution to that? The line was closed at a time when there was enormous pessimism about the future of rail travel in Britain in the 1960s and a great many of the Beeching-related decisions that were taken then would not have been taken if people had been able to foresee the way that the rail industry has developed in recent years. As it takes six hours to get from Aberystwyth to Cardiff by train via Shrewsbury, this would cut the journey time in half. And fortunately, there has been a big increase in the demand for rail travel: in recent years, the usage of Aberystwyth station has increased by 40 per cent in the last eight years, for example. This would give us a real prospect of reconnecting parts of Wales that perhaps feel that they’re far too distant from the areas where too much investment seems to be taking place in the minds of ordinary people, picking up again on the point that you made at the beginning of today’s proceedings about how the results of the election in America yesterday and Brexit actually derived to a great extent from feelings of exclusion and that we need to do more to connect people.

Being connected is one of the fundamental needs of every human if they’re going live in an environment that has minimal distress and anxiety, and I think it’s essential that, within the programme for government, we place just as much of an emphasis on the united and connected element of Government strategy as we do on the other three important strategies. I think that this project would be an appropriate proposal for the national infrastructure commission for Wales to take a look at once it’s up and running, and I intend asking the commission to do just that. However, in the meantime, we are commissioning a feasibility study, as I say, to build on the existing evidence, and I can outline what that study will incorporate. There will be an assessment of the track. We know that more than 90 per cent of the track remains unaffected; we’ll carry out a review of the track. We’ll look at structures and stations and tunnelling. We’ll look at telecoms and a number of other issues. I think the initial estimate of reinstating the line was something in the region of £750 million as a total project. It is expensive. In terms of deliverability, it could be done because, as I say, the vast majority of the track has already been retained. But it will be a costly project to undertake, which is why I think it has to have expert, independent advice provided to Government in the form of expert advice from the national infrastructure commission.

I’m pleased to tell the Minister that it doesn’t take six hours to travel from Aberystwyth to Cardiff. I do it on a weekly basis and it takes four hours. But, four hours is more than enough to be on the train because most of the journey is through England. It would be nice to travel from Cardiff to Aberystwyth through Wales, rather than through England. But the main blessing of this scheme, as well as linking Aberystwyth and Cardiff, is to link Carmarthen and Aberystwyth—two sub-capitals, as Adam Price said, for west Wales.

It’s extremely important that we see economic growth in west Wales for our young people, for the Welsh language, and for heritage, culture and tourism as well, and that’s what this proposal provides us with: an opportunity to achieve that dream of linking west Wales. Then you wouldn’t need a development zone: the railway would do that for you. But, on a practical basis, I’m pleased to hear that this scheme is to be funded because of the agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Government, and I’m pleased to hear this idea that NICW, the infrastructure programme, is also looking at this. But, in practical terms, we need Network Rail now to look at this scheme in earnest. When I discussed this with Network Rail about a year ago, they were very clear that they would look at a proposal such as this one if the Government was behind it and if there was a feasibility study in place, because then they could programme that for capital development ultimately. Network Rail aren’t doing particularly well on capital programmes at the moment in Wales, but that’s another issue. But, this now needs to be part of their planning. Would you meet with Network Rail urgently to discuss this?

Yes. In fact, I believe my next meeting with Network Rail is coming up in the next six weeks, so that’ll be an issue that I’ll be discussing with them, along with the need to invest more in tree clearance. A lack of investment in tree clearance is leading to too many leaves on the lines, which is leading to a lack of reliability in the network. So, I’ll be raising a number of points with them. I’ve already raised the fact on numerous occasions that I think it’s unacceptable that we in Wales have benefited to the tune of just 1 per cent of overall spend by Network Rail since 2011. I think time is overdue for a windfall from Network Rail right across Wales. I understand that the line was originally closed—. It was a victim of the Beeching cuts when it was closed in 1965, and I know subsequent closures of lines, I think, in 1970 and 1973. I think Members are right, around the Chamber, to say that, had there been the foresight then to secure services, then we’d be in a far better position today to have a more connected Wales. Nonetheless, we now have a duty as Welsh Government to ensure that communities are well connected and that forms of transportation are also integrated where and whenever possible. I think the roll-out of the TrawsCymru bus network has proven that there is incredible demand for people to travel where railway lines are not available across the country and from the north to the south. I’m pleased to be extending the number of services that are available from the TrawsCymru service in the new financial year.

Cabinet Secretary, you are absolutely right, united and connected is totally vital, and I’m very supportive of this. However, we also need to be fiscally responsible. You’ve already talked about the £750 million that it could cost to reopen this line. From a written question by my colleague Andrew Davies, we know that there’s been at least one scoping study of £30,000. There is a bus service that is currently being subsidised by the Welsh Government. All of the sums add up together to make a very big sum of money here, so could you please tell us how much more money is going to have to be spent before we establish the feasibility of this project going ahead?

The money is allocated within the next financial year’s budget—or in the draft budget—and, subsequent to that work being carried out, I’d expect the project to be able to be examined thoroughly by NICW and, following their assessment of the project, Government would then receive a set of recommendations. We would then, if NICW or the experts were minded to recommend the project go ahead, incorporate it into a future national transport finance plan. But I do take on board what the Member says about ensuring that all of what we do in terms of transport and all other services that we provide are fully affordable.

Yes. The tourism investment support scheme is a fund that Members are aware supports the tourism industry. From 2013, the value of offers totals £5.5 million, together with an additional £11.3 million for strategic tourism projects, such as the Royal Mint Experience and Surf Snowdonia. In total, the fund has helped to create 1,087 jobs and includes a further £40 million of investments being levered in.

Thank you very much for that update, Cabinet Secretary—I should’ve said that earlier. But, in 2012 the Government did give the Ruthin Castle Hotel £0.5 million, more than three times higher than any other TISS grant in that year, and just £5,000 of this has been recovered for the Welsh taxpayer after the company failed to meet the TISS criteria. I appreciate in this specific example that there were difficulties recovering moneys because the company’s gone into administration. But, that in itself raises questions about the safeguards on which the Welsh Government insists when giving the TISS grant. The lost money, that’s something other businesses could have used. So, will you be recalibrating the rules for TISS grants in order to have a wider geographic spread for job creation, or are you looking for different ways of reducing the risk to the Welsh taxpayer?

I can confirm the latter. In fact, I’ll write to Members with an update on the tourism investment support scheme, because the criteria for support were changed. I think I’ve highlighted this in a previous session here in Plenary, or in a committee, but the criteria changed so that there was a minimum of 30 per cent repayment allocated within the award process.

In terms of Ruthin Castle Hotel, I think, first of all, it’s essential that Members do not talk down that particular hotel, because it is still open, it’s operating very successfully and it provides employment opportunities for many people. I would not wish Members in this Chamber to convey the impression that Ruthin Castle Hotel has closed or that it is in trouble. Indeed, my officials met with the new owners back in April of this year to discuss the expansion plans that the hotel has. The hotel has also undergone change insofar as separating some of the assets that have a greater liability are concerned, so there is now a trust that’s been established to look after parts of the historic environment that the castle includes. In terms of that specific case, I’m happy to write to Members with a full account of what happened and the reason why the project encountered problems. In terms of that project, yes, only approximately £5,000 was recovered, but the hotel is still operating. It is still employing people and it is retaining four-star standard.

I’ll happily update Members in terms of the changes to TISS, and I’ll also provide a more detailed account of what happened with Ruthin Castle Hotel and the due diligence that it was subject to. I can confirm that, as part of the TISS programme for 2017, there will be two major attractions that will be delivered: one in the north that will be an alpine coaster, and one in the south, in Pembrokeshire, which will be a wakeboard park, which will be a key feature of 2018’s Year of the Sea.

Cabinet Secretary, from previous contributions I’ve made on this subject you’ll know of my personal interest in raising awareness of the industrial and social heritage of Merthyr Tydfil, in particular, and I’ve been working with the council, discussing options for developing these into significant tourism opportunities. Indeed, last week I was pleased to address Merthyr’s heritage and regeneration conference, when I focused specifically on what Merthyr has to offer in that regard. Apart from questioning whether we always do everything we can to preserve or to renovate sites and buildings that have a significant story to tell in respect of our local heritage, I spoke specifically about how we could learn from places like Ironbridge in delivering a whole-town experience. I also suggested to them the possibility of developing the Dic Penderyn trail, which I know I’ve spoken to you about, which would tell the story of the people of Merthyr around the time of the rising. That seemed to be welcomed by the council and by a number of the heritage volunteers in the town. The reason I raise this is that Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council and the heritage organisations have considerable ambition for the town—there’s no doubt about that—but, of course, the barrier to developing many projects is generally a financial one. Now, I realise that TISS—

You do need to come to a question now, please.

Yes, I’m coming to the question. I realise that TISS is a scheme based on the funder of last resort and, you know, after all others have been exhausted, and I know that it’s only limited to £0.5 million and it mostly covers projects around accommodation, activity and restaurants and so on—

A question, please.

The question is: can the Cabinet Secretary advise me whether there is flexibility within the rules governing the scheme that would allow access to funding that could assist with some minor heritage projects that couldn’t attract any other funding, but which, if developed, could help to draw people into the town?

I’d like to thank Dawn Bowden for her question. A number of Members have, in recent weeks, raised with me questions about whether the Government could support certain projects and certain installations in their constituencies and regions. I know Neil McEvoy has recently raised the same question. What I’ll undertake to do is to write to Members with details of TISS—the criteria—but also, if I may, I’ll include details of destination managers within the respective parts of regions of Wales, and the contact details, because I think it would be valuable for Members to be able to liaise with them or, at least, to be able to refer groups to the destination managers because they then have details about two other important funding programmes—the regional tourism innovation fund, which may be relevant to the point that Dawn Bowden raises, and also the regional tourism engagement fund. In addition, there are funding opportunities that are provided through the Heritage Lottery Fund. Presiding Officer, if I may, I’ll try to capture all of this detail in a letter and circulate it to Members so that everybody is equipped with the relevant detail to be able to advise on any projects that constituents bring forward.

Yes. Businesses looking to access grant support will need to complete the appropriate application and provide any necessary supporting documentation. This will usually be a business plan and relevant financial information.

Thank you for that answer. Cabinet Secretary, we’ve had a number of high-profile collapses of businesses involving an awful lot of public money, and it’s not just here on your watch or indeed your predecessor’s—she was the one who made a lot of these decisions—but it goes right back to the days of Ieuan Wyn Jones and £2 million for ragworm farms, which we got not one penny back for. I absolutely appreciate that we have to gamble in order to help build the economy, but can you please assure us that you’re going to rigorously implement a process for vetting and doing due diligence on business applications? If you look at what a farmer has to fill in for a small grant, it is, in many cases, far, far, far more information than a business that just seems to need to put in a plan and an outline structure. I do think that, for the sake of public money, and to ensure that the money is in the right place for the right companies, and that they are truly supported, so that we don’t have this cycle of up and down, we need to be more diligent in how we do this.

Well, it is essential that due diligence is taken fully into account as part of the process of determining whether a business should get Welsh Government or taxpayer support, and processes are rigorous. I am looking at ways that we can strengthen that process. I think it’s also important to recognise, though, that in terms of the support we have offered, only 4.9 per cent of the 1,110 companies that received offers of financial assistance from the Welsh Government over the last five years have actually gone into recovery. So, the proportion is actually very small. But, of course, whenever a company does fail, it does make a lot of news. I am, as I say, undertaking work to look at how due diligence can be strengthened, and I will update Members accordingly. In terms of enterprise death rates, again, we have got a good story to tell in Wales. The average proportion of businesses that close is 9.2 per cent, compared to 9.6 per cent in 2014. Of course, during the last few years, we have seen unemployment in Wales reach a record low, and employment in Wales reach a record high. Some businesses will fail for various reasons. We deal, as I say, with hundreds of businesses each year. The economic reality is that some will fail and some will succeed, and not all business proposals go according to plan. What is essential, as the Member has highlighted, is that we carry out all checks thoroughly and rigorously on the businesses and the people leading them, so that we can guarantee that the taxpayer is getting full value for money and that their investment is as risk free as possible.

A lot has been said about questionable grant support through the Welsh Government—the land sales, such as Lisvane, where the public purse lost £39 million. Do you agree that investment in serious fraud prevention in the Assembly through the channels that exist will probably yield a profit for the taxpayer?

Well, it’s for the Wales Audit Office to assess any cases that Members may have concerns about. The examples that the Member has raised are contentious issues, and we would have wished no losses to be incurred by the taxpayer. But the Wales Audit Office carries out a thorough inquiry of projects that it deems to be in the public interest, and I would expect their work to continue. I would very much welcome their work in regard to any project or any decision that is taken on my watch.

Yes. We are currently procuring an operator and delivery partner as part of the Wales and borders services from 2018 and, of course, the metro. This process will also include discussions with bidders on how services from Ebbw Vale to Newport can best be delivered as part of the wider provision of the south-east Wales metro.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The provision of a regular service between Ebbw Vale and Newport would be a key part of linking Newport with the Gwent valleys. Over the last 10 years, there have been campaigns supported by local AMs and the ‘South Wales Argus’ to ensure that this line would stop in Newport. It would be a crucial boost to the local economy and the public transport network, both in Newport and the Valleys communities on the route. Along with my constituents and my colleague John Griffiths, Assembly Member, I would be keen to see this happen as quickly as possible. Can the Cabinet Secretary confirm that a regular Newport-to-Ebbw Vale service remains a priority for the south Wales metro and the new rail franchise?

Yes. We are investing to allow for more frequent and faster services on the line, and we are also adding new platforms at a number of stations. We have funded Network Rail to deliver the project, and they have laid most of the new track that is necessary in the next stages for work to begin on the stations themselves. Network Rail’s work on the signalling system will start immediately afterwards.

Cabinet Secretary, I have been asking about a link to Newport since 2007-08, when it actually started. Network Rail has undertaken a number of works to deliver more frequent services for passengers on the Ebbw Vale line. These include the construction of new platforms and the re-signalling of the line. Could the Cabinet Secretary provide an update on these improvements, and when can we expect to see more frequent services to and from Ebbw Vale and Newport? Thank you.

Well, metro phase 1 is already under way, with a series of improvements to stations and to railway infrastructure. I’m conscious that the Member has been vocal about this matter since 2007, but I am delighted that this is being taken forward at pace now, and I look forward to the Member congratulating the Welsh Government on its delivery of this important project.

This is a matter for which the UK Government is responsible, but I understand from them that the reduction in journey times from London to Cardiff, once the work is completed, will be approximately 17 minutes.

Does he agree with me that, even with delays and now the postponement of the Filton Bank work into Bristol, electrification offers huge opportunities for Newport as a business hub, and does he also recognise that, combined with both the western rail link and expansion at Heathrow, we will be ideally placed to benefit as we jump to the front of the queue for a trade deal with the United States?

Well, I would agree that electrification of the main line will undoubtedly benefit Newport. It will also benefit Cardiff, but I would also expect it to be extended in a timely fashion to Swansea, and I do hope that, in the autumn statement, there will be positive news in that regard. I’d urge the UK Government—because I’m conscious that there are now a number of delays and problems associated with some of the projects that it’s responsible for—I would urge the UK Government to consider passing responsibility and fair funding for rail infrastructure to Welsh Government to deliver so that it can become more responsive in terms of what passengers and communities require.

In 2016, we’ve supported a wide range of major sporting events including the World Half Marathon, Extreme Sailing Series, Tour of Britain and the Wales Rally GB. We want more major international sporting and cultural events across Wales and there are ongoing discussions with partners to identify many opportunities.

Thank you for that response. I would agree that we do need to attract more major sporting events, but they do put pressure on our transport infrastructure, and we have seen—a constituent has been in touch with me referring to three occasions in the last fortnight when a member of her family have had to stand on the train all the way from Wrexham to Cardiff, and, on one occasion, all the way from Wrexham to Newport. That is inconvenient, of course, but it was not possible to use the toilet either, and it raises questions on passenger wellbeing, but also the health and safety more generally of those using trains that are so packed.

She has now written to the Health and Safety Executive to ask them to look at the situation. Being aware that there are two major international sporting events happening in Cardiff this weekend, what assurance can you give that the service will be safe and appropriate?

Well, we meet with rail operators regularly to discuss the impact and the implications of major sporting and cultural events on the rail network, and, indeed, on the road network as well. I’m conscious that it’s not just the sporting events that can cause congestion on roads and also overcrowding on trains; cultural events can also pose problems. There was a recent incident during the summer in north-west Wales where there were problems with parking, which the Member is well aware of. So, it’s important that the organisers of events also join us in talks with rail operators and with those who manage the trunk road network and also local roads.

Whenever we support a major event, we look for all solutions to traffic concerns as an essential part of the criteria of our funding. However, the major sporting events that have taken place here in the capital are those that require special attention, and, for that reason, the major events unit within Welsh Government regularly meets with rail operators to discuss capacity issues. I’m conscious that, next year, we have the Champions League final taking place at the Principality Stadium, and, for months now, officials have been discussing with rail operators and with Network Rail what more can be done to ensure that passengers coming for that event, and also passengers who use the network on a daily basis who will experience a busier period as a result of sporting events, can still experience a quality environment where there is not overcrowding. So, the work will continue, but I think it’s fair to say that, once we have the new franchise in place, with new criteria met by the operator and development partner, we will be in a better position to be able to divert increased capacity down to Cardiff when there are major events down here, or equally, away from the capital when major events take place elsewhere.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport and the first question is from Adam Price.

Audiology waiting times in Hywel Dda university health board are not where they should be. I have written to the Chair and made clear the need for improvement. I expect the health board to work with relevant stakeholders to make that improvement happen.

I’m extremely grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for his honesty on the dire situation at the moment. A number of constituents have been in contact with me to convey their concerns about the waiting list, which represents hundreds of people awaiting treatment. Some patients had to wait eight months before receiving a hearing aid. Has the Government carried out any assessment of the cause of these lengthy waiting times, and what measures can be put in place in order to ensure that there is improvement? Has the Government given any consideration—in addition to the target that they have set of 14 weeks for a first-time hearing aid—to setting a specific target for replacements, where there is a dire problem at the moment in terms of the waiting times?

I thank the Member for his follow-up questions, which I recognise. We think that, unfortunately, about 350 people in Hywel Dda wait too long, past the target time. So, we are aware that there is a definite problem within the Hywel Dda health board area. In terms of what’s caused that, there’s a combination of issues, as is almost always the case. Some of this is about short-term staffing measures—for example, there’s been a period of sickness and there’s been a period of maternity cover, as well, which has caused a challenge.

It’s also about getting the right staff mix as well for the future. So, within the conversation that’s being developed with the health board and stakeholders, they’re looking for audiology posts—so it isn’t all just about the consultant end of the workforce. The good news for yourself and other Members in Hywel Dda health board area is that there are going to be interviews taking place within the next month, and we expect that people will then start in the new year, which will help to address the backlog, both for the first appointment and the second or follow-up appointments that you mentioned as well. Part of the work we’re doing on the ENT plan is that we’re actually looking at how we have some sensible measures for understanding both first and second appointments, so there may be some changes that I think would be helpful, both in terms of scrutiny and the ability to understand what is going on. The other element is actually the building work that is taking place in Prince Philip Hospital in Llanelli. That’s a cause of some of the challenge we have, but—the honest answer is—not all of it. So, we should now be in a better position to address the backlog, with the staff coming on board and the completion of those capital works as well.

Cabinet Secretary, you’ve just referred to the national ENT implementation plan, which was published earlier this year, and that plan announced that each health board would actually establish an ENT care collaborative group, to oversee issues such as appropriate patient streams and referral thresholds, which would help with reducing waiting times. In light of that plan, can you provide an update on the progress of the Hywel Dda ENT care collaborative group, and tell us what new outcomes have been delivered by the health board in the way it delivers ENT services for patients in west Wales, and can you tell us how this is helping to reduce waiting times?

As I’ve explained in the first series of answers, it’s actually about the fact that Hywel Dda aren’t where they need to be. Some of it is about short-term measures and some of it is about the longer-term planning and the engagement with stakeholders to make sure that they do have a local plan. They should also benefit from some of the national pilot work being undertaken in other health board areas, both in terms of the point about staff mix, but also about how the pathway is designed. So, I can’t say to you, or any Member—and I wouldn’t try to—that I expect all these issues to be resolved within a period of a few weeks. But I do expect that, before the end of this performance year, and going into the next one, that there’ll be a model of care that is more sustainable, where stakeholders themselves will have been involved in designing that, and in designing the measures to understand what success looks like, and I do then expect Hywel Dda to have a more sustainable delivery mechanism for citizens within west Wales. That should also then transfer into learning across the rest of the country too.

We discussed aspects of the paediatric service in last week’s urgent question. I reiterate again that I expect service provision to be delivered on the basis of the very best available clinical evidence. And, of course, the Member is familiar with the content of the 2015 review, led by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.

Cabinet Secretary, as has already been said in this Chamber before, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine have made it clear that a 24-hour paediatric service is needed in order to maintain a full-time accident and emergency service. Given that you continue to tell us that the Welsh Government is listening to experts, can you tell us whether you agree with the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, who are experts, that 24-hour paediatric services are needed to maintain an accident and emergency service? And, if so, will you now look to re-establish full-time paediatric services at Withybush hospital?

Well, there’s an interesting conflation of two separate issues there. In terms of the paediatric service, we know that, in other parts of the UK, the paediatric service is provided by nurses, leading the paediatric service. In fact, the 2015 royal college review indicated that it may be more sensible to move to a nurse-led service around Withybush in any event. That review also told us very clearly that it would not be sensible to try and reinstate a 24-hour paediatric ambulatory care service.

There is a challenge in making sure all these different services match up with each other. A practical thing like moving where the paediatric unit is, so it’s nearer the emergency unit, it’s part of what has already been done. But I do reiterate that the advice that we have had about the model of care being provided in west Wales is one that has serious weight to it, of genuine expertise, where people are responsible for managing, leading and delivering these services around the country, and we’ll continue to be guided by the evidence and advice.

Cabinet Secretary, it is, of course, right that these questions are raised here in the Assembly, and I’m sure that you agree that questions are raised and asked in the Assembly. But I’m a bit concerned about the tone of the question that you had previously, and how that will play out in Pembrokeshire, where I live. I don’t want the message from here to become one of alarm, that, suddenly, Withybush accident and emergency is now at risk, and that is my concern from the previous question. So, what I’m asking of you, Cabinet Secretary, is a clear message that that is not the case, and that the two things that you’ve just said were conflated—paediatric care and A&E services—are separate and that one doesn’t actually depend on the other.

Thank you for the question, Joyce Watson. I recognise that there is real concern about the future of health in almost every part of the country. Given the commentary about healthcare services in west Wales and the extremity of the language, it is no wonder that people are concerned.

I repeat again: the challenge of having a paediatric service is part of what we are being guided by, and its relationship with the A&E service as well. There are no plans to change the A&E service. We are working with the health board, and it’s the health board’s responsibility to work with its stakeholders, to listen to its clinicians and the public, to meet the desire for a service, but to actually meet the need to deliver that service in a genuinely safe manner that delivers the high-quality care that I expect for every citizen right across Wales.

So, I reiterate again that, on the paediatric service, we are listening to the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. They have undertaken another review again, at the end of September, to further inform where we are. I do not believe there is any need to scaremonger or to project fear about the future of A&E services in Withybush or further within west Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, if Withybush was in your constituency, would the constant reliance on locum paediatric consultants meet your demands and expectations of high-quality care?

It’s part of the challenge that we have about ensuring that we have a consistent grade—[Interruption.] You’re getting an honest answer.

[Continues.]—that we have a consistent grade of a medical workforce, and those other professionals who support them, to make sure that we do deliver high-quality care. That does mean that we need to move to a model that will allow us to recruit permanent high-quality staff across all those particular grades. As to the consultant cover is being provided, if you look again at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health’s review, they indicate it’s for an integrated team, based at Glangwili, to provide that cover, but it does not mean that there is no paediatric service within Withybush; it’s one that meets demand and meets need. And if I lived in and around the Withybush area, I would want to know that the service that is being provided is one that is based on the very best clinical evidence and advice. And that is a challenge. Trying to run a service that meets the needs of local politicians and ignores the requirements of evidence and reliable clinical advice is the wrong thing to do for citizens, either in Withybush or in any other part of the country.

Questions now from party spokesperson. Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Suzy Davies.

Diolch, Lywydd. Good afternoon, Minister. The draft budget shows a £3.6 million cut to direct social services funding. Where is that money going and, if it is still for social services purposes, how will I be able to find it in order to scrutinise how it’s spent?

The draft budget shows an extra £25 million for social services, and that was in respect and in understanding of the severe pressures that the social services sector are under at the moment. Pressures include, for example, the national living wage coming in next year, which will impact on local authorities and providers themselves. But it’s very important to respect the fact that it’s great news that low-paid workers will receive an increase in pay, but also to understand that it’s going to put some pressure on the sector, which is why we’ve allocated an extra £25 million for that. We also allocated more than £4 million extra in order to be able to take the first step in achieving our manifesto commitment of doubling the capital limit that people can keep before paying for care. So, we’ve allocated more than £4 million for that, and, also, money to enable us to put in place the full disregard of the war disablement pension from April of next year.

Thank you for that answer. Obviously, we would support the final point that you made regarding the pension. But, effectively, what I’ve heard there is that I’m then to look for this money in wages. Perhaps you can tell me then—. You issued a statement last week, indicating that the recurrent transfer of £27 million a year from the UK Government to meet the cost of providing support to the former independent living fund recipients, is now going straight to councils, as it is in England, rather than to the independent disability sector preferred third party, as in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The purposes of that money is not to sub councils’ cuts. Why have you turned your back on the more co-productive models encouraged by the future generations Act, and what guarantees have you secured that this money will be ring-fenced for its initial purpose?

I don’t recognise the picture that you’re paining in terms of the support that we are giving to sustainable social services, to our third sector grant scheme, which is where the funding to which you refer, which was formally in the family fund, has been brought into. We have that fund, which is worth £22 million, which brings together four previous grant schemes, and we had 84 applications for grants, seeking just over £69 million for that scheme. So, we did try to look at a fair allocation of funding right across that, and the most that any organisation could have in a grant was £1.5 million. So, the family fund received the full £1.5 million in that.

With regard to the future of the family fund, we’ve actually provided them with £400,000 in order to try and become more sustainable in the future. So, that is one of the ways in which we’re supporting disabled families, and Disability Wales and Carers Wales were also awarded funding within the social services third sector grant scheme as well. On the independent living fund, we’ve tried to take a pragmatic approach in terms of speaking with the sector, with social services and also people in receipt of independent living moneys, in order to try to take a step approach in terms of future delivery, by taking the changes over two years. This was the approach that was suggested to us by our advisory group.

Thank you for that answer. I don’t think I heard that the money was going to be ring-fenced for its original purpose and, from my point of view of as a scrutineer, I think it’s going to be difficult for me to follow the money.

Perhaps I can move us on now. You may have heard, Minister, that, after court action for breaching statutory time limits, Swansea council faces further potential legal action, as hundreds of deprivation of liberty safeguard assessments are yet to be signed off. A few weeks ago—and things may have changed by now—there were over 600 needing completion, signing off or allocation, and, of course, these orders affect very vulnerable people, all of them with limited mental capacity. Now, the council and unions don’t agree as to why, but it is clear that social services in Swansea are very stretched. I’m just wondering how Welsh Government can help Swansea social services meet the demands placed upon them, not only for the sake of the social workers that are involved in this, but also for the people who are the subjects of the orders.

This is an issue affecting local authorities right across Wales, and, in terms of the why, I think the reason there is that, in 2014, the Supreme Court reached a decision known as ‘Cheshire West’, which widened the definition of what’s meant by deprivation of liberty, and Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales and Healthcare Inspectorate Wales have jointly described a 16-fold increase in the number of applications, so I recognise the picture that you’re painting in terms of the significant pressures on this right across Wales. I know that the Law Commission are currently looking into this issue at the moment, with a view to publishing a report in December. So, there might be changes as to what deprivation of liberty standards might be and what orders might involve in the future. So, obviously, changes will be decided at UK Government level, but we’ll be keen to have our input into that and to make strong representations.

We have provided local authorities and health boards with funding over the past three years in order to try and have them fulfil their legal obligations with regard to those timescales, but, obviously, I recognise that there is still significant pressure there.

Cabinet Secretary, there were 108 deaths involving C. difficile and 22 deaths involving MRSA in Wales last year. While great strides have been made to improve infection control and hand-washing campaigns have been successful, we still have a problem with cleanliness of hospital facilities. I fully accept that we cannot achieve 100 per cent cleanliness in a working hospital. However, there is no excuse for overflowing bins on a ward or dirty walls. So, what action are you taking to improve the cleanliness of our hospitals?

I thank the Member for her question. She’s right to point out the significant progress that has been made on reducing these levels of infection rates, but there is much more that needs to be done. Every health board has an improvement target each year. Not every health board has managed to achieve that. It’s a regular feature of accountability meetings with both chief executives and me in terms of contact with chairs, and there are often very simple hygiene standards to be addressed that will help with infection rates. There is also a challenge in some parts of the population where there is, if you like, a reservoir of some of these particular infections. But the real challenge is for the health service to do what it could and should do, and we recognise the need for further improvement and that does start with basic hygiene.

Thank you for your answer, Cabinet Secretary, and staying on the topic of hospital cleanliness, it was disappointing to learn that Bronllys Hospital received a food hygiene rating of 2, while the majority of hospitals score a hygiene rating of 3 or more. I hope that you will agree with me that every hospital should have a five-star hygiene rating. Food served to frail patients should not only be of the highest nutritional standards, but also prepared, stored and served hygienically. Cabinet Secretary, what is the Welsh Government doing to improve food hygiene in our hospitals and in the wider care sector?

Thank you for the question. Again, you make the point that the great majority of settings in both the care sector and the hospital sector do comply with high hygiene standards. I am particularly disappointed and frustrated by the recent outcome at Bronllys. They have been made very aware that both I and the Minister expect there to be significant and rapid improvement and a reassessment to provide the assurance that not only patients, but their families, will quite rightly expect.

Finally, Cabinet Secretary, we can’t totally eradicate hospital-acquired infection, but we must ensure that we’re properly equipped to treat infection. With antimicrobial resistance on the increase and very few new antimicrobials being discovered, we are reaching a crisis point. What lessons has the Welsh Government learnt from the O’Neill review and what role can the Welsh Government play in encouraging greater research into developing new antimicrobials?

Thank you for the third question. There are a range of challenges here. It’s actually an area where the four UK components of the national health service family actually have a joint approach—a recognition of common challenges in antimicrobial resistance, but also in prescribing behaviour as well as a need for further research. So, you will see Wales play its part within the research community. There are significant areas, not only of health gain, but also within the life science sector, for potential further activity. But I think we need to start with, and probably our biggest contribution can be in, making sure that prescribing guidelines are adhered to. There’s got to be a change in both attitude and behaviour from clinicians in both primary and secondary care, but also, importantly, in terms of public expectation about what will happen during healthcare interactions and whether people will be prescribed antibiotics that are appropriate and, equally, will accept and understand when a clinician says an antibiotic is not appropriate as well. We’re actually harming ourselves by overprescribing and overuse, and we’re now going to deal with the reality of some of that challenge. So, there are real challenges, both in behaviour as well as in research and the future in this particular area.

Plaid Cymru’s spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you, Llywydd. Another critical report has been published by the ombudsman today into the quality of care in Glan Clwyd hospital. This time it was a cancer patient who had to wait far too long for treatment. This is the third critical report from the ombudsman in just two months. It happens, of course, in a wider context where Betsi Cadwaladr is in special measures. Why does the health service in north Wales reach the point where we’re hardly surprised in hearing news such as this?

Thank you for the question. Obviously, I’ll be providing more detail in response to the urgent question after this that the Presiding Officer has accepted. The particular issue that you raised is incredibly disappointing, not simply from the point of view of someone who has received care that was not adequate, but also because, actually, Betsi Cadwaladr is a high-performing health board when it comes to providing cancer treatment. So, this case really does stand out, and not in a way that does credit to the health service. But I’m pleased that the chief executive has indicated he would apologise directly to the family, and I’m pleased he recognised issues in 2014, and I also expect not just the points about the care provider but the complaint handler to be dealt with as well. And obviously, I’m deeply disappointed that a citizen who came to the health service with real need has not been treated in a way in which any of us would expect or want to be. So, there are real points of improvement, but in the areas of cancer care, I think there can be some confidence that Betsi Cadwaladr has been a high-performing health board in the past, and we can expect it to be in the future. I expect the new medical director would obviously input into that as well.

But we know, of course, of the wider problems across the board, and when the health board reaches such a point then one would expect radical steps—truly radical steps—to be taken to change things. All we’ve seen in reality is a change in senior management, and, at the moment, I tell you that people have no confidence that that in and of itself is going to introduce the change required.

One thing that is constantly pushed is more centralisation, and rather than dealing with services that are failing, one proposal on the table now is to move vascular services, which are of a world-class standard, from Ysbyty Gwynedd. We are pressing for a consultation on that. Can the Cabinet Secretary explain the rationale for tackling poor performance by destroying those things that work well? And in terms of the future of Ysbyty Gwynedd, does the Cabinet Secretary believe that there should be more or fewer specialist services provided there in the future?

Thank you for the follow-up questions. In terms of the radical steps that are taken, putting a health board into special measures was a radical step. It’s the only health board since the history of devolution to be put into special measures, and it’s not just about changes to only senior managers; there is a need to change the culture within the organisation. That’s why we expect the health board to be in special measures for a significant period of time, because the changes that we need to see, for example, in mental health services, will take a significant period of time. So, I don’t really accept this characterisation that radical steps have not been taken and are not being taken. We also have the reassurance of the tripartite advisory body, so we have external advisers, not just the chief executive of NHS Wales, reviewing the progress that is, or is not, being made with regard to special measures.

On your particular point about vascular surgery, we’ve been through this before, and I simply don’t accept or agree with this characterisation of the issue. The proposals are for about 20 per cent of activity, the highly complex vascular surgery, to be moved to a central unit, and that central specialist unit is based upon evidence it provides better outcomes—better outcomes for the people, regardless of where they live across north Wales, who go into that specialist centre. Eighty per cent of activity will remain where it is. So, for example, the diabetic debridement service that takes place within Ysbyty Gwynedd would stay where it is.

I don’t have a set objective for how many specialist services will remain in their current settings, either in north Wales or anywhere else. I simply set out that the health board, with its local population, wherever it is, must confront those obvious challenges it knows exist, and must address the best clinical evidence and advice on what to do to improve that service. Sometimes, that will be about delivering a service within a community and making care more local, and sometimes, where the evidence tells us the best and the biggest health gains to be made, which will also improve our ability to recruit the right staff in the right place, is actually to have a specialist centre. And I just don’t think it’s tenable for serious players within the debate about the future of the health service to only ever say, ‘We disagree with any proposal to centralise a specialist service’. There is significant evidence that the move for vascular surgery will improve outcomes across north Wales, and I hope that Members will look at the evidence here objectively.

We do have a specialist vascular centre in north Wales and that is in Bangor. According to all the statistics that we have now, in terms of the question on specialist services in Ysbyty Gwynedd, I realise that you don’t have a figure in terms of the number of services, but, as Bruce Forsyth says, ‘Higher or lower?’ That’s all I was asking for. In terms of special measures, it’s not placing the board in special measures that was the radical step, but the declaration that those radical steps were needed.

But we will move on. Plaid Cymru, as the Cabinet Secretary knows, is keen to see the development of medical training in Bangor. Funding for medical education formed part of our recent agreement on the budget. Does the Cabinet Secretary agree that, if he is serious about developing medical education in north Wales, removing specialist services from Bangor makes no sense at all? We see these threats and we have seen threats in the past—maternity services, for example. We are still awaiting investment in the emergency department. Shouldn’t the Government be developing healthcare in Bangor now, as the health centre for north-west Wales, and centralising, if you like, in preparation for introducing that medical training?

I thank the Member for his final series of questions. I think it’s really important that we separate out the right model for the right form of specialist care, wherever that is across the country, when we focus on north Wales, and in particular on Bangor, so that we don’t just have an argument about one site and one geographic centre. The danger there is that we play the three centres against each other and that’s really not helpful. We have to understand what the very best clinical evidence and advice tells us about what should be a specialist service, what that conversation should or should not be, and then what we can expect in terms of outcomes for the patient as a result. What we do know is that, where those specialist services are created, they’re more likely to recruit staff into them in a sustainable pattern.

So, part of the challenge is not simply about saying, ‘This isn’t broken, so we’re not going to fix it’, because that just means that you wait for a service to fall over before you actually make change and you ignore all the evidence and advice around it, and that can’t be the right way to plan and deliver healthcare in any part of our country. So, that is not what we are prepared to do. And it is not what I expect health boards to do. I expect health boards, in meeting the needs of their local population, to be properly aware of all the evidence and advice of the different services that they have that develop their own place and understanding that their duty is to provide the very best healthcare for their local population. That will mean that the way that some services are delivered will need to change. Not to do that would be to fail the responsibilities that they have to the local population.

We will see a different pattern of services in primary care, in secondary care and tertiary care across this next five years. It’s important that we do, because, otherwise, we simply pretend that running the current model of care, in five years’ time, is going to meet the needs of our population, it’s going to make sure we recruit the right staff in the right place and deliver the right care. Then, we’d be fooling ourselves and we’d be poorly serving our public. I’m not prepared to do that and nor should health boards be. That is not the lead that I’m giving as the Cabinet Secretary for health and I expect other people who really want the health service to succeed, to join that debate in a much more open-minded way and to think again about the quality of care that we’re providing. Service quality and service outcomes drive what I want to see and they should drive what all of us want to see within the health service here in Wales.

Thank you for the question. Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr provides a wide range of services, including 24-hour emergency services, emergency admission and assessment, short stay observation facilities, minor injuries service and a co-located out-of-hours service. In fact, between the areas of day care, of emergency admissions and of maternity and elective in-patients, it sees, on average, more than 10,000 people within each year, in addition to those other services it provides.

That is the correct answer, Cabinet Secretary. [Laughter.] I’d say, amongst residents in Caerphilly, the role of Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr, though, is not fully understood. The specialist critical care centre that’s designated for Cwmbran, or near Cwmbran—Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr was designed to serve it. And, by the way, you won’t ever hear me call it ‘the SCCC’ ever again after this mention, because I don’t think that sells it to the people of the area.

Bearing in mind this issue, I recently met with the chief executive and chairman of the Aneurin Bevan health board. Following those discussions, I’d like to see a further centre of excellence at Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr, particularly in the form of a centre of excellence for breast care services. I think that would further enhance the activities that are going on in Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr, particularly in relation to the critical care centre that will open in association with it. Will the Cabinet Secretary add his support to that campaign, and add any further support that he’s willing to give?

I thank the local Member for inviting me to join a local campaign that I know he is taking very seriously. However, I’m sure you will understand that it’s for the health board to take the decision on whether they do have a specialist centre for breast care and on where that is as well. They need to engage the local public, and particular the community health council. It is possible, where I could be called upon to make a decision, you understand that I wouldn’t express a view on it. But what I will say is to reiterate points that I’ve made previously—that the decisions around the capital programme, in particular the specialist and critical care centre, are part of a whole healthcare system that includes Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr. The services that are provided there need to be based on what is the evidence of patient benefits in the patient experience, the patient outcomes in a genuinely sustainable service. I’m aware that there are proposals and discussions about a specialist breast care service, and I look forward to receiving the outcome of those, and understand that they really are founded on those really important points about how we deliver a better service, not just for your constituents, but constituents across Gwent and wider south Wales as well.

Cabinet Secretary, following the same question that my predecessor asked, Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr is one of the sites being considered by Aneurin Bevan board for a specialist centre of excellence for breast cancer services—

That’s what I just said.

Yes, I know. I’m just mentioning it and agreeing with you. [Interruption.] In March this year, it was reported, Presiding Officer, that patients in Gwent are waiting longer for breast cancer referrals than anywhere else in Wales. Will the Cabinet Secretary advise when a decision is likely to be taken, and will he commit to exploring all options available to him to deliver excellent breast cancer services in South Wales East?

I thank the Member for the question. In trying to discern what’s different about the points made by the Member for Caerphilly—I’ve said what I said about not being able to comment on an individual decision, but the evidence about the current service drives the need to think about how the service is delivered in the future. And that’s the point—I’m not thinking you can deliver the same service in the same pattern and expect improvement. So, I look forward to seeing the proposals that the health board are running, and have a discussion with the local population and the community health councils. If it comes across my desk, I will look at, as I’ve said to the local Member for Caerphilly, the evidence of patient benefit, experience and outcome, and a genuinely sustainable high-quality service.

Some people were clearly disappointed by the scope of services available, and particularly the nature of the emergency service, compared to their prior expectations. I just wonder if there are any lessons to be learned by the Welsh Government or the health board as plans are made and communicated for the future of the Royal Gwent Hospital in Newport and Nevill Hall Hospital in Abergavenny, in light of the very welcome specialist and critical care centre.

Well, some of the challenges about the nurse-led service are about understanding what is and isn’t there, and, actually, some of that relates to a lack of understanding about the high-quality care that advanced nurse practitioners do provide, and the high numbers of people who go to Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr and are seen very quickly and very professionally. You don’t hear an awful lot of complaints, actually, about the quality of care that’s provided in Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr, and I think more people could make more use of that, rather than defaulting to a larger centre, where their care needs could be met closer to where they are.

There are always lessons to be learned about how health boards communicate plans for changing the way that health services are delivered, and it’s important that we don’t shut off and say we’ve reached a point of perfection. There will always be more that we could and should learn, so that’s why we expect health boards to constantly engage with their local populations to explain the rationale behind any decisions and proposals for the future. I think the most important point is to constantly reiterate: what is the benefit for the citizen, what is driving the service change agenda, how will it actually impact on those patients, and can we expect to see an improvement in the quality of the service that they receive? I think, actually, Aneurin Bevan is one of the better health boards in this area. For example, despite some difficulties with the way that the stroke care reconfiguration has been delivered, it’s now in a much better place and they’re recruiting stroke clinicians in a way that other parts of the country aren’t always able to, because they’ve got a better service and they’ve engaged their local population about that. So, I look forward to seeing other health boards learning from each other and improve the way we talk to and listen to our public in redesigning healthcare for the future.

Thank you for the question. I expect resources between and within primary and secondary care to be used to address the health and well-being needs of the populations that each health board area serves. I expect resource use to both lead and follow the changing pattern of services as more care is delivered closer to home.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response? But the share of the Welsh health budget spent on primary care has reduced over recent years. Is there any intention from the Welsh Government to try and reverse this trend, because I believe, and I hope the Cabinet Secretary does, that spending money in primary care saves money further along the line?

Thank you for the point. I think part of the challenge in understanding what’s happening in primary care is understanding what we mean by primary care spend, as well. I’ve seen a range of figures. There’s obviously campaigning, lobbying and, quite rightly, scrutiny about the amount of money that we spend and the share of money that we spend. For example, we spend in primary care spend 13.7 per cent of our budget, compared with Scotland spending 11.8 per cent. That’s drawn from comparative figures that the Royal College of General Practitioners in Scotland accept as properly representing primary care. So, it isn’t just a general medical services spend.

I think, though, that rather than getting lost in talking about a set percentage of the health budget or a set sum of money, we need to be focused on what is our vision and expectation for the future of healthcare services. How will they be delivered? If more care is going to be delivered within the community and closer to home, we need to shift our resources. Those resources are in some parts financial, but, actually, a lot is about the staff that we have and the way that we use and remodel our primary care estate to be able to deliver that service. I’m interested in delivering the right service, in the right place, at the right time and having resources that enable us to do that. That will see a shift in resource. That’s where my priority is, rather than having a set point at which I say, ‘I want x amount to go into primary care or secondary care,’ because I don’t think that’s necessarily the right way to run and manage the service.

Cabinet Secretary, community pharmacies have a big role to play in delivering care in the right place at the right time, as you just talked about. I had the chance, recently, to visit a Lloyds Pharmacy in my constituency. I was struck by the disjoint between hospitals and community pharmacists when it comes to discharge. Although discharge medicine reviews do happen, I understand that 30 per cent of hospital readmissions are down to medicine errors. Is this an area the Cabinet Secretary will be looking at in the current negotiations he’s having with Community Pharmacy Wales around a new pharmacy contract for Wales?

Thank you for the question. It allows me to highlight work that is already ongoing. Of course, I’m sure you will appreciate, and the pharmacy you visited will appreciate, that we are taking a very different approach to the funding of community pharmacy here in Wales, compared with the £200 million cuts being delivered to pharmacy in England. It’s a real challenge for community pharmacy over our border. I am pleased we’re taking a different approach, not just on the money, but on what we expect to see delivered for that money as well, because we will have a quality-based approach with that extra sum of money that we are saying we will continue to invest in community pharmacy. It will change not just dispensing against the amount of items, not just volume, but actually the quality of the service as well. I’ve already asked for a piece of work to be done with community pharmacy—it’s being led by the chief pharmaceutical officer—on looking at a specific range of areas, and actually understanding how we improve the hospital discharge process is a specific part of that work, and I expect to see proposals for improvement. I think we can make greater use and greater benefit from the quality of services that exist within community pharmacy to make things easier for patients who leave the hospital and then go back into their community, and, at the same time, we’ll certainly have a very busy hospital pharmacy service as well. So, over the course of the next six months or so, I think we’ll hear more from me about how we’ll continue to develop and invest in community pharmacy here in Wales.

You made that announcement last month of £20,000 to attract new junior doctors to work in general practice in areas of Wales where it’s difficult to attract doctors. Naturally, we welcomed that, but it does nothing for the huge pressures on GPs currently in post this afternoon, in all parts of Wales if truth be told. So, what about vireing some resources and funding to primary care now in order to assist those GPs currently working, as well as attracting future GPs?

Thank you for the point, and it’s one that is well understood. Part of the work we’re doing on the ministerial group that I’ve convened and I’m chairing is to look at both the points about new entrants into the profession as well as supporting the people currently in it. So, this isn’t a point about ignoring people who are currently working within primary care. So, the incentives were specific to deal with and address areas of need. We’re listening to our partners around the table, and it’s all partners—a range of health professionals, including, of course, the British Medical Association and the Royal College of General Practitioners—to think about how we better support our current practices. There’s something about the cluster money that is already there, and making sure it gets out to practices so they can use it and determine how they want to use it with their partners within primary care. There’s also something about looking again at the sustainability framework and understanding what we need to do to actually make sure that more practices engage in that. Because we have found that not every practice that is facing a challenge is prepared to go through that process where extra help can be provided. I think there’s something about the level of trust and information sharing to allow that support to be provided. So, there’s more work for us to do, and it’s actually an opportune time to be talking about this because, of course, we’re starting negotiations with the BMA on the future of the GMS contract here in Wales. So, plenty of opportunity, both in the contract negotiation, but also with the work that we are doing to try and improve the numbers of people, but also the range of people within the primary care workforce.

I’d just like to pick up on the point made by Nick Ramsay because it’s completely unacceptable that a third of all hospital readmissions are due to medicine errors. I want to probe a little bit further on the specific point that when it’s been decided that somebody is ready to leave hospital, why is it not possible for them to then pick up the prescription that they may have been prescribed from their community pharmacist, rather than having to wait for it to be dispensed by the hospital? Because that would then enable them to get out of hospital quicker, making them get well quicker, and making the bed available for somebody else.

It’s part of the work that I expect to see undertaken because I think the ideal thing would be for people to be able to have that medication, wherever possible, delivered by or with their community pharmacy, whether it’s about collecting or about a home delivery service. The great majority of community pharmacies do provide that form of service. I think it would help in seeing people leave the hospital when they’re fit for discharge. It would also deal with some of the delays within the hospital pharmacy service that we know take place as well. So, people that really have to be seen within a hospital pharmacy setting should get their medication more rapidly, as well as it allowing people to leave. So, it’s absolutely a part of the work that I’ve asked to take place and, as I say, I look forward, over the next six months or so, to reporting back to Members on the progress that is being made.

Yes. I’m happy to say that the most recent perinatal mortality surveillance report, published in May of this year, showed that Wales’s neonatal outcomes were comparable to the UK as a whole, and better than some areas with similar levels of high deprivation. So, we will continue to invest in the workforce and in capital to develop neonatal services for the future.

I’m glad to recognise the improvement in outcomes. However, you will be aware that a recent report by Bliss highlighted that only two out of 10 neonatal units had enough nurses to staff their cots in line with national standards. If you fail to address this matter for next September’s trainee nurse intake, then will it not become impossible for your Government to fulfil the commitment made by the First Minister on 13 July for neonatal services in Wales to be properly staffed by 2021? Given that, I wonder if you could highlight what actions you’re taking to ensure that this commitment is indeed met.

Thank you for all the follow-up questions. Of course, when we have our trainee nurse numbers we expect to have an intake, and there are challenges for us to discover and deliver on to make sure that we actually retain those nurses within the Welsh system if at all possible. There’s also a problem with general nurse recruitment anyway. You’ll know that there is a general challenge across western Europe, in fact, in recruiting and retaining nurses. It isn’t something unique to Wales, but it does mean that we are in a very, very competitive market, just as with some parts of doctor recruitment.

I don’t think that we’re going to get to the point where the commitments that this Government has made are going to be undeliverable. The challenge is how we do it, but what should provide some confidence is that, in a range of areas, we’ve already seen a significant increase in some of the nursing numbers. For example, in west Wales, you’ll be aware following the question last week, that one of the things that has been done with the new model is a significant improvement in nurse recruitment and retention. So, it is possible. It’s part of what we expect to see. We need to make sure that the models of care that we provide are attractive to keep nurses there to provide high-quality care. But, of course, you will see—in a very open way, through each year—a range of information about the nurse numbers we have in neonatal services. And we will, of course, report against those national standards. My interest is to make sure that we meet those national standards and we continue to evidence a real improvement in outcomes for mothers and babies as well.

Thank you. Michelle Brown. No? Okay. Thank you. Question 6, Vikki Howells.

Although latest figures suggest that obesity levels among children in Wales are stable, rates are still unacceptably high. Our programme for government makes a clear commitment to tackling obesity, working across Government and with schools to promote and increase healthier lifestyle choices.

Publication of the UK Government’s action plan for tackling childhood obesity met with criticism from campaigners due to the watering down of many of the expected proposals, especially those around sugar and on the advertising of unhealthy foods. In the Cwm Taf Local Health Board area, which includes my constituency, 28.1 per cent of four- to five-year-olds, the second highest in Wales, are overweight or obese, and there is a pressing need to take action. Will the Minister make representations to the UK Government that the proposals contained in their action plan are inadequate and need urgent revisiting to give children in my constituency and across Wales the protection they need?

Well, the Welsh Government joined many others in expressing some disappointment at the lack of ambition in the UK Government’s childhood obesity strategy. There are a number of areas in which the Welsh Government has consistently urged the Secretary of State for Health to deliver stronger action at a UK level, and that includes tougher action on sugar, for example, and particularly on the advertising of unhealthy foods to children. The Cabinet Secretary and I have jointly written to the Secretary of State for Health on this precise matter, expressing our disappointment and pressing the case for tougher action as well. But, in the meantime, we do continue to use all of the levers that we have here in Wales, for example, to support our food industry centres to help reformulate their products to reduce sugar, salt and fat, and we continue to work to ensure that children have a healthier start in life, for example, through our 10 Steps to a Healthy Weight programme, our Healthy Child Wales programme and the network of healthy schools initiative, which 99 per cent of schools in Wales are taking part in.

Health boards in Wales follow national guidance to support general practitioners and other healthcare professionals in the management of patients with coeliac disease. Staple items, such as fresh bread and pasta, are available on prescription to help patients optimise their nutritional status and maintain a healthy, well-balanced lifestyle.

I thank the Minister for that response. I have been contacted by a constituent who suffers from coeliac disease, who finds it very difficult to find foods that are certain to be 100 per cent gluten free, and is very concerned that the staple food may be withdrawn from the list of free prescriptions. Would you be able to reassure my constituent about that issue?

Yes. There are no plans to change the current situation with regard to staple items such as, as I said, fresh bread and pasta being available on prescription. Community pharmacies are actually really important in terms of providing people with coeliac disease the opportunity to buy a wide range of products, as well as what they receive on prescription. That just reinforces again the importance of community pharmacy in terms of meeting the health needs of people with coeliac disease and a wide range of other conditions.

I expect all health boards to provide safe and effective out-of-hours services to respond to urgent healthcare needs. This includes ensuring that those with the most urgent clinical needs are dealt with soonest, and that all patients are dealt with within a clinically appropriate time.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I was recently contacted by an 87-year-old constituent who was in need of an out-of-hours appointment following a problem with a catheter in the early hours of the morning. A home visit was requested by phone at 11.00 a.m. and a visit booked. A doctor didn’t finally arrive until 8.00 p.m., nine hours later, after several phone calls in the meantime. The doctor then advised an ambulance to hospital. That arrived. My constituent says that, throughout, the staff who dealt with him were second to none, but he was really concerned about the delays involved in the out-of-hours service that he experienced, and he asked me if I would raise it with you in the Chamber. I wonder if you could take a look at this case—I am happy to provide you with the details—and whether you could tell us what advice and guidance you’re giving to the local health boards to try and make sure that these types of delays are, at the very least, kept to a minimum.

Yes, I would be happy if you would provide me with details of the incident, particularly the time of week that it took place—whether it was the weekend or in the week. Blocked catheters are a relatively common issue for an out-of-hours service. It is also part of the challenge about having a district nursing service available as well, as part of an improvement we need to see, because it should not be the case that a blocked catheter leads to an A&E attendance. That is not something that I believe is appropriate either for the health service, or, more importantly, for the individual citizen. So, I would be interested to hear directly of this example, because it’s a good example of what we need to see a lot less of, and, in terms of blocked catheters, dealt with effectively by the primary care service, whether in hours or out of hours.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The Llywydd has accepted two urgent questions under Standing Order 12.66, and I call on Neil McEvoy to ask the first urgent question.

I thank the Member for his question. I am sympathetic to the circumstances of this case, but immigration is not a devolved issue and it’s not the Welsh Government’s practice to make representation on individual cases. I know that Assembly Members have made representation to the Home Office, and others may wish to join them in this.

I know that immigration isn’t a devolved matter, but communities are, so hence you’re taking the question, and I’m really pleased that the statement of opinion is going from the Assembly; that is really important. But I think if the Government were to make a statement then that would make the case even stronger, and that’s why we’re elected: to stand up for the people of Wales. So, I urge you to do so.

I understand that many elected Members have made representations, to which the Home Secretary is answerable, and they’ve made a strong case. Indeed, the Cardiff MPs have done so, and they made a strong case representing Mr Naderi’s case and I hope the Home Secretary will take notice of the views expressed here and amongst the wider Welsh public. However, immigration policy is not devolved to the Welsh Government.

I appreciate that the Government can’t intervene on something that’s not a devolved matter, but I just think it’s important that we express our concern. Today I met the family of Nicole Cooper, who is the partner of Mr Naderi, and the father is a former police officer with 30 years’ service, and the son, who is the brother of Nicole Cooper, has represented Wales in the 300m jump—the 400m, sorry. So, this is an exemplary family and an exemplary young man, and it’s causing huge concern in the community amongst people who’ve met this young man and who’ve been at school with him, who’ve been at college with him, and who realise just what a contribution he could be making in Wales.

So, it was fantastic to have such a great show of solidarity amongst all four parties here in the Senedd, on the steps this afternoon, but I just think that we just need to be showing our concern at this ripping apart of a valued member of this community.

We’re very grateful for the comments by Jenny, and I know Julie Morgan and Lynne Neagle have also made representation to me. I am sympathetic to the case, but I am not the decision maker here, and I am sure the Member is aware of that. The process here is a clear one, whereby representation needs to be made to the Home Secretary, which I know that Members have done in this Chamber. It is only right that Members are able to express their views and support for the family and for the individual in this case in this Chamber, but, unfortunately, this is not a devolved matter. I do not have any responsibility around this.

Cabinet Secretary, I fully support the intervention with the Home Office in order to prevent this deportation. I commend Jenny Rathbone, Julie, and Neil McEvoy in bringing this constantly to the Chamber. Cabinet Secretary, will you speak to the Home Secretary to urge them to reconsider in this instance?

As I responded to the others, I refer the Member to my previous response to the Members. It is a matter for individuals to make representation as the elected Members representing those bodies. I would advise the Member to write directly to the Ministry in order to make her representation known.

I think we all hear what you’re saying, Cabinet Secretary, in that Assembly Members, of course, have made their voices heard. But, whilst this is not a devolved matter, and we also accept that point, it is quite appropriate for the Government to make its opinions known and to make representations to UK Government on non-devolved matters. Would the Cabinet Secretary agree with me on that?

I think I’ve made my response very clear. I am sympathetic to the circumstances of this case, and the Members have brought it to my attention during this debate and earlier. However, this isn’t the responsibility of Welsh Government—it’s a matter for the Home Office, and therefore Members must make their representation to the Home Office for them to make the appropriate decision. It’s not normal practice for the Welsh Government to make representation for individual cases here in Wales.

Bashir Naderi is a constituent of Jenny Rathbone, but many of his friends and supporters live in Cardiff North. In particular, I was approached by a young woman who lives in Cardiff North—his friend—who said, ‘Bash may have been born abroad, but he is now Welsh’. He’s been brought up by a foster family—she’s still his mum—he’s been educated here, he has no contacts in Afghanistan, and it just seems to me absolutely inhumane that, at the age of 18, the Home Office then decide, ‘Right, he goes back’. I accept entirely what you’re saying that immigration is not devolved, but if a person who has received all the services from Wales, and who wants to contribute back to Wales, is snatched in this inhumane way, is there some way that the Government can communicate with the Home Office about this practice, this way of operating? Because I am aware of other people that this has happened to in this sudden fashion, and I do feel that if this happens to someone who lives in Wales, we do have a responsibility here in the Senedd.

Of course, again, I recognise the absolute commitment by Members in this Chamber to the support of Bashir. The issue is, of course, a technical one that the Home Office has to make these decisions. If it was my decision, it may be a very different discussion we’d have. I can give you assurances that I’m sure the Home Office will be made fully aware of this discussion and urgent question here today, and the Minister will be informed of your points of view in that process.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The second urgent question has been accepted by the Llywydd, and I call on Llyr Gruffydd to ask that urgent question.

Thank you for the question. The health board has fully accepted the identified failings and recommendations in this individual case. I’m pleased the chief executive of the health board will apologise personally to the patient concerned. I expect the health board to take swift action on the recommendations, and officials from the Welsh Government will be monitoring progress closely.

Thank you for that response. I too would want to acknowledge the way that the health board has responded to what has been said in the report. Unfortunately, it feels as if these reports are appearing almost on a weekly basis these days, and it’s important to note that many of these are historical cases that are emerging and that the board is trying to resolve problems—and they are, of course, in special measures. But, there’s no signal, as far as I can see, that some of these fundamental problems related to staffing—which have been at the heart of many of these cases that have been highlighted—have been resolved. The chief executive, in response to today’s report, said that the urology department was still under huge pressures. The ombudsman says that there needs to be a capacity review. My question therefore is: would you accept that the fundamental factor in many of these cases that we have seen, including this latest one, is the shortage of staff, and that staffing problems, of course, lead to increasing pressures on individuals and services, which in turn unfortunately make it more likely that mistakes are made? Can I ask you, therefore, what your Government is doing to resolve this fundamental issue?

Thank you for that series of points in the follow-up question. As I mentioned earlier in response to your colleague Rhun ap Iorwerth, when he mentioned this particular case, there are challenges about the care provided and the model of care provided, but also, this case highlighted a very real challenge with the unacceptable way in which the complaint itself was dealt with. That’s absolutely part of this as well. I think a lot of the anxiety could have been taken out if the health board had dealt with the complaint in a more timely way, and hadn’t decided to move the complaint to the end of actually receiving a form of care. I don’t think that was acceptable, and I want to be really clear that that should not happen at this health board, or any other, in the future. In terms of the points about the make-up of cancer services and the pressure, some of these are UK-wide pressures and some of them are more localised pressures as well. We know that urology services are under pressure right across the UK, so there is something here about understanding how we have, again, the right form of service. So, that’s something about capital investment and it’s also about a model of care as well.

This really does go to the heart of the point you make about workforce challenges, because I said in response to questions earlier today—and in pretty much every questions I deal with there is almost always a question about the workforce—it’s who we have, whether they’re the right grade, whether we have enough of them, and how we get more staff in what is almost always a really competitive market, not just within the UK, but further afield, too. That’s why having the right models of care really does make a difference. We make it much more difficult to recruit to models of care that are not delivering and are leaving people in a position where the service is unlikely to be seen as sustainable. So, there’s a range of different things that we need to do.

You’ll see action that the Government will take on the way in which we commission places and the way in which we design and deliver the workforce to improve workforce planning in the current weeks and months. That’s long-standing work; decisions will get made on that in the near future. You’ll then see also the work that we’re going to do in terms of the investment we’ll make again in education and training places here within Wales, and the way we support our students, too, as well. It goes with the point your colleague Dai Lloyd made as well about understanding what we need to do to both bring more people in, whether it’s primary care or secondary care, but also to keep the people that we’ve got. There’s a range of different points in all this, and I wouldn’t pretend that there is one simple answer to deal with any of this. The challenge for the Government and the health boards is—and the deanery as well—how do we make sure the environment we create in Wales is one where people are valued, people are respected, and at the same time our high expectations are met, and what we need to do to see the system change positively is to deal with those workforce challenges and to continue to deliver the high-quality care that people, quite rightly, would expect from our national health service.

Let me begin by thanking Glan Clwyd and Wrexham Maelor for the cancer treatment they’ve given to members of my own family. Nonetheless, this does raise serious concerns. I have—I won’t read them all out—upheld complaints by the ombudsman against Glan Clwyd here in 2012, two in 2013, and one in September this year, when a gentleman with chronic renal failure died and the ombudsman felt there was a complete lack of responsibility by the consultant physician and a lack of renal physicians on the day concerned. I had another one this month, where a complaint was upheld when a daughter complained her father’s treatment post-operatively at Glan Clwyd was inadequate, resulting in his death from sepsis, and now this. You say the health board has apologised, and I’m sure it has, and I welcome that, but in each instance, the ombudsman has made a range of recommendations to the health board for the review of procedures, audit and training and, in each case, his recommendations have been accepted by the university health board. How do you propose to drive the cultural change within the institution so that, whether people are cleaners, maintenance staff, nursing staff, doctors or clinicians, they all feel motivated and part of a team with management that minimises these sorts of problems in the future through a patient-focused approach, notwithstanding, of course, the pressures upon them and other hospitals throughout Wales?

I thank the Member for his series of questions and points. There is a something here about cancer—and I was pleased to hear him acknowledge the treatment that members of his family have received, because, as I said earlier in response to Rhun ap Iorwerth, actually, Betsi Cadwaladr has a good reputation for the speed and the quality of treatment in cancer services. But that doesn’t mean to say that you should simply then ignore those areas where we recognise that that quality has not been provided. I’ll make this point: the reports of the ombudsman do not get ignored, either by health boards or by the Government. So, the health board, as it will know, can expect to see follow-up from this report, to see that the recommendations are being implemented.

The challenge always is how we have a reporting system that can acknowledge where there have been failures, to give people some recourse and, at the same time, how we try to deliver a learning and improvement environment as well, because the challenge is—in this instance, there were four different consultants involved in the care of this one individual. There’s learning for each person and each member of the wider team. The challenge is how to ensure that learning is then implemented and we don’t move to a system where it’s effectively a system of providing blame, because that is actually the worst thing that we could do, because that would either lead to people wanting to hide their mistakes or to move away from them, or actually, if we want to hire more people to come into a service and more people are blaming each other, that is not the right focus for the national health service. So, it has to be on improvement as well as accountability, and that balance, I think, is being struck, but it doesn’t mean to say that we’ll get everything perfectly right in the Government in our relationships with health boards, and the health boards themselves as well. And that’s why we want some maturity in the conversation about the future.

I do think, though, that, over the course of this next term, Members should expect to see an improvement in quality and outcomes within the service, and where there are complaints, as with any service of this scale and size—and there will be, there will be times when we don’t get things right—. Even in a fantastically performing system, the challenge is what we do about things so that we minimise those risks, and that unacceptable treatment, and what we do to learn from those, to understand what we need to improve in the future and make sure that we don’t see happen in the future as well.

So, I take on board the points that are made, and, as I say, these reports are not ignored, they’re taken very seriously, both by the Government, and, indeed, the health boards themselves.

I know from the experiences of a family member who had cancer some years ago, and was treated at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, that the medical staff on the front line do their utmost to provide prompt, high-quality care. However, this isn’t the first time that the ombudsman has found failures at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd surrounding treatment, despite the obvious efforts of the staff on the front line. What is the Welsh Government going to do to ensure that the medical staff at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd receive the resources and assistance that they need to provide an effective and efficient medical service, and what direct action is the Minister going to take to address the failures in care in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd that the ombudsman has highlighted?

Thank you for the question. I believe most of the first part of the question has been answered, in response both to Rhun ap Iorwerth and Llyr Gruffydd, and also Mark Isherwood. And I’m pleased to say and acknowledge that this isn’t down to a lack of effort, but there is something about a learning culture, where people genuinely challenge, and constructively challenge, the way in which care is provided within multidisciplinary teams.

In terms of the direct action, again I’ve explained that the Welsh Government won’t ignore the report. I’ve explained, in terms of the accountability conversations that are happening with both the chief executive and with the chair, that the issue will get raised, and that they can expect there to be follow-up from officials as well, to make sure that the learning is actually carried out, and can be evidenced now that that learning has been taken on board, both by individual staff and across the whole system. Because, as I say, I want to see learning and improvement take place as a result of each of these reports, rather than simply looking to blame a particular individual and not look at what the whole system could and should do differently.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

We now move on to item 3, which is the 90-second statements, and the first one this afternoon is David Rees.

Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Yesterday was the fifteenth anniversary of the horrific explosion at blast furnace No. 5 at the Port Talbot steelworks. The explosion occurred at 5.15 p.m. on 8 November 2001, and many residents in Port Talbot quickly became aware of the incident after hearing the loud bang of the explosion.

Three steelworkers lost their lives that day—Andrew Hutin, age 20, Stephen Galsworthy, age 25, both from Port Talbot, and Len Radford, age 53, from Maesteg. Several other steelworkers were injured, and some of those experienced life-changing injuries.

The emergency services, both internal at the steelworks and external, quickly responded and attended the site. They faced horrific scenes. The injured, many with severe burns, were transported to the various hospitals in the area, and received excellent care from the NHS. Today I want to remember those who died, those who were injured, and those who suffered, and are still suffering with post-traumatic stress disorder, as a result of being at that event. And we must also not forget their families. I also want to, once again, say ‘thank you’ to all the emergency staff and the NHS staff who responded to this incident.

As we seek to secure the future of the steel industry here in Wales, we must not lose sight of the dangers that steelworkers face every time they start their shifts in our steelworks, and, in doing so, steelworkers are delivering for the UK. It is important that we now deliver a strong and safe industry for them.

Thank you very much. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch. I and Llyr Gruffydd, and many others throughout the land, are currently sprouting facial hair at this very moment, this very Movember, to raise awareness and funds for research into prostate cancer, and also wider issues of men’s health, including mental health and testicular cancer.

Why the moustaches? Because people ask us what it’s all about: are we doing it for a bet, or worse? And then we can tell them, because now we’re talking, which men don’t tend to do very well on these matters. It’s a bit of fun, with a serious purpose.

The Movember Foundation is a global men’s health charity, which raises funds to deliver innovative, breakthrough research that enables men to live happier, healthier and longer lives. Millions have joined the movement, raising over £440 million, and funding over 1,200 projects, focusing on prostate cancer, testicular cancer and suicide prevention. The foundation encourages men to stay healthy in all areas of their lives, with the focus on becoming more open to discussing their health and significant moments in their lives.

So, a quick mention for all those involved in cutting-edge research, such as Prostrate Cymru and Prostrate UK, and for those involved in the Men’s Sheds movement, which began in Wales, in Tondu, and to all those others who seek to improve men’s mental and physical health. I thank the Presiding Officer for letting us raise these important matters of men’s health here in our Assembly, and by doing so, speaking to Wales. We all need to talk more about this, and we need to act, and we hope our little moustaches may help. Happy Movember.

And finally, Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. About a year ago, I met Elly Neville of Pembroke, and Elly had won a competition to design a collage Pembrokeshire flag at Pembroke Dock Community School as part of the school’s St David Day’s celebrations. Elly and her family then took the flag around Pembrokeshire to raise funds for the refurbishment and upgrade of ward 10 at Withybush hospital, to make it once again a dedicated cancer ward. Her father, Lyn, had been a chemotherapy patient at ward 10 himself after a bone marrow transplant.

Elly’s ward 10 flag appeal has grown and grown. Now, it is an official part of the Hywel Dda health charities. To date, the campaign has raised over £52,000 and has purchased its first equipment for the ward. The next step is to get approval for the full business case for refurbishing ward 10, which had given its dedicated staff and facilities for her father’s recovery. But even Elly’s prodigious feats will need Welsh Government assistance for such ward refurbishment.

Perhaps I should have mentioned that Elly is six years old. Her contribution has already been wonderful, and she is a credit to her family, school and community. She received a British Citizen Youth Award last month in the House of Lords. I commend her work and the charity to the Assembly. Diolch yn fawr, Elly.

Thank you very much.

We now move on to item 4, which is a statement by the Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee on the future of agriculture and rural policies in Wales. I call on the Chair of the climate change committee, Mark Reckless.

Diolch. If we are to secure the best possible deal for our rural communities, agriculture and environment following our exit from the European Union, then we must be bold and clear in what we expect from the UK Government. We, the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee, have reached an early consensus based on expert advice and the views of our stakeholders. The committee and I agreed to make this statement in order to send a clear message to the UK Government about what Wales wants at the outset of the exit process.

We are seeking two commitments from the UK Government. The first is in relation to future funding. We believe that Wales must continue to receive the level of funding for agriculture, environment and rural development that it currently receives from the European Union. That was, after all, the promise made by a number of senior campaigners on the ‘leave’ side in the EU referendum. Whilst we recognise that the ‘leave’ campaign did not speak for the UK Government, several of its senior campaigners now do, notably the Foreign Secretary and the Secretary of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

The second commitment is in relation to policy freedom for Wales. Decisions on future agriculture, environment and rural development policies should be taken in Wales. After all, responsibility is devolved. Should the case be made for some level of UK-wide policy framework, then this should be done on the basis of agreement between the devolved administrations and the UK Government. We also support bilateral discussion between the Welsh and UK Governments. Agreement on any overarching policy framework should be subject to scrutiny by the devolved Parliaments and Assemblies and require their consent. If the UK Government does ensure a continuation of prior EU funding to Wales in full, then we call on the Welsh Government to make a commitment in return. We ask that the Welsh Government agrees to protect funding, once transferred to Wales, for the support of agriculture, environment and rural development policy.

On behalf of the committee, I have written to Andrea Leadsom MP, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, to seek a commitment to maintaining the funding envelope for Wales. I have also written to Lesley Griffiths AM, Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs, who I’m delighted to see in the Siambr, to ask for an assurance that such funds would be protected and continue to be used to support agriculture, the environment and our rural communities.

Only with these undertakings from the UK and Welsh Governments can we with confidence propose future policies. It’s crucial to recognise the current EU funding for agriculture and rural development is several times higher than it would be if subject to the Barnett formula.

The continuation of prior EU funding is needed to ensure the economic and environmental sustainability of our rural areas. Without it, we risk losing the unique cultural, social and linguistic cohesion that characterises rural Wales.

The committee’s work on our post-Brexit agriculture and rural development inquiry has been about more than future financing. We’ve have held discussions with farmers, foresters and environmentalists. In September, we visited farms and food producers in Ceredigion. Last month, we held a workshop with stakeholders from across Wales, as well as convening a seminar of leading academics. Later this month we will be visiting farms in Snowdonia.

In addition to the position on future finance, our committee has reached an initial view on two further high-level principles. Both are intended to support evolutionary change, rather than a sudden shift in policy. First, we support a continuing shift in financial support, away from payments based on acreage and historical production, and towards agreed environmental and land management objectives. Second, we are particularly keen to support more marginal farms, including in upland areas. Helping poorer farmers especially should also help maintain a public and political consensus for farm support. However, development of policy principles such as these will be meaningless unless we secure the requisite future funding.

I hope that all parties in the Assembly can support our work and the call we make today on future funding. Subject to that, we can all make the best of the opportunities to deliver for the people and environment of Wales. Diolch.

Can I commend the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee for deciding to look at the future of agricultural and rural policies in Wales as one of its first inquiries? Of course, agriculture is the backbone of the rural economy and makes an enormous contribution to the Welsh economy as a whole. It’s essential, therefore, that these policies are examined especially in the light of Brexit. However, whilst it’s important that the Assembly scrutinises agricultural and rural policies, I’d like to understand a little bit more about the sheer scope of this inquiry and therefore the realistic outcomes we can expect throughout this process. So, perhaps the committee Chair can tell us more about the scope of this inquiry in his response here this afternoon.

Now, I’m sure that the Chair will agree with me that different policies require greater time commitments, given that some are more heavily embedded or are even reliant on EU legislation than others. So, can he tell us if there will be any flexibility in the committee’s timetabling to add additional meetings so that all aspects of the inquiry are fully discussed?

Of course, it’s important that the committee does all that it can to encourage stakeholders and rural communities to be involved in any inquiry, and I’m pleased that a workshop and a committee visit has already taken place, as he mentioned in his statement earlier on.

I understand that the consultation on this inquiry, which has already been issued, will end on 25 November, so can the committee Chair confirm how the committee will then respond to the replies received? Understandably, given the wide-ranging nature of this inquiry, how will it deal with important separate rural policy topics that it could receive as a result of this particular inquiry? Of course, within the agricultural brief alone, there’s enough policy scrutiny work to last this committee for a long time. So, it’s important that stakeholders are fully aware of each step of the committee’s inquiry process.

Members who’ve been here for some time will remember the Rural Development Sub-committee of the third Assembly, which was a permanent sub-committee to consider matters relevant to rural development and rural policies. Can the Chair tell us what his assessment of that committee was and has the current committee had any discussions regarding the possibility of resurrecting a similar sub-committee to look at rural development and rural policies on an ongoing basis, rather than just a one-off inquiry?

I very much agree with the committee’s view that while it may be advantageous to have, by mutual consent, a UK-wide framework for agriculture and rural development, and for environmental regulations as well, the committee must ensure that principal policy responsibly in these areas are repatriated to Wales from Brussels. I’m pleased to note from today’s statement that the committee will also press Governments at all levels to make sure that agriculture, rural affairs and the environment remain financial priorities, because, clearly, these are the areas that will be most tested as we exit the EU.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I’m very pleased to see that rural affairs and agricultural policy will be further scrutinised at an Assembly committee level. We are facing a time when a number of important decisions will need to be made in relation to Welsh agriculture and there will be a profound impact on rural Wales. We on this side of the Chamber welcome the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee inquiry into agriculture and rural policies, post Brexit. It’s vital that we involve all stakeholders in discussing ways to make our rural communities more prosperous and resilient in the months and years ahead.

So, can I thank the Chair of the committee for his statement today? I look forward to seeing this inquiry’s progress over the coming weeks. Thank you.

I’m grateful to the Member for his contribution and for his work for his party and others in these areas. As he says, agriculture is the backbone of our rural economy, but we’re conscious not to define agriculture too narrowly. Both the scope and type of agriculture has changed and continues to change, but also the scope in different areas of Wales to diversify from traditional agriculture and attract income through other provision is very significant. Also, in our request to the Cabinet Secretary for the Welsh Government to commit to protect spending in these areas, we wouldn’t want to be overly restrictive in the precise definition and boundaries around those areas, because we recognise that those change over time.

The scope of our inquiry has developed and I think it’s been one of the big challenges for the committee to determine what the proper scope of this inquiry is. I was in Scotland a week or two ago and spoke to what they call the convenor of the equivalent rural affairs committee in Scotland, and they’ve chosen, at least so far, not to undertake such an inquiry and were interested that we were doing so and in the challenges that we faced. I think also, along with other committees, we are feeling our way in terms of relations with the external affairs committee, ably chaired by David Rees here, and in our links and discussions with the Welsh Government and UK Government, to the extent that we are able to seek those.

What we’ve decide to do is for me to make this statement today, setting out the absolute centrality of the findings. Because I think, as we’ve continued, it’s become clear to us that we could spend an awful lot of time working out precise policy proposals and great ideas of what we’d like to do in the future, but actually without clearer commitment and confidence on funding, that work might be wasted. So, we’re very keen to put that very clear statement that we expect that level of funding to continue and we hope that the Assembly will be able to express that to the UK Government on a cross-party basis.

We’ve also put out there two further principles, which we discussed at a stakeholder workshop and thought that the initial response was reasonably positive, even though, of course, some farmers and some areas may get some disbenefit from those continuing trends. But, they are continuing trends that we think may help secure greater support for what we’re arguing for in terms of financing and the requirement for that money to continue.

We do have flexibility in the timetable. We’ve put out the call for evidence and responses to the consultation by 25 November. Our intention is to have evidence sessions in January, so if there are particular experts, interest groups or individuals who the Member thinks we should hear from, I’d be very interested to hear his submissions on that. I was aware of the sub-committee that met previously and have heard positive reports, particularly in terms of engaging stakeholders from its work. I don’t think I’m betraying any particular confidence by saying that the committee has had discussion around the potential use of sub-committees and rapporteurs. We haven’t, as yet, taken a decision to establish a sub-committee for this. I think our intention would be to report towards the end of the first quarter of next year, but depending on developments in the overall post-Brexit discussions, as well as within the agriculture and rural development sector, it’s an area we could very well return to, given its primacy and importance to the work of the committee.

Like the Member, I agree with the UK-wide framework. I do also just put there that the Welsh-UK discussions are also important, because there’s a different political context in Wales, where we voted for Brexit and where we have a Government that is coming to terms with that and is committed to continued membership of the UK rather than the different perspective of the Scottish Government. So, I don’t think we should make something that the Scottish Government might veto or where it might want to go a different way. I don’t think that should preclude our working with the UK Government, although obviously we want to explore the potential for a UK-wide framework to the extent that would be agreed by the Welsh Government and by this Assembly.

I thank the Chair for giving a fair summary of the committee’s proceedings to date. From the Plaid Cymru point of view, it is important that we do seize the opportunities now, in terms of the decision to leave the European Union, in order to ensure that we have the best possible terms for agriculture and rural areas, but also to ensure that opportunities are taken to tailor agricultural policy and rural support to Welsh needs. In that context, the Chair referred to the fact that the committee has already looked, for example, at less favoured areas—the uplands, particularly, in Wales—and it does lead us to the fact that it won’t be possible to develop policies, and certainly we won’t be able to ensure that funding is available for those areas unless we have a specifically Welsh framework. It’s very important that’s in place.

Of course, there is room for collaboration with the other nations of the UK—we need that in terms of animal health, animal welfare and such issues. But, does the Chair agree, therefore, that the only way that we can meet the needs of the committee is to ensure that there is freedom of opinion and freedom to make decisions in terms of agricultural policy in Wales, and that we are in a position to agree with other nations on the issues that we have in common, but that we also retain the freedom to make different decisions where that is to the benefit of rural communities?

The second question that arises as a result of this statement is: how will the committee look at other issues? The focus of the Chair’s statement—and indeed it’s true to say the focus of the committee’s proceedings—has been on funding. It’s true to say that a political pledge was made and therefore it’s appropriate that we try to hold people to account in terms of those pledges, but there is another process happening here. Trade is important, exports are important—90 per cent, as the Chair will know, of our agricultural produce is exported to the European Union at present—and the opportunity to take ownership of the good reputation of Welsh agriculture is very important, I think, and there’s an opportunity at one level there. So, does the Chair believe that we could look at how environmental legislative continuity and legislative continuity in terms of trade, and their interrelationship, could also be considered by the committee? Although that is another huge area, it’s extremely important that we don’t only look at funding, but that we also look at the broader context where our farmers trade with the rest of Europe and the rest of the world.

I thank the Member for his contribution, both just now and also in committee. Certainly, I’ve found his contributions very valuable, including in developing my own knowledge of the sector. I also appreciate his generally upbeat approach and focus on the opportunities that may come out of Brexit, and I think that those different positions—I’m impressed by the degree of focus on how do we adapt to the new situation and do what is best for our constituents. He mentions a desire to seek the best terms for agriculture, and specifically Welsh agriculture, both I assume in any future trade deal with the European Union in third country deals that may be struck, and indeed within the UK’s own internal market. I think he mentioned 90 per cent exports—the figure I think I remember from one of our research briefs was 60 or 70 per cent, but that may be on a UK basis rather than a Wales-specific basis. We talk in our committee and elsewhere sometimes about food miles and wouldn’t it be better if we consumed food closer to where it was produced, but in the case of much of what is produced in Wales, and particularly lamb, it simply would not be plausible for us to consume even a significant share of what is produced in Wales. The size of the agricultural sector is large for Wales, but one matter we must keep very close and central to our discussions with UK Government is it looms much less large at a UK level than it does for Wales. When we look at the exports, the proportion going to the European Union, the potential tariffs if we were subject to a common external tariff in these areas are higher and really much, much more significant, and could completely change the orientation of trade and production if that were not handled well. There may be opportunities out of that, but there are certainly also risks. I would share the desire to continue access to the single market and a desire not to have those tariffs on Welsh agriculture; I think I probably speak for all members of the committee and probably other Assembly Members in that.

Yes, we should have freedom for our agricultural policy, and I think that should be clearly recognised by Westminster. Nonetheless, I think there may be significant scope for agreement on UK policy frameworks or, if necessary, England-and-Wales frameworks, and so much of what is de jure devolved to us has, in practice, been done at the European Union level. We think of protection for particular types of agricultural goods and foods; if we’re outside the European Union, we have to really establish our own regime for that, and we have to have minimal standards for third country products under WTO rules and, perhaps, stronger standards for European products if that is agreed. But it’s going to be a very significant challenge for us in terms of legislative capacity as much as anything else. I think there will be a need for a common approach under some issues, such as animal health, where it’s difficult to see the advantages of a number of different approaches within these islands, although others may have different views on that.

In terms of environments, yes, I think there are strong arguments for legislative continuity. I think much of the European legislative framework has been adopted without close consideration at a domestic level, and I’ve often said to people from environmental organisations, I’ve slightly cautioned against always referring to European protection, because for some people who perhaps don’t share a positive view about the European Union and its laws, it may be better to make those arguments on the merits of the legislation or as international protection. I’m struck by how much of the European legislation has more international counterparts as well. But we need to look at those, I understand that, and I think there will be scope for us, committee and Members, to work to support environmental organisations and the Assembly as a whole, as we take on that very large task.

I very much welcome this statement, because it’s a signal of early intent on the high principles from the committee. I particularly welcome the clear statement that the funding that is currently there and that was very much promised within the referendum by those campaigning to leave should actually be delivered, but not only that, that the policy that surrounds that should actually be made in Wales and decided in Wales, as befits a legislature where all those competences are, indeed, devolved to us now. So, we shouldn’t in any way retrench into a situation where, whatever shape the Brexit finally takes, on the framework of the EU, as it is passed down to a UK level, we suddenly find that we’ve lost competences. It has to be here that agricultural policy, rural development policy, environmental policy, et cetera, et cetera, should actually be decided.

But we do need that funding, and I think the Chairman is right in making that very clear point that the funding is key to this. It must be for the Welsh Government, I have to say, to actually decide how to utilise that funding, or which way to cut, dice and splice it. Because it’s interesting that, within the statement as well, the Chairman rightly says that—he doesn't actually refer to the point that has been made to us previously, but I know he’ll have paid regard to it, where people have said, ‘This isn’t a blank sheet; this is an issue of transition.’ It’s not as if we’re setting up a whole new ball game here. We are working within rules and there are other countries that will have different versions of support for their farming community. It isn’t a blank sheet.

However, there is an opportunity for some more radical thinking, and some of that radical thinking may indeed include thinking around how you use public money to actually deliver wider public goods. Amongst those public goods, by the way, are the production of good, sustainable food and viable rural communities with small and medium-scale farms. But also amongst those public goods are flood alleviation, how we deal with the peat bogs on top of the moors, and biodiversity. How do we maintain the absolutely invaluable ecosystem services that we have and all of that as well? This does give us an opportunity to think differently and think radically, but we must—as the point has been made to us, as well—think about the fact that we are not going from a blank sheet. Whatever happens in England, or in Ireland, funnily enough, let alone in other European countries, we need to keep an eye to that in how we take forward this. But funding is key, and policy freedom in Wales is key as well.

There’s just one final point I wanted to make. We often talk about rural communities within this place—and I was used to this in Westminster as well, thinking about places on the north York moors or the East Anglian farmers, or somewhere in Ceredigion, beautiful as it is—but it’s also an issue that affects the south Wales valleys and many other places. Forty per cent of my constituency is upland hill farming—always has been. It’s essential for Wales, in particular, that we get this right, and I very much welcome the high-level statement by the chairman here. Even though we’re still in discussions—we’re still talking with many people out there—the high-level principle of saying, ‘The funding that was promised must come to Wales’ has got to be delivered on, and then it’s got to be for Wales and the Cabinet Secretary in front of us to actually decide, in concert with Assembly Members here, what the policy should be and how we should actually use that funding to deliver those wider benefits that are out there. That’s the thing I would end up in saying. Whilst this is very much focusing, quite rightly, on farming and food production and so on, it is also looking as those wider imperatives, critical that they are, of biodiversity, ecosystem services and sustainable rural communities. They all go hand in hand. They can all be delivered together. We are stewards of this, going forward, not masters of this, and we need to look after these rural communities.

I’m very grateful to Huw Irranca-Davies for that contribution. You mentioned at the beginning funding being promised, and I mentioned that some ‘leave’ campaigners did give assurances—and I mentioned two of those who are now in very senior and relevant levels in the UK Government. I recognised, during the campaign, that it was a campaign and that I wasn’t speaking for any Government on the matter. I sought to be careful in what I said in light of that. I think other ‘leave’ campaigners may also have considered that. But I remember—and I see Andrew R.T. Davies here, and I think there were a number of exchanges with the First Minister in the run-up to that referendum, where he was pressed to give assurances as to the continuation of funding.

I also remember other occasions. I shall not name the Member, but a particular Member on the Government side, when I was debating in front of farmers, was suggesting to the farmers that they should vote ‘remain’ because, if they didn’t, their funding could be at risk, and they shouldn’t assume that agriculture and rural development would be at the top of the list of priorities for a Welsh Government with a lot of other pressures on its time, and perhaps not traditionally so much support in that community. But what I want to do today, with this statement, is to draw Members from all parties together behind what I think is a common objective. I think we’re in a political fight for this. I think we can achieve this. But I think if we work together—yes, to hold ‘leave’ campaigners in Government to specific assurances given, but also to explain the unique rural economy that we have in Wales—and I mentioned the linguistic element, which I think is probably not something many policy makers in London will give great consideration or even necessarily be aware of when these matters cross their desks. If we were to go from the EU level of finance to a Barnettised level of finance, the impact on those communities in terms of the likely depopulation and change to the landscape and breaking up of cultural, social and linguistic communities that that would lead to would really be very, very severe. I feel that strongly, as I know do many Members in this Chamber, whichever side of the debate they were on at the referendum.

The Member also mentioned wanting legislation made in Wales. I agree with his sentiments but he, as I, will be aware of the sheer complexity of the legislative base. I’ve heard it suggested that there are something like 5,000 legal instruments affecting the CAP. This Assembly and the Welsh Government will have many different calls on their time, as does our committee, and I think that the challenge is to find what are the essential elements, and we’re trying to identify key principles that we want to particularly apply in Wales. I think we need, as a committee and as an Assembly, to focus our time on those areas where we can really make a difference if we seek to change the legislative framework or adjust it in any way from that which has grown up within the CAP. Yes, the Welsh Government should have control of that money, but I do think that a statement as to continuing that level of support for these areas would assist us in making arguments to UK Ministers and others to keep that funding. The Member also mentioned that, I think, his constituency has 40 per cent upland hill farming. When we talk about more marginal farms, yes, that includes the uplands. But, particularly in areas such as his, but also across much of south-east Wales, there’s not necessarily a division between lowland and upland farming. There are many farms that will have part of the farm in the valley and part further up. I agree with him in terms of what he says about biodiversity and sustainability. It’s very important that we all focus on those, and there are times when there are hard trade-offs in terms of money and other objectives, but he is right to keep those areas at the forefront of our minds.

I congratulate my friend Mark Reckless on the impressive way in which he chairs the committee and the way he has delivered his statement today. Also, I would like to commend the committee for the serious job of work that all members of it are doing. I’m not normally associated with the word ‘consensus’ very much, but I am delighted to hear that the committee has arrived at a broad consensus approach, and I hope that that will extend beyond the confines of the committee and into the Assembly as a whole. Agricultural policy in the context of leaving the EU is vitally important. It has been overwhelmingly dominant in EU spending ever since we joined back in 1973. It is right, therefore, that it should have paramount importance in policy development in Wales, to which the freedom is now given to develop an agricultural policy to suit our own needs, specifically for our own nation. I am pleased to hear what Simon Thomas said in his response to the statement earlier on, and the positive way in which he approaches the opportunities that now lie before us. It is, of course, vitally important that the funding of agriculture in Wales is preserved as it is handed down to us from the EU. I appreciate, as Huw Irranca-Davies said, that this isn’t something that is set in stone for all time. But, at least for a significant process of transition, stability does depend upon people knowing that what they have been used to can be relied upon. Bearing in mind that we joined the Common Market, as we then called it, before the Barnett formula was invented, the obligations for funding agriculture predate that formula. For the time being, at any rate, it is essential that what is spent on farming in Wales is protected. I’ve strongly supported the First Minister and the Welsh Government’s view that the UK Government should guarantee every penny of funding that the EU currently spends in Wales. I think the corollary of that argument is that the Welsh Government itself must now step up to the plate and guarantee, for a significant transitional period, the level of funding that will be handed down to it by the UK Government in respect of agriculture, if that is what, in effect, happens in due course.

I’m pleased at the emphasis that has been put upon the support for marginal farming, and in particular for the uplands. We have to recognise the political reality in which we all operate—that the agricultural community is a small proportion of the total population, and we depend upon the consent of urban populations for the degree of subsidy that rural areas receive. One of the ways in which we can maximise the potential of that is treating farmers as custodians of the countryside as much as the growers of food. Although I do believe that food security is an important element as well, we still have a very substantial deficit in food production in this country. We have massive imports, and that, in the context of the negotiations coming up with the EU as to our future relationship, is a weapon that we should use to the full. In our own hands, we have a £10 billion-a-year deficit with the EU on food and drink. Therefore, they have every interest in maintaining the existing access to the single market. There is also the important element, which has been mentioned so far, of future trading opportunities between Britain and the EU, and Wales and the EU in particular. Simon Thomas was right to point out the dependence of Welsh farming upon exports, and this is a challenge for the future, undoubtedly, particularly for producers of lamb. We have to recognise that the world doesn’t stand still and countries like New Zealand have faced huge challenges in the past—they abolished all their agricultural support overnight—and yet agriculture in New Zealand thrived. Maybe there are lessons that we can learn from such experiences in the committee as well—not that that’s something that I’m recommending, but, nevertheless, the response to such shocks does offer opportunities for us to learn as to how we can cope with them. Trade promotion is another important element of this as well, where we’ve got greater freedoms as well.

The last point that I will make is that it’s not only agricultural policy that is devolved to Wales, but also environmental policy, and this gives us the opportunity to look at the current regulatory regime and to see whether, in certain instances, it is disproportionate in the costs that it imposes upon farmers relative to the public benefits that are supposed to derive from it in other areas. Given the remoteness of Brussels and the opacity of the way in which decisions are made there, and the importance of lobbying groups in the making of public policy, and the unaccountability of the people who take the important decisions, I think this gives us a huge opportunity in Wales now to reconstruct—over a substantial period of time, no doubt, because the job is huge, as my friend has pointed out—in that it gives us the opportunity to have a look at agriculture in the round, both the costs regime as well as the trading regime. Because, ultimately, all of this affects the viability of farmers and the life in the countryside of many others who depend for their livelihoods upon them.

So, I congratulate my friend, as the chairman of the committee, once again, and the Members who serve under him, and I look forward to further reports in future.

I thank my group leader and party’s agricultural spokesperson for his contribution. He rightly observes that the common agricultural policy has been dominant in EU spending since, and indeed before, we joined in 1973. He’ll also be aware that that proportion of spending has come down over that time from near 90 per cent to around a half in more recent times. We talk about wanting to maintain every penny of funding, and we make this call that we are today to the UK Government in that respect. But I think we also do need to understand that there are some complexities around these issues. The overall trend in spending, or certainly the push of UK policy in CAP negotiations, has been towards a reduction and continuing fall in the share of the EU budget on this area, and, if we’d stayed within the European Union, it’s possible that a UK Government might have continued that pitch. There’s also the issue of are we talking about maintaining spending in sterling or in euro terms. Many farmers will be shortly receiving, perhaps, a significant increase in payments, at least in sterling terms, although they’ll of course be worried about the sustainability and likely future for those payments. We also have to consider what the definition is of the area of agriculture of the CAP or a broader rural development and land management policy.

I think there is also scope for improvements and opportunities in taking powers in this area within Wales. Certainly, farmers I speak to have a lot of concerns about the degree of regulation and would question whether all the activities they are required to do actually make economic sense or sense in terms of their objectives. I know the Cabinet Secretary has had similar conversations with farmers, and, at least in the near term, doesn’t hold out huge prospects for a great deregulatory bonfire. I think, from those who criticise the degree of regulation, what we really need are specific examples of regulations that should be repealed, or things that could be done in a better or more proportionate way, and I think we’d be grateful for input from the Member and others on that.

He mentions trading opportunities—yes, there are trading opportunities. The example of New Zealand is a very stark one, and, yes, I think, in a sense, agriculture in New Zealand is successful currently, but it’s a very different type of agriculture than what there was before 1984, and, on those who were in involved in the mid 1980s in production, I think many farmers suffered very severely from those changes, and moving from one system to another will not be easy and would, I think, mean a severe loss of employment and potentially associated depopulation in our rural areas.

Overall, though, I’m very grateful to the Member and others for the contributions we’ve had, and I think that we will all work together in pushing these arguments and doing the best we can for Wales in this sector, as in others.

Thank you. I have two more Members who wish to speak on this statement, so can I ask for a concise question, and a concise answer from the Chair, and we’ll get both of you in. Jenny Rathbone.

I just wanted to respond to Paul Davies, really, to say that this is not just a rural affairs matter. My constituents in an urban constituency are just as concerned about the quality and the cost of food as any other residents are, so I think that it’s really important that we address this issue in a timely fashion, because farmers who voted to leave didn’t realise that they were potentially going to lose 80 per cent of their income. I think one of the issues that we do need to be considering in this evolution, not revolution, approach that we’re taking is that Brexit is going to make a lot of vegetables more expensive, because nearly half the vegetables we consume are imported. And we’ve already heard evidence—

Are you coming to a question, please?

My question, really, is: how are we going to turn that corner, given that, at the moment, we only grow vegetables on 617 hectares of land, which is 0.4 per cent of agricultural land, hardly any of which is in receipt of pillar 1 payments. Many of the people who are involved in the labour-intensive activity around horticulture are people whose future in the country is unclear, because they’re European migrants. So, what does the Chair of the committee think we are going to be able to do to address the food security issues that are posed here, as well as the health of the nation and the future employment of people in Wales?

I thank the Member for her contribution. She ably represents her urban constituents, and brings that perspective to the committee deliberations. In terms of horticulture, it’s not an area that has traditionally been within the CAP, although the free trade framework within the EU sees us have very substantial imports, particularly, I believe, from Denmark and, especially, the Netherlands. Yes, if it were harder for labour to come into the country to work in those areas, there would be pressure to increase wages to try and bring others in, and I recognise the challenges about that. The impact of the pound is also likely to be a factor. I think probably what Welsh producers will want to do is to focus particularly on value-added and higher-end products—the organic products or ones where they can have a supply chain that benefits from and markets the concept of having vegetables locally produced, since I know many of the Member’s constituents, as will our own, will share her view, and would welcome being able to purchase more, if not all of their produce from local quality providers.

And finally, Vikki Howells.

Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Two questions and I’ll try to be concise, Chair. I’d like to thank you for the statement you’ve made today, as one of the members of the committee myself, and I welcome the comments regarding looking at the broader context of farming and the role of the rural economy, particularly with regard to the Welsh language as well. So, firstly, my question is: how can we integrate this broader approach into our inquiry, so that we take a truly multifaceted approach, which extends beyond purely looking at the financial implications of agriculture as a narrow concept? Secondly, after meeting lots of farmers, including young farmers within my constituency, there are definitely concerns around the skills agenda. As the proportion of people working in agriculture in Wales is over three times that of the rest of the UK, how can we ensure that the skills agenda to make sure that the next generation of farmers wants to go into the industry and stay there—how can we ensure that that actually underpins our inquiry and is placed at the heart of future policy?

I think for the broader context, we will have an opportunity to take a more cross-cutting approach to agriculture in rural development, because of the policy freedoms we would have post Brexit. I do, again, emphasise, though, that it is going to be quite time-consuming and demanding for members of our committee, but also potentially for the Assembly as a whole, in developing the legal framework and pressing our priorities, which we identify in these areas. We will, I think, come with our report, perhaps in March next year, although we as a committee are keeping open what the potential follow-up will be and whether that’s an interim report or whether we begin a new inquiry. I know we are looking at the food industry more generally, because a number of us want to integrate that approach into what we do with agriculture and rural development.

The Member ably raises the skills agenda. I think one barrier to people coming into the sector is, of course, the price of land, and the potential decoupling of support or what arrangements there might be post Brexit that could have implications for that. I have been quite struck, particularly on our visit to west Wales, that for many families farming is in their blood and they feel an obligation to continue farming that land. So, even if they’re economically on the edge, they may continue doing that, even to the extent of taking on loans and perhaps, down the road, risking losing that land because they feel that is what they do and that’s their obligation to their forebears, to their family and to that landscape. And I think, with our focus on the more marginal areas, I’d like to use what funding we do have with a view to supporting those people and helping to sustain those communities, and I look forward to our committee continuing to work towards those objectives.

Thank you very much.

We move on to the next item on today’s agenda, which is a debate by individual Members under Standing Order 11.21 on the state of nature report, and I call on Simon Thomas to move the motion. Simon.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased to open this debate and that so many Assembly Members are interested in the debate on the report. The purpose of the report is to put before the Assembly this particular report produced by some 56 different organisations—conservation organisations, environmental organisations and animal protection organisations also—on the state of nature in Wales. The report is very accessible but difficult to accept, because what it has to say about the state of our climate and our habitats is disappointing, to say the least, and says a lot about the lack of care that has been taken over the years, not by Government—I’m not blaming Government here—but by us all, as a society, in not taking this issue seriously.

The report makes for some frightening reading, in a way, for those of us who recall habitats as they were in the past or recall seeing wild animals, or who just wish for our children and grandchildren to be able to have those same experiences. One in 14 species in Wales is now on the way towards extinction. Many of them are recognised in Welsh legislation, under the Environment (Wales) Act 2016, as species that are a priority for conservation, but yet the decline is quite staggering. Since 1970 something in the region of 57 wild plants and 60 per cent of butterflies and 40 per cent of bird species have seen decline in our rural areas and habitats. And of those that we recognise in our legislation as priority species, only some 40 per cent of those are classed as being stable. So, there is real risk that we will lose some of these creatures that are in Welsh habitats and have developed in a Welsh context, and that we then lose something that makes a contribution on a global level and that makes us distinct as a nation.

In that context, therefore, everyone will accept that we now live in a world where human activity is having more of an impact, perhaps, on the world and nature and wildlife than natural issues. Some people would call that anthropocene—a new era where humans are more important than natural forces. It is seen, perhaps, in the fact that an index of biodiversity is being published, not just for Wales but for the whole of the UK, as part of this report, and the presumption is that we need something like 90 per cent, according to this index, to show that the ecosystems that we have are robust enough to maintain wildlife into the future, and, as a result of that, of course, to maintain prosperous habitats for humans too. According to that index, Wales scores 82.8 per cent. Now, that is higher than the other nations of the UK, which is positive, but it is short of that 90 per cent that is seen as the threshold for robust ecosystems, and it also means that we are in the bottom 20 per cent of the 218 nations that participate in these surveys. So, clearly, we have to do something differently. We have to respond positively to the challenge and ensure that more is done in terms of biodiversity and of preserving and enhancing some of the natural species that we have in Wales.

I want to be positive in this debate, even though the picture is perhaps quite bleak in the report. The fact that we are now having more of an impact on wildlife and habitats means that we do have the tools here to do something about that, because, clearly, if we use technology in a smarter way, if we live more smartly and use our understanding of biodiversity better, then we can take action in order to protect and enhance these areas. In recognition of this, we have two pieces of legislation passed by this Assembly—the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016—which set out a number of objectives that add to the positive possibilities that we have in overturning this unfortunate current situation.

We need leadership from Government in this area. We need to see clear leadership under the well-being of future generations Act in particular, I think. Objectives or goals, I should say—because there are different words in English and Welsh—or well-being goals, as they’re identified in the Act, were published last Friday. One of those goals, No. 12, is to use and improve natural resources in Wales in order to improve long-term well-being. What is important about that goal is that it recognises that maintaining a strong natural environment, with biodiversity and healthy ecosystems, helps people, contributes to health, boosts a sustainable economy and creates ecological robustness and a possibility to adjust to change. In other words, looking after wildlife looks after humanity too, and we need to progress on that basis.

I want to conclude, before hearing from other Members in terms of their comments in this debate, with a bad example and a good example of how we’ve gone about things in this area recently. Unfortunately, the decision to allow the dredging of scallops in Cardigan bay is, in my opinion, a mistake. Although we are looking for a sustainable fishery in terms of scallops in Cardigan bay, I’m not sure that we have the information yet about the marine habitats and how they could be improved if dredging were to take place. I do hope that, at the very least, the Government will very carefully monitor the impact of that on our marine habitats, not only in terms of the scallops themselves, which are eaten, of course, but the impact on those rare species that are protected in Welsh seas, particularly the porpoise.

On the positives, last Friday, I was very lucky to go to Devil’s Bridge—a wonderful place, particularly in the autumn, and, of course, the setting for the filming of ‘Y Gwyll/Hinterland’, to those of you who watch it. I was there to see the experiment of reintroducing the pine marten to Wales. This is a creature that had become extinct, to all intents and purposes, in Wales, but 40 of these creatures have by now been released back into the wilds of Ceredigion. They are from Scotland, and they are warmly welcomed, of course, because they are reintroducing something that had been lost from our natural ecosystem. In light of the release of these creatures into Wales, a number of interesting things have emerged, the first of which is that they travel long distances—one went as far as Abergele. Secondly, they keep the number of grey squirrels down. So, we see that, in culling something that was a predator in the ecosystem, we allowed the grey squirrel to take over our woodlands. So, this is a positive example—something that we want to see more of.

So, there is an almost pessimistic message in the report itself, but by undertaking this work ourselves, we can be positive in restoring our wildlife and ensuring that biodiversity does prosper again.

I also welcome this report on the state of nature, a report that has been brought together by over 50 nature groups, and the second important report to provide an evidence base on the state of our natural world and also provide a basis for doing something about it and for making decisions in Wales. As Simon said, it is not comfortable reading in parts, but there is a need for the Government to take action on the outcomes that are noted in this report.

Some of these are very serious. Even though Wales is home to over 50,000 species, the diversity of those species and the breadth of natural and semi-natural habitats have declined substantially, with a number of species that are important culturally and ecologically having disappeared completely. I do agree with Simon that one of the most significant statistics in the report is that one out of every 14 species in Wales is facing extinction. How are we going to explain to the next generation that they will never see the nightingale, the corn bunting or the turtle dove in Wales?

Nature has an innate value itself and is also vital for our well-being. Maintaining a healthy ecosystem is vital to sustain our way of life, and a strong natural environment provides a basis for our society and our economy. But, as well as showing where the problems are, this report also gives an idea of how to take action. In Wales, as everywhere else, climate change has led to habitat loss, soil exhaustion, and more flooding and more drought. Agriculture and the agricultural sector are vital to Wales and there is a need to ensure a sustainable future for the sector following the decision to leave the European Union.

The authors of this report call on governments here and in the UK to consider the findings of this report when drawing up farming schemes in the future. The environment Act provides a framework for cutting carbon emissions and a statutory target of cutting emissions 80 per cent by 2050, but Plaid Cymru acknowledges that climate change is the greatest threat to humanity, and we have to continue to hold the Welsh Government to account so that their policies contribute towards this target. There is a need, as Simon said, to implement the environment Act and the well-being of future generations Act, and that needs to be a main priority for the Government if we’re going to reverse this decline in our natural world.

So, there is a need for solutions from the Welsh Government to two important questions. What difference will these Acts make in the way that the Government takes action, including departments across Government? What difference will we see at a grass-roots level through the policies that the Government will bring forward as a result of these Acts? The legislative framework is in place to protect and develop our wildlife—we now need to see action at a grass-roots level.

This debate is a stark reminder of the challenges facing the natural environment, not only in Wales, but in the seas and oceans that border our country. The threats facing these fragile marine ecosystems, and the steps we can take to mitigate their effect, will be the focus of my contribution today. After all, we should never forget that Welsh territorial waters occupy an area equivalent to our country itself. As ‘State of Nature 2016 Wales’ reminds us, these seas are rich in a variety of marine life, occupying an important position at the boundary of three oceanic climate zones and possessing a large tidal range. Different species have undergone different experiences over the period the report explores. According to long-term data trends, 34 per cent of marine vertebrate and 38 per cent of marine plant species have declined. For marine invertebrates, the long-term decline is even more worrying, with three out of four species affected, although I am glad that this trend is lessened in the short-term data. Comparison with the ‘State of Nature 2016 UK’ report shows similar patterns, with steep declines for marine invertebrates, in particular, again being evidenced. Reading this report in connection with the Welsh document also suggests that the success of marine vertebrates is largely driven by increases in fish numbers.

Positive actions around conservation are having beneficial outcomes, as the report highlights, and monitoring and research in particular are important tools in understanding species behaviour and tackling issues arising from human interactions. It is good news that the globally important grey seal population on Ramsey island is experiencing the highest recorded levels of pup births, and that measures are already in hand to make sure no disruption is caused by tidal turbine technology. This is crucial, as we are still catching up in terms of tackling the impact of other human activities on the seas around Wales, and examples given in the report include unsustainable commercial fishing, development, the introduction of non-native species and inputs of contaminants and nutrients.

The UK report also mentions the impact of global warming, with changes in sea temperature leading to large numbers of species showing problematic northward drifts in their distribution. Cold-water species are decreasing in numbers, but warm-adapted species that move north frequently encounter food sources that are not sufficient for their need.

Brexit will also pose significant challenges to our approach to marine policy. The EU marine strategy framework directive, created to improve the health of our seas, set a target for Governments to take action to manage the human pressures on our waters to achieve good environmental status, creating seas that are healthy, productive, and—crucial in terms of this debate—biologically diverse. I would support the call from Wales Environment Link and other stakeholders for the Welsh Government to maintain its ambition for meeting the strategy framework by 2020, and hope this could be integrated into the Wales national marine plan when the Cabinet Secretary brings her proposals forward. Similarly, the work around marine protected areas must take account of our secession from Europe, and fisheries policy will be a third policy area affected by our leaving the European Union, where it is important we strike a sustainable balance.

We have a duty to protect the diversity of our marine environment, but if we do not do so, we could also lose out on opportunities that could prove useful for the Welsh economy. ‘Future Trends in the Celtic Seas’, an important new report published today by the WWF, suggests that, combined, the seas are worth £15 billion a year to the UK, Irish and French economies and support around 400,000 jobs. I have spoken previously about the sheer challenge of overcoming our nature deficit disorder, where children and young people in Wales consider themselves to have a weaker connection to the natural world than their peers in Northern Ireland, Scotland, or even London, and I would ask us again to consider how we could link these to a serious understanding of the importance of our marine environment.

This report is a warning of our need to do more, but, as David Attenborough reflects in the foreword to the UK state of nature report, this should give us hope too. Action was taken following the publication of the 2013 report, and I hope that clear measures will follow, in turn, from this.

I’m very grateful to be able to take part in this individual Member debate today, and I would like to tender David Melding’s regrets at not being able to be here to speak in this debate. The state of nature report is a key piece of evidence in helping us to understand what action we can take to protect and preserve our precious nature and ecosystems, and it will be a key piece of evidence in helping us to scrutinise the work of the Welsh Government, of the Cabinet Secretary, and particularly in the implementation of the well-being of future generations Act and the reach and impact of the Environment (Wales) Act.

We’ve talked already—some of the other participants here—about the many statistics that the state of nature report highlights: the decline in our species, the priority species that have been lost, and the critically endangered species. When we talk about species, we often talk about animals, but of course all the plants, the butterflies and the insects on the ground are absolutely vital in maintaining our ecosystem. We did have a piece of good news from Vikki Howells, who mentioned the state of the grey seals, and of course the pine martens have increased and that has been very, very welcome. But my concern actually lies predominantly less with this state of nature report than with the global situation that we find ourselves in.

The number of wild animals living on Earth is set to fall by two thirds by 2020, and this is part of a mass extinction that is destroying the natural world upon which we all depend. Animal populations plummeted by over 58 per cent between 1970 and 2012. By 2020, we human beings and our lifestyle will have killed off 67 per cent of all of Earth’s animals. That is an appalling legacy for us to leave our children. We all know that tumbling animal numbers are down to farming, logging, the impact of humans—a mere 15 per cent is protected for nature—and unsustainable fishing and hunting. It goes on and on. Rivers and lakes are the hardest hit habitats, with animal populations down by 81 per cent since 1970. This is all due to us, to excessive water extraction, to our pollution, to the dams we build. All these pressures are magnified by global warming, which shifts the ranges in which these precious animals that help sustain our ecosystems are able to live.

There is some good news. There are not just our seals, not just our pine martens, but tiger numbers are thought to be increasing and the giant panda has recently been removed from the list of endangered species. I bring this up—I talk about the global situation—because I want to reinforce that, whatever we do here, Cabinet Secretary, in our small country, in our small way, will count. This is vitally important because we can’t celebrate our efforts just yet. In just a bit more bad news for the global environment we have a new President-elect who has said that,

‘The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.’

It is very concerning that the leader-elect of the free world takes this attitude towards such a serious issue. If he takes the United States of America out of the Paris agreement, it will threaten all of our efforts to stabilise temperature change and to start to resolve climate change. That is why we need to do our part. I feel very deeply for this, not just for us, not just for the animals on our planet—their planet, the big ‘our’ planet—but I’m concerned for the future of my children, for your children, and for all of our children. Will they have a planet left to live on? I really fear for their future.

I too welcome this debate today and the ‘State of Nature 2016 Wales’ report, in which I think many organisations have played a very valuable part in helping to produce and highlight. Of course, there are causes for concern, which Members have already mentioned, and a need for the Welsh Government and other public bodies to act to address those concerns.

As with other Members here, I am a champion, through the Wildlife Trust, for a particular species—in my case, the water vole. The decline in the water vole population in Britain is quite dramatic. In fact, it’s the most serious decline of any wild mammal in Britain in the last century. Between 1960 and 2004, it’s estimated that that fall was around 95 per cent. So, obviously, there are very serious concerns in terms of the water vole population in Wales, and beyond Wales in terms of Britain as a whole. So, the organisations concerned with biodiversity and the water vole population highlight habitat loss, as you would expect, and fragmentation of habitats as factors involved in that decline; predation by mink, of course, which has been a big factor; water abstraction and pollution of the waterways; and management of reens and ditches, and the role of intensive agriculture in that. So, there’s probably a reasonable degree of consensus in terms of the prime causes of that fall in water vole population and also, I think, quite a degree of agreement in terms of what needs to be done—some of the things that most need to be done to address that decline—so, reintroduction programmes for water voles, control of the mink population, restoration of habitat and reversal, and certainly a halting of the decline in the habitat that supports them; that’s waterways and riverbanks and more extended areas of natural habitat not fragmented by development. So, when we look at all of those issues, Llywydd, I think it’s clear that the environment Act and the well-being of future generations Act, as mentioned by others, are absolutely vital to the general picture and to water voles as well. We need to make sure that they are implemented as effectively as possible. For me, I guess, locally, my experience of the water vole population is mainly around the Gwent levels. We have got an amazing network of reens and waterways there. They have been carefully managed over the centuries. Nonetheless, they are under threat, of course. One of the main threats is the proposed M4 relief road across the Gwent levels. So, I think it will be a major test of the legislation that I have referred to as to whether the biodiversity issues, including the water vole population, are adequately and sufficiently factored into decision making on that particular proposal. Certainly, I am working very closely with the wildlife trusts and a range of other organisations to try and get the key message across—that it’s no good to anyone in terms of ensuring good biodiversity in Wales if we are talking the talk, as it were. When it comes to key decisions, we have to walk the walk.

I congratulate Simon Thomas and other Members on securing this debate, and I agree with the motion that is proposed. We welcome the ‘State of Nature 2016 Wales’ report, and we commend the organisations involved in developing that report. I have, however, been struck that, as well as that ‘State of Nature 2016 Wales’ report from many organisations, largely in the third sector, we also have this very substantial report from NRW recently—the state of natural resources report. I am struck by how those two reports seem to have progressed in parallel without much support or cross-fertilisation between them. We have spoken on our committee to NRW, the Cabinet Secretary and others about the process we have had for this. I think that, probably, there is something special about this first report that we had from NRW. They have explained that the timescales made it difficult for them to be as open or consultative with third-sector organisations and environmental groups as they might otherwise have been, and that, because of the nature of the first report, there was perhaps more in the way of sharing drafts and drawing on support from Welsh Government, as well as from within NRW, in developing that report. I do think it’s important, though, for the future that there is not a perception of the Welsh Government in any way marking its own homework on biodiversity or what we do in these areas. We look to NRW to have an independent approach in keeping score or in reporting on where there are improvements, or where there is deterioration in the matters being monitored. I do hope that there will be more scope for the many very worthy organisations that produced the excellent report that is the subject of the debate today to interrelate with NRW and the reporting and research work that they do. The base of people who are employed and are working in these areas in Wales is not large, and I think there should be scope for cross-fertilisation, and the sum of the parts would be greater than if people work entirely separately.

I was struck by the contribution from Vikki Howells. I was a little saddened by one aspect of what she said. She referred, I think, to children saying that they had closer connection to the natural environment in the other nations within the UK, or even in London, than they do in Wales. From a personal perspective, I just find that very surprising because, certainly, with my children, I feel they have a much closer connection to the natural environment now we have moved here than they ever had in south-east England. When I just look at the amount of green there is in Cardiff, or when I visit the Newport wetlands and what the RSPB have done there, or her own community or many other Valleys communities—the nature of the radial development along the valley floor and lower slopes means that so much of the population is so close to nature, and at least there is the potential for such accessibility. I would like to close my remarks on that positive note. We look forward to improvements with the support of this Assembly and the Welsh Government in future years.

I’m very pleased to take part in this debate, and I congratulate the Members who’ve put this forward, because I think the issues that are raised are absolutely crucial, and I think that these issues are really the bread-and-butter stuff of what we should be doing here in the Assembly to preserve the wildlife of Wales. It is a matter of great concern that our biodiversity has declined. Previous speakers have listed that decline, and I do think it should be a key policy of the Welsh Government to reduce this decline—and, indeed, for all of us. And already it’s been mentioned that we do have legislative tools—the environment Act and the future generations Act—and we do have key decisions to make, as John Griffiths said in his contribution, where we have to decide what we must preserve and measure that against other gains. So, there are key decisions that we do have to make.

Even though my constituency is mainly urban, there are very important species that can be found in urban areas, and there are green patches of wildlife that I think it’s absolutely vital that we preserve, not only for the wildlife that is there, but for the health and well-being of the population, because I think it’s already been referred to, the fact that wildlife and nature and the environment does improve your well-being and your health.

Like John Griffiths, I am a species champion, and I am the species champion of waxcap fungi, which are very important to Cardiff North. The grasslands around the Llanishen reservoir are home to the waxcap fungi. As you may have heard, because I’ve raised this in the Chamber quite a few times, there’s been a long campaign, which Jenny Rathbone, my colleague, and I have both been involved in, to prevent development at Llanishen reservoir. Our aim is to turn it into a country park and to refill the reservoir. This campaign has lasted for 15 years, and Western Power Distribution ruthlessly opposed the widespread wishes of the public in Cardiff North and did all it could to build over the reservoir, including going to two public inquiries. It was a huge effort to try to retain the site.

But, in any case, in 2003, waxcap fungi were discovered at the reservoir, and they were discovered by the residents’ action group, which contains ecologists and very expert people, and, in 2005, it was designated as a site of special scientific interest, which was a matter of great rejoicing. Now, waxcap fungi were once common throughout the grasslands of northern Europe, but, because of intensive farming methods, they’ve virtually disappeared in many places. And, actually, 29 species of waxcap fungi were found at the reservoir, which means that it is a site of international importance for these types of fungi. It was a very exciting discovery, and I know—. I think Simon Thomas said he wanted to be positive when we discussed these issues, and this was very positive, because they were discovered during—well, during, really, this campaign.

Last year, we had the very good news that the site has now been bought back by Dŵr Cymru, by Welsh Water, and Natural Resources Wales and Welsh Water have been monitoring the waxcaps, with ecologists, very, very carefully, and I understand that they are still doing very well on the site. Welsh Water is actually planning to refill the reservoir and open it up the public, but would manage the grassland fungi and protect this unique city site for future generations. So, that is why my species is waxcap fungi. And I’m not only celebrating the fact that they are unique, but that they also helped save the reservoir. I think it’s absolutely crucial, on a wider note, that we do keep urban green spaces for future generations in order to promote biodiversity in every part of Wales. Thank you very much.

Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I’m going to concentrate on the importance of sites of special scientific interest, or SSSIs. As others have already noted, we are losing species at a frightening scale at the moment and, as the state of nature report states, one of the reasons for the loss of biodiversity is the decline of habitats. Wildlife needs room to prosper and the protected sites that we have do provide that. SSSIs are a natural treasure. They include some of our more striking habitats, from wetlands to sand dunes and from meadows to ancient oak woodland. Not only are they positive for our wildlife, but they also have huge economic value. Every pound spent on positive SSSI management brings an investment of £8, and anyone who has visited one of the RSPB sites on Anglesey, for example, will know just how popular they are with visitors, tourists and local people. They provide an opportunity to see a variety of wildlife in their own habitats.

I want to draw attention to two specific examples in my constituency that demonstrate the importance of investment in SSSIs in order to ensure that they are in the best possible condition for our wildlife. The first is the very positive news that ‘aderyn y bwn’ is breeding in Wales for the first time in over 30 years, and that is in the Malltraeth peatlands on Ynys Môn. There have been some examples of the bird being here in the past, but this is the first time they’ve bred for many decades now. The reserve was formed back in the 1990s with the aim of bringing the species back to Anglesey, and after a long wait and seeing a number of other at-risk species prospering, finding that this species had chosen to nest and breed there was a tribute to the hard work of the conservation team and a tribute to the activities of birdwatchers locally.

The second story of success is the nature reserve at South Stack, in the Holy Island Coast SSSI, which is supporting a number of habitats and species. One of these is the red-legged chough. It’s very fashionable to be a champion for a species, and I was chuffed—please forgive me—to be chosen as a champion for this rare and wonderful bird. This bird has particular habitat needs that are far more specialist than some of its closest relatives, and that’s why the rocky shores of western Anglesey are ideal. Through management of these coastal grounds, then the numbers of these iconic species have been maintained.

In those two cases that I’ve mentioned, careful management of those sites has led to successes in terms of conservation, but the picture isn’t the same across the whole of Wales. We don’t know, for example, what the state of some of our best sites for wildlife is. The last review of the status of these protected grounds was done in a quick survey of a sample observed by the Countryside Council for Wales over a decade ago, and the outcomes weren’t particularly encouraging. It’s crucially important, I think, that we invest in monitoring and assessing these sites in order to discover whether they are making provisions for the species that they are set to protect.

I do hope that the Government will today acknowledge that we do need a review of the way in which our best sites are performing in order to protect wildlife and acknowledge the importance of managing these protected sites properly, and monitoring in order to understand and restore Welsh nature. If our best sites for wildlife aren’t in a good state, then how can we hope to safeguard the future of biodiversity in Wales and to improve the prospects for wildlife in Wales?

As Wales species champion for the curlew, I visited Ysbyty Ifan in Snowdonia this summer with the RSPB, the National Trust and the tenant farmer, and heard that, instead of prescription, agri-environment schemes need to pay farmers on outcomes, doing things with them. I also heard that the main reason breeding is failing is nest predation, with the fox and crow the main culprits, which is why curlews, crows and fox trails are being monitored within a trial and control area, prior to the introduction of possible predator control.

The Welsh uplands are in need of conservation attention. Fifty-five per cent of species studied in the state of nature report have been in long-term decline and species abundance is declining. As many as 15 per cent of uplands species are threatened with extinction. Upland habitats are particularly important for breeding curlew, which are now scarce in the lowlands. The curlew is hugely important as a species both culturally and ecologically in Wales. Between 1993 and 2006, there’s been a rapid decline in curlew numbers of 81 per cent in Wales. Without intervention, these trends are likely to continue. The curlew is now listed in the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s near-threatened category at global level and vulnerable to extinction at European level. The RSPB has commenced a major programme of recovery for curlew across the UK, with trial areas set up at six sites, including Hiraethog, Migneint and Ysbyty Ifan, the area I visited this summer, and with management intervention commencing, in winter 2015-16 and surveying last summer.

The causes of the decline are: the loss of suitable habitat, changes in upland agriculture within places, and an increase in stock—and conversely in others a reduction—of grazing animals has led to a reduction in habitat quality. Forestry in upland areas has led to a direct loss of habitat and, given the now low numbers, predation is now taking its toll as well. Blanket bogs are one of the most important habitats found in Wales, if not globally. As well as providing homes to rare plants, invertebrates and birds such as the curlew, they provide much of our drinking water, underpin the rural economy, and hold large stores of carbon. However, over the years, blanket bogs in Wales and across the world have suffered at the hand of humankind. In the past, activities such as drainage, burning and the planting of forestry have damaged the bogs. Only in recent years have we come to understand how valuable the habitat is in its intact state.

So, does the Minister join me in recognising that we need to do more to protect this important habitat? It is vital for the future of the curlew that we get the future land-use policy right. With our departure from the EU, we have an opportunity to define our own sustainable land management policy. This policy must address biodiversity decline, but also wider issues of environmental degradation by ensuring delivery of clean water, water storage to prevent flooding, and carbon storage in our peat lands. Does the Minister therefore agree that this must be the direction of future land-use policy in Wales?

The curlew is the largest European wading bird, instantly recognisable on winter estuaries and in its summer breeding grounds by its large size, long down-curved bill, brown upper parts and long legs. Its song is haunting and evocative; for many people, it is the call of wild upland areas. The north Wales moors now support the largest population of breeding curlew in Wales, with birds returning to nest in spring. Curlews breed on open, flat or gently undulating bog, moorland, upland farmland and lowland wet pastures, feeding mainly on a range of invertebrates, including earthworms, leatherjackets, beetles, spiders and caterpillars. Although they’re still relatively widespread in the uplands, breeding pairs are, as stated, now scarce in the lowlands. In 2006, the last estimate considered there to be just over 1,000 pairs of curlew breeding in Wales only.

So, the actions required include support and advice for the owners and managers of land where curlews occur or could be expected, to implement favourable management for curlew as part of their farm business. This could include the reinstatement of previously lost management. An action also required: rigorous monitoring of the effectiveness of the Glastir agri-environment scheme to inform scheme options and wider management, and finally, the importance of trialling comprehensive management solutions to turn around the decline in upland breeding curlews. Thank you.

Diolch, Lywydd. I’m grateful to speak in this incredibly important debate today, and, of course, I welcome it and I welcome the ‘State of Nature 2016 Wales’ report. First of all, I want to start by thanking all the organisations involved for their hard work in producing what is a very detailed and informative paper, and, most importantly, to recognise the thousands of dedicated, passionate volunteers who, through their love of nature, donate their time. Without their help, we would not be as well informed about the state of nature in Wales and this would make it incredibly difficult to know where intervention is most needed.

The report does give us a stark insight into biodiversity loss here in Wales and it is, indeed, a mixed picture of severe losses, such as the turtle dove, whinchat and the curlew, though it isn’t all bad news. I was heartened to read of gains in a number of species and success stories, which clearly does demonstrate what can be achieved when stakeholders work together. As elected Members, I believe that we are guardians of the environment for future generations, and that’s been said here today. It has, after all, taken only 50 years to see a 56 per cent reduction in the species studied. In that case, we need to take urgent action, otherwise we will not halt this decline. I don’t think any of us here wants to continue passing that decline as a legacy of our work.

If we look at the UK-wide state of nature report, it does make a few observations. One of those observations is that intensification of agriculture has had the biggest impact on wildlife, and that has been overwhelmingly negative. Thankfully, there are many landowners and farmers who are concerned about the impacts of agriculture on nature and who want to create a positive change through wildlife-friendly farming. I think that’s critically important to the restoration and recovery of habitats and wildlife, given that 84 per cent of land here in Wales is indeed used for agriculture. Of course, for many farmers and landowners, sustainable land management, which has a positive effect on nature, is only possible because of financial support that’s received through Welsh Government and EU grant schemes like Glastir. I am, therefore, deeply concerned about future funding for these critically important schemes once Wales does leave the European Union, and, indeed, about the potential loss of many significant pieces of EU legislation that do protect wildlife, such as the habitats directive, the birds directive and controls on pesticide, which would all have a negative impact on us arresting that decline.

I am aware, of course, that the UK Government has said that they will honour the rural development contracts that have been signed before Wales does leave the European Union, and the direct payments to farmers will be sustained until 2020. But what we have to look at is what happens after that. So, I’d like to know if there’s been any representation made by the Cabinet Secretary to the Westminster Government regarding the long-term funding for agri-environment schemes for Wales in a post-Brexit era, and whether, within those agri-environment schemes, we’re going to receive the money, of course, that we were wildly promised for farmers that would be shared, also, in looking after the environment that we are talking about today.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs, Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Lywydd. I very much welcome this debate on the state of nature report and I’m happy to support the motion. I do recognise the important work done by the state of nature partnership and thank them for producing this very important report. I also appreciate the vital and important work undertaken by volunteers in Wales, whose efforts in monitoring and recording species and habitats have also contributed to this report.

Whilst the state of nature report highlights the decline in a number of species and habitats in Wales, and the root causes of those declines, the report is certainly not all negative. It notes a number of species that have been recovered in the last 20 years, such as the coal tit and nightjar, with the evidence also showing bats in Wales appearing to do well.

In our marine environment, whilst the report does note some declines, it also highlights that more than half of the marine species in UK seas have increased. The Welsh Government has long recognised the issues with respect to the decline in biodiversity. Our commitment to reverse this decline by building ecosystem resilience is key to the delivery of our nature recovery plan for Wales. This will only be achieved through embedding biodiversity throughout decision-making at all levels, building on the contribution biodiversity makes to our well-being.

Will the Cabinet Secretary take a question?

Yes.

Could I ask on that very point: because the Welsh Government is so focused on biodiversity, could she give some assurance to us today that, at the forthcoming Cancun convention on biological diversity, there will be a strong representation from the Welsh Government there, either in person, ideally, or, if not, by senior officials?

I’m unable to attend, but I will certainly have a senior official going in my place.

As referred to by Simon Thomas in his opening remarks, we now have in place a legislative framework that addresses these issues. Our groundbreaking Environment (Wales) Act 2016 and Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 mean we have the strongest foundation within the UK, and we are acknowledged internationally as being exemplars in implementing our international commitments to sustainable development and biodiversity.

Both Acts recognise that safeguarding and sustainably managing Wales’s natural resources are key to our well-being. Public bodies within the well-being of future generations Act are now under a duty to contribute to the seven well-being goals, which include maintaining and enhancing a biodiverse natural environment, with healthy, functioning ecosystems. We’ve now published our well-being objectives, which set out how we will use the well-being of future generations Act to help deliver our programme for government and maximise our contribution to the seven well-being goals. Our well-being objectives include to manage, use and enhance Wales’s natural resources to support long-term well-being.

The environment Act draws upon the ecosystem approach set out in the convention on biological diversity. The Act will ensure ecosystem resilience is a key objective of how we manage and use our natural resources, so our habitats and species are able to thrive and adapt to the pressures they face.

Will the Minister take a question?

Yes.

Just on that point: it struck me that the aims and objectives that were published on Friday of the future generations Act set out systems rather than ecosystems. Can you assure me that there’s nothing meaningful in the fact that the aims talk about systems, whereas the Act talks about ecosystems, and that what the Government is talking about is ecosystems?

Yes, we are talking about ecosystems.

So, to embed this, the Act sets out an interconnected delivery framework. I launched the first of these, the state of natural resources report, produced by Natural Resources Wales, last month. It forms a national evidence base, identifying the pressures and opportunities for the sustainable management of our natural resources. I will shortly be consulting on the second of these, a statutory national natural resources policy, which will set out our priorities to address these pressures and opportunities across Government and beyond. Thirdly, NRW will produce area statements identifying local issues and priorities for action.

Our current consultation on local air quality and noise management in Wales is set within this framework. We are proposing new policy guidance to stress the greater public health benefits likely to result from actions to reduce air and noise pollution in an integrated fashion over a wider area. [Interruption.] No I can’t—I’ve already taken two.

This approach will also benefit biodiversity. Furthermore, the environment Act introduces an enhanced biodiversity and resilience of ecosystems duty for public authorities in Wales. This will ensure public authorities put biodiversity into the heart of their decision making in a joined-up and integrated way, delivering multiple benefits for society. For example, our current consultation on nitrate vulnerable zones shows how we are committed to building resilient ecosystems. This means taking a preventative approach, addressing the underlying issues rather than treating the symptoms, and improving the long-term ability of our ecosystems to provide services and adapt to pressures and changes.

For our marine environment, it is important we continue to work in partnership to build resilience. I’m committed to ensuring Wales contributes to an ecologically coherent, well-managed network of marine protected areas, and to delivering the first Welsh national marine plan that integrates policies across the Welsh Government for the marine environment. The plan will include policies specific to biodiversity and tackling invasive non-native species. By delivering our commitments under the marine transition programme, we are ensuring biodiversity is an integral part of decision making in Wales. I do also wish to say a few words about our commitment to biodiversity in the context of Brexit. Yes, of course, there are many challenges and risks, but also many opportunities. I’ve been extremely encouraged by the consensus of views expressed at the roundtable discussions that I’ve held since the vote. Collaboration is key across all sectors to define the Wales we want post Brexit, and the mechanisms to achieve our vision. Building on and learning from current funding mechanisms will be crucial post Brexit, from schemes such as the sustainable management scheme and Glastir, as well as developing new market-based funding opportunities, including payments for ecosystem services.

Joyce Watson specifically asked about post-Brexit funding, and I want to reassure her and all Members that discussions are very much ongoing. Just yesterday, I hosted a meeting between myself and my ministerial counterparts from UK Government—Scotland, and Northern Ireland were represented by the Permanent Secretary. Those conversations are ongoing, not specifically around funding, although, obviously, that’s part of the discussions. Also, Joyce Watson will be aware of the JMC-EU that the First Minister attends, along with other First Ministers where, again, funding is obviously a main topic. We’re very concerned—obviously, we’ve had reassurance from the Treasury that, up to 2020, we’ll receive funding, but after that, at the moment, we don’t know.

The environment Act and the well-being of future generations Act are strong foundations on which to build and take forward our commitment to biodiversity. Following the decision to leave the EU, we will not row back on our existing legislation, nor on our commitment to biodiversity. Our legislation will allow us to promote new, innovative and pioneering long-term approaches to the management of our wildlife. We are committed to reversing the decline in biodiversity and, indeed, to see it thrive. I’m confident the approach I’ve outlined, which sets us apart as a world leader—even though, as Angela Burns said, we are a small country—in how we manage our natural resources will achieve this. Diolch.

I call on Huw Irranca-Davies to reply the debate.

Diolch, Lywydd. Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for the tone and the positivism in her quite comprehensive response there? But could I also compliment all of the speakers today, many of them, and those who sought this debate, not least of all, Simon Thomas, who referred to how we’re in the anthropocene era? But he had a positivity about his contribution, which said that if we choose to make a difference, we can make a difference. That was the theme that came through from many of the speakers.

Sian Gwenllian touched on an issue that was repeated by Joyce Watson—this issue of how we explain this to the next generation unless we steward this properly, unless we reverse the declines in biodiversity and unless we repair the damage to our ecosystem services as described in the state of nature report.

Vikki Howells rightly focused on the marine environment and the work that can be done there, because, very often, we look at the great blue yonder, and it is the great blue yonder. People do not look at the health and the well-being of that area in the way that we do in terms of the terrestrial natural environment.

Angela Burns reminded us of the global imperative on a day when we actually see that slightly imperilled, slightly, with the selection by the largest and greatest nations in the world of somebody who is a climate change denier. We have to work doubly hard now to actually keep the global impetus on actually delivering on biodiversity, climate change and so on.

We also had many champions here of the natural environment today—all of them are champions—John Griffiths, the water vole champion; Julie Morgan, the waxcap fungi; and Mark Isherwood, the curlew. We had Rhun ap Iorwerth saying how chuffed, indeed, he was to be here. [Laughter.] And Mark Reckless, Chair of the CCERA committee, quite rightly—I’m not sure what he’s championing, but he did champion the need for independent monitoring and evaluation of the Welsh Government’s progress on all of these issues.

Now, I’m proud to be the lapwing champion here in the National Assembly, and that question of where have all the lapwings gone is an excellent distillation of all the grand themes in this debate, noting the decline and fall of the once great empire of marine and terrestrial life, of plants and birds and butterflies, the declines of species and habitats, and the tragic loss of biodiversity. In years gone by, black and white lapwings could be seen in flight all year round all over Wales. They were as abundant as the wildflower meadows that sustained them. Now, they are rare and special. The lapwing is our modern equivalent of the miners’ canary. Their slow demise is showing us that nature is in trouble. For their sake, and for ours, we need to take action.

Now, for the lapwing, the solutions are in farming and landscape management, and we need to address this in our policies for agriculture, rural development and, not least, in this post-Brexit landscape. We need viable farming, viable rural communities, viable species and habitats, too. We need to rethink our approach to get the very best of all worlds, whilst restoring the best of this world, of which we are stewards not masters. Regardless of Brexit, we should be looking at a brave new world, and in this brave new world there should be no conflict between maintaining our ability to grow food and looking after the land and nature on which it depends. The first is utterly dependent on the second. So, let’s take this opportunity to work towards intelligent and sustainable farming, landscape and environmental management, where we, the citizens, invest in farming, not simply for food and the vitality of rural communities but by using public funds to generate tangible public goods, such as clean water, pollution prevention, maintaining healthy soil, caring for nature, climate mitigation and adaptation, including recreating natural flood defences, such as floodplains with wet grassland and wet woodland.

Will you give way?

I’m not sure if I have time. My apologies.

We have created some of the tools to do this in Wales. We are leading the way in legislation and policy. We have the environment Act. Part 1 describes the sustainable management of natural resources. It enables Wales’s resources to be managed in a more proactive, sustainable and joined-up way. It helps to tackle the challenges we face. It’s focused on the opportunities our resources provide. On the biodiversity and resilience of ecosystems duty in section 6(1):

‘A public authority must seek to maintain and enhance biodiversity in the exercise of functions in relation to Wales, and in so doing promote the resilience of ecosystems, so far as consistent with the proper exercise of those functions.’

In section 7 of the Act,

‘Without prejudice to section 6, the Welsh Ministers must—

(a) take all reasonable steps to maintain and enhance the living organisms and types of habitat included in any list published under this section, and

(b) encourage others to take such steps.’

And mention has been made already of the well-being of future generations Act, which describes a resilient Wales—

‘A nation which maintains and enhances a biodiverse natural environment with healthy functioning ecosystems that support social, economic and ecological resilience and the capacity to adapt to change (for example climate change).’

The Cabinet Secretary in front of us, who is leading on this, in the Joint Links conference stated:

The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act offers an opportunity to bring biodiversity into central decision-making processes for public bodies, influencing biodiversity and resourcing that underpins it. We need to use this to the greatest effect, ensuring grant funding mechanisms are compliant with the Act in achieving the well-being goals and, in particular, the resilient Wales goals.

There’s been a fantastic array of contributions to hear. Our political diversity, I have to say, did achieve some harmony, with everybody agreeing that there is one direction of travel here: we need to rebuild and restore our natural environment, replenish the biodiversity, reverse the habitat loss, restore the quality of our natural ecosystems. It’s good for us, it’s good for the planet, it’s good for this generation and for future generations. We know we have the tools, we know we have the ambition—it’s now for us to work together, and all the speakers here made this point today, to reverse the biodiversity loss, to repair our damaged ecosystems, and to hand on to future generations a healing planet and a healthy planet. We are the stewards, not the masters.

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

The next item on the agenda is the Welsh Conservatives debate, and I call on Mark Isherwood to move the motion.

Diolch, Lywydd. In this Remembrance week we propose that the National Assembly for Wales recognises that those who serve or have served in the armed forces, and their families, should be treated with fairness and respect, and believes that Wales should be at the forefront of implementing the armed forces covenant, which is intended to redress the disadvantages that the armed forces community may face in comparison to other citizens, and to recognise sacrifices made.

An estimated 385,000 members of the current and ex-armed forces community live in Wales. According to the Royal British Legion’s 2014 household survey, this comprises 310,000 members of the current and former service community in Wales, with an additional 75,000 children. Ministry of Defence statistics have further suggested that there are 153,000 veterans amongst this population.

The first of July was the centenary of the start of the most bloody battle of the first world war—the battle of the Somme; 7 July was the centenary of the battle of Mametz Wood, when infantrymen of the 38th (Welsh) Division walked straight into the German machine guns in front of a wood, roughly a mile in length, near the small village of Mametz. It was an honour to sponsor last week’s Royal British Legion poppy ride here, when Assembly Members and staff joined veterans, legion members and staff to cycle the distance from the Assembly to Mametz Wood to mark the Remembrance period. Congratulations to a certain Member over there, who I believe was the fastest—or covered the greatest distance in five minutes. I went for a gentle ride in the country, but there we are. [Laughter.] On this day, 9 November 1916, 100 years ago, the battle of Ancre Heights began, as the final phase of the battle of the Somme was drawing to a close. By 1918, 280,000 Welsh servicemen had served in world war I, of whom approximately 40,000 died. On this day 22 years later, Germany started expelling 180,000 French people from conquered Alsace-Lorraine in year 2 of world war II. People have also made the supreme sacrifice in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Falklands, Northern Ireland and Korea, to name but a few. For the past informs the future, let us never forget.

We call on the Welsh Government to note the Scottish Government's creation of a Scottish Veterans Commissioner in 2014 to champion the needs of the armed forces community, and to create an armed forces commissioner for Wales, dedicated to improving outcomes for both veterans and serving forces, and their families. The establishment of an armed forces commissioner for Wales is essential to support the specific needs of veterans and represent these to Welsh Government, and to properly scrutinise service delivery for veterans carried out by Welsh Government, NHS Wales and local authorities. The commissioner would engage with the armed forces community, as well as all public services, and champion the many key third sector projects supporting veterans and their families, so that they may be supported and rolled out, hopefully nationally, by, or with the support of, the Welsh Government. This role has been supported and endorsed by the armed forces community and armed services heads. It’s not our idea. We’re simply championing it on behalf of that community and those well-placed experts.

We also call on the Welsh Government to introduce a veterans needs assessment as the basis for delivering services, to ensure that former members of the armed forces are entitled to receive the support they deserve. The armed forces covenant refers to the mutual obligations between the UK nations and our armed forces. Its principles were enshrined in law by the previous UK Government in 2011, ensuring that the armed forces community does not face undue disadvantage when accessing services such as housing and health. All 22 local authorities in Wales have in place an armed forces community covenant, requiring them to have elected member armed forces champions, but more is needed.

Leading the Welsh Conservative debate on veterans here in July, I provided the example of a constituent who, following his army discharge, was diagnosed with chronic and complex service-related post-traumatic stress disorder. He had attempted suicide in March after repeated attempts to secure appropriate NHS intervention had failed. Further to my intervention, his community mental health team promised him a care co-ordinator within four weeks. However, when I was asked to visit him again two months later, he had still heard nothing. Well, the update on that story is that only after my further intervention at the highest level in the health board, was he appointed a care co-ordinator. Despite the clear commitment of local authorities and the Welsh NHS to deliver as many tailored services as they can to the armed forces, Welsh Conservatives’ casework—and, no doubt, that of all other parties—provides evidence that this does not go far enough.

Improved Welsh Government data collection is vital in order to establish the health needs of veterans, identify the support needed by their families and carers, inform commissioning and service provision, and highlight the engagement needed with people in the armed forces, serving and/or at transition into civilian life. In fact, this is exactly what June’s ‘Call to Mind Wales’ report, commissioned by the Forces in Mind Trust, and based on interviews with veterans, their families and people working in the voluntary and independent sector, called for. This report also called for increased Veterans’ NHS Wales capacity, stating that much more needs to be done to support the mental health needs of veterans in Wales. June 2016. The need for improved data collection is further emphasised by the Royal British Legion’s Count Them In campaign, which calls for questions on the armed forces community to be included in the next UK census. As they say, it’s estimated that there are currently between 6.5 million and 6.7 million members of the armed forces community living in the UK, representing about a tenth of the population. Yet little is known about the exact numbers, location and needs of this significant group.

When I raised this with the Cabinet Secretary in July, he stated the Welsh Government was supportive of the principle, but he believed that it could put service personnel at risk. However, he also promised that an expert group would look at this issue, and I hope to hear more from him on that today. There could be up to 0.25 million, in fact, veterans in Wales, but, without this data, we cannot plan for the NHS capacity needed, commission the wider services required, or provide the support on which families and carers depend, and we cannot deliver on the promise made by the armed forces covenant, that those who serve or who have served in the armed forces, and their families, are treated fairly.

We will support Plaid Cymru’s amendments 2 and 3 and commend the work of organisations such as 65 Degrees North, which helps the rehabilitation of wounded or damaged ex-servicemen and servicewomen by offering the opportunity to participate in challenging adventure. The project has secured support from the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Harry’s Endeavour fund and UK Government’s armed forces covenant LIBOR funding, which has also provided funding for CAIS Wales Change Step veterans services, providing veterans across Wales with tailored peer support and specialist intervention, and for First Choice Housing Association to support Wales Homes for Veterans—Alabaré.

Having led the first debate here calling for adoption of the armed forces covenant in Wales, and having campaigned on issues ranging from service-related mental illness to the total disregard of the war disablement pension, I welcome some of the subsequent steps taken by the Welsh Government. However, much more is required and we will abstain on the Welsh Government’s amendment 4 accordingly. It refers to the development of a ‘housing pathway’ for ex-service personnel and their families. But, as I said yesterday, I’m reliably advised that this just details in one place everything someone is entitled or not entitled to already, and doesn’t actually offer anything new, and that the Welsh Government needs to ensure front-line staff training about it.

Instead of £585,000, Veterans’ NHS Wales have stated to the armed forces committee here—the cross-party group—that they need £1 million annually just to meet the basic mental health needs of the armed forces community in Wales. Although a letter sent to me in August by the Welsh Government states that

‘between 60 and 65% met criteria for post traumatic stress disorder with the mean time from referral to first appointment being 42 days’,

this is outside the Welsh Government’s 28-day target for primary care referral to assessment, and real referral-to-treatment waiting times were up to 38 weeks last month across the three health boards for which statistics are held by Veterans’ NHS Wales. Although the Welsh Government letter says that it expects therapists to help one another across health board boundaries if there’s sickness or absence, I am told that the backlog this would create in the other health boards makes it impossible.

The Welsh Government letter says that some veterans could have their care met from local primary mental health support services, but I’m advised that most Veterans’ NHS Wales patients have complex biopsychosocial needs requiring Veterans’ NHS Wales treatment and support.

As the Royal British Legion’s response to the consultation on the Welsh Government’s new ‘Together for Mental Health’ document states, and I quote,

‘the delivery plan at present does not address the complete package of mental healthcare needs for the Armed Forces community, and will not provide the right level of leadership or performance measures to adequately address the future needs of Welsh veterans or their families’

and it also says

‘the document should echo the intentions within NHS England’s constitution’.

I commend this motion accordingly.

I have selected the four amendments to the motion and I call on Bethan Jenkins to move amendments 1, 2 and 3, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much. Of course, I’m pleased to be part of this debate today, and, of course, I could not disagree with the fact that we need to treat families and veterans with respect. Really, I would expect anybody who lives in a civilised society—although perhaps there are some people in America who don’t agree they live in a civilised society after last night—to treat people with respect and to ensure that everybody can have access to resources—what’s needed by them as people who live in our society.

I want to be critical to some extent, because the irony of debates such as these is that there is a lack of vision by the Westminster Government when people to leave the army to put resources in place at that time to support soldiers. There is still enough money available for schemes such as Trident, for large military schemes, but there aren’t as many schemes in place to provide resources to help soldiers who are out on the battlefield at the moment and also to provide them with resources when they return from places such as Iraq and Afghanistan. I think we really need to discuss this in the context of this debate, because it’s very easy for the Conservatives to ask for more money and more resources all the time, when there is a need for the Westminster Conservative Government to show clearly that they understand the social problems that go along with the situation of people leaving the army.

I’m hearing it all the time from families. They say, ‘I expected more from the army. I expected more from them. I’ve been part of that family for years and I’ve been operating under their leadership.’ That lack of concern by them isn’t something that they can take without emotion, because they’re so close to the situation. They’ve developed relationships that not one of us, perhaps, understands, in very difficult situations. They’ve seen people die. They’ve seen their friends suffer. So, in the context of this discussion, I think we need to remember the emotion and the people behind these discussions.

Even though there are problems on a Westminster level, there are situations that remain where a number of people who were in the army or in the armed forces are unemployed, they have mental health problems and there is a need for enough skills for them to be able to transform themselves and to return to life outside the army. They say, ‘I’m now a civvy. I have to become a civvy and live in civilised society again.’

Rwy’n croesawu cefnogaeth y Ceidwadwyr i’r gwelliant a gyflwynais mewn perthynas â 65 Degrees North. Rwy’n gwybod fy mod wedi anfon neges e-bost atoch i gyd yn gofyn i chi ddod ar daith i fyny’r Wyddfa neu fynyddoedd eraill Cymru—ac rwy’n gwybod bod rhai ohonoch wedi ymateb yn gadarnhaol iawn—i gefnogi, a cherdded ochr yn ochr â chyn-filwyr, gyda llawer ohonynt yn dod o fy rhanbarth, Castell-nedd Port Talbot yn arbennig. Rwy’n meddwl bod un yn dod etholaeth y Dirprwy Lywydd, a bellach yn byw yng Nghaer, Peter Bowker, gŵr a gollodd un o’i goesau yn rhyfel Affganistan, ac a lwyddodd i groesi cap iâ yr Ynys Las heb gymorth yn ddiweddar. Byddant yn awr yn dringo mynydd uchaf Antarctica ym mis Ionawr. Yr hyn y maent wedi’i ddweud wrthyf yw, gallwch, fe allwch roi’r holl wasanaethau cwnsela yn y byd iddynt, ond os gallant ddod o hyd i ffyrdd o fod yn egnïol eto—oherwydd, yn amlwg, mae llawer o’u gwaith yw ymwneud â bod yn egnïol—yna gallant deimlo nad ydynt wedi eu gadael ar ôl gan gymdeithas a bod ganddynt rywbeth i’w roi yn ôl. Felly, maent yn mynd i mewn i ysgolion yn ogystal ac yn dweud wrth bobl am realiti rhyfel. Wrth gwrs, pe baech yn cyfarfod Pete, gallech weld ei angerdd dros yr hyn y mae’n ei wneud. Mae’n mynd i mewn i ysgolion ac yn dweud, ‘Nid wyf yn gwneud hyn er mwyn ceisio tanseilio’r hyn y mae’r fyddin yn ei wneud, ond rwy’n ceisio dweud wrthych y gall hyn ddigwydd i chi ac y bydd yn rhaid i chi newid eich bywyd o ganlyniad i hynny. ‘ Dyna pam rwy’n angerddol o blaid yr hyn y maent yn ei wneud.

Mae’r un peth yn wir am Newid Cam. Fel y dywedais ddoe, roeddwn yn hapus i roi cyfran o fy nghodiad cyflog iddynt ym Mhort Talbot am eu bod yn gwneud gwaith anhygoel gyda’r lluoedd arfog mewn perthynas ag anhwylder straen wedi trawma, a gyda’r teuluoedd hefyd. Dywedodd un ddynes ei bod wedi dioddef cam-drin domestig gan ei phartner am ei fod wedi dychwelyd yn dioddef o anhwylder straen wedi trawma difrifol. Roedd hi wedi gorfod ceisio gweld pethau yn y ffordd honno, ond wrth gwrs, ni allent fyw gyda’i gilydd wedyn am ei fod yn creu cynifer o broblemau iddi hi a’i theulu. Felly, roeddwn yn falch iawn o allu cefnogi’r elusen honno.

Ar fater comisiynydd, fe ddywedaf yn fyr mai’r unig reswm pam rydym yn dweud nad ydym yn ei gefnogi yw fy mod yn credu bod angen edrych ymhellach ar syniadau eraill. Nid wyf o reidrwydd yn dweud ei fod yn syniad gwael, ond credaf fod yn rhaid i ni edrych yn rhyngwladol ar yr hyn sy’n gweithio, ac mae’n rhaid i ni edrych ar gysyniadau eraill y gallwn geisio eu cyflwyno yma yng Nghymru, syniadau eraill i helpu’r rhai yn y sector penodol hwn, a sicrhau nad ydynt yn cael eu hanghofio a’u bod yn gwybod eu bod yn rhan annatod o’n cymuned yma yng Nghymru.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children to formally move amendment 4 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

Rhianon Passmore.

Diolch, Lywydd. Thank you. As we approach Remembrance Day and Remembrance Sunday, it is right that we acknowledge here in the home of Welsh democracy the extreme service that the men and women of our armed forces have given, so that we continue to enjoy the freedom that we so prize. I will be representing, like many, my people of Islwyn at remembrance events in Risca, Blackwood and Maesycwmmer in the days ahead. I particularly want to thank the Royal British Legion for all their hard work throughout the year, and I would also like to acknowledge the work of Caerphilly County Borough Council’s armed forced champion, Councillor Alan Higgs, Labour’s councillor for Aberbargoed. His dedication, commitment and the time he puts in to give voice to the armed forces community throughout the authority’s area is deeply appreciated.

This debate, though, is timely on top of recent events and we must all challenge ourselves constantly to learn from the past. Warfare must always be the last resort. The Welsh Government will continue, I know, to monitor progress in Scotland after the establishment of an armed forces and veterans commissioner there, so that we can learn from developments across the United Kingdom. Whilst responsibility for the armed forces is not devolved, the Welsh Labour Government has rightly taken a lead to ensure that our 385,000-strong armed forces community in Wales is supported—and that is 12 per cent of the population. Let there be no doubt that the men and women who have done their duty for our country in uniform command and deserve the greatest respect from every single man, woman and child in Wales.

The Welsh Government, local authorities and partner organisations have demonstrated their commitment to the armed forces, with the principles enshrined in the armed forces covenant across the principality. All 22 local authorities in Wales have signed the community covenant, showing their commitment to the armed forces community, and the Welsh Government continues to work with local authorities to ensure that those commitments are delivered. In Wales, the Welsh Government has put significant measures in place to develop and co-ordinate deliverable public services for our veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, and has established the Veterans’ NHS Wales, sadly still the only service of its kind in the United Kingdom. Each local health board has appointed an experienced clinician as a veterans therapist with an interest in or experience of military mental health problems. The veterans therapist will accept referrals from healthcare staff, GPs, veterans charities and, most importantly, self-referrals from ex-service personnel. And this is a clear example of putting words into meaningful policy and actions.

Rightly today military veterans in Wales are afforded the right of priority treatment for any health condition that arises from this service. This has not always been the case. Indeed, the Welsh Government has recently refurbished its package of support for veterans and their families to ensure that they access and receive the support they rightly deserve. And this refreshed support package sets out the Welsh Labour Government’s ongoing commitment across ministerial portfolios to the armed forces community across Wales.

Will you take an intervention on that?

Sorry, I want to finish.

And it includes a new ‘Welcome to Wales’ booklet for those deployed here. And the Welsh Government continues to work closely with organisations such as the Royal British Legion to support our armed forces and veterans in every way possible.

This package of support, though not exclusive, includes £0.5 million for the all-Wales veterans’ health and well-being service, the homebuy shared-equity scheme, which has been extended to cover widows and widowers of personnel killed in action, and additionally, as has been mentioned, from next April, a full disregard of the war disablement pension, which will be introduced in local authority financial assessments of charging for social care. This will ensure armed forces veterans in receipt of these pensions will not be required to use them in order to pay for the cost of their care. And in February, the Welsh Labour Government and the Welsh Local Government Association joined forces to introduce free swimming for all armed forces personnel and veterans across Wales.

I would like to praise the work of the mentioned expert group—the only one of its kind in the United Kingdom. The expert group was established to advise on how public services can best meet the service community’s needs. And I know that this Chamber will be fully united today in giving our armed forces their full support. This week, we pay our full respects and we remember, but we must challenge ourselves to ensure that we are true to that remembrance every day of the year. One of our greatest playwrights, Alan Bennett, in ‘The History Boys’ challenged the audience when one of his characters stated:

‘A photograph on every mantelpiece. And all this mourning has veiled the truth. It's not so much lest we forget, as lest we remember.’

This Welsh Labour Government is determined to ensure that we will never forget the individuals who are willing to sacrifice everything to protect our nation, and we will fulfil our duty to them. Thank you—diolch.

As Mark said, this year is the one hundredth anniversary of the battle of Mametz Wood. For many Welsh soldiers, this was the first major offensive of the first world war. The capture of Mametz Wood was of key importance in the battle of the Somme. After five days of fighting, nearly 400 Welsh soldiers were killed, injured or posted as missing. As a result, 38th (Welsh) Division was out of action for almost a year. Between 2001 and 2015, the British armed forces lost 454 men and women in Afghanistan—a similar number was lost in just one morning in Mametz Wood.

It’s appropriate that we recognise the enormous debt we owe to those who have served and are presently serving in our armed forces. We owe it to them to provide the care and support they so richly deserve. Leaving the military, often after a long period of service, presents former service personnel with many challenges. It often means having to relocate, move home, find new employment, and undergo a change of lifestyle.

They face many challenges. One of these is mental health. Between 4 per cent and 5 per cent of ex-servicemen and women in Wales suffer from mental health issues. Post-traumatic stress disorder, as Mark earlier said, is an anxiety disorder caused by experiencing stressful or distressing events. It can happen at any time in their age. Someone with PTSD will often relive the traumatic event through nightmares and flashbacks. They may experience feelings of isolation, irritability, and guilt—in some cases leading to an increase in alcohol and drug misuse. The symptoms of mental illness need to be recognised early and greater support is required from the NHS in Wales for service personnel, veterans and their families.

The education of children of service personnel can also suffer due to a disrupted lifestyle in the armed forces. In Wales, there is no separate pupil premium for children of service personnel, as they have in England. The pupil deprivation grant is only available to children eligible for free school meals, which most service children are not. The Welsh Government should introduce a service pupil premium to support armed forces children in Wales.

Safe and secure housing for veterans is essential also. We need an armed forces housing pathway, which will outline what current and former servicemen and women are entitled to under devolved housing policies. We need tailored support to assist veterans to adjust back to civilian life and find employment here.

A survey carried out in 2014-15 revealed that only 34 per cent of veterans described themselves as being employed, either full time or part time. That’s not acceptable, Presiding Officer. I would like to see the establishment of a network of one-stop shops for veterans, as they have in Scotland, to ensure they are fully aware of the advice and support available to them after their service in the armed forces.

We need a veterans commissioner for Wales—the other side of the Chamber said they probably won’t support it, but the fact is they need, not an army general to control the retired armed forces, but a commissioner with their own needs and requirements in the society in Wales to co-ordinate and provide the support they need and deserve. This has been done in Scotland and I believe Wales should follow the same way and they should follow the same suit.

Wales has a long and proud relationship with the armed forces. Grant funding for the council of Wales, a voluntary youth organisation, expires on 31 March next year. This was a valuable source for cadet and defence-related youth organisations in Wales, and is now no longer available.

Will the Member give way?

No time. Perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could address this matter in his reply. Presiding Officer, we have a duty to recognise the long history of courage, sacrifice and service of our servicemen and women, past and present, and I hope the National Assembly will acknowledge the debt of gratitude today, and support this motion. Thank you.

I’d like to thank the Welsh Conservatives for bringing forward this debate today, particularly as we prepare to remember the sacrifice made by so many of our brave armed forces personnel. Welsh citizens have a long tradition of serving our nation’s armed forces, and played a key role in many of the battles in both world wars. Wales represents just 5 per cent of the UK’s population, yet makes up 7 per cent of the UK’s ex-service community. We currently have around 8,000 Welsh men and women serving in our armed forces—men and women prepared to give their lives in order to protect the everyday freedoms we all sometimes take for granted. If it wasn’t for the dedication of these men and women, and those like them who went before, we would not be having this debate today. Welsh men and women died in their tens of thousands in order to keep our nation free from tyranny. We owe them so much: more than we can ever repay. The very least we can do is look after our service personnel, both serving and retired. While we have got much better at supporting our armed forces personnel and veterans, we still have a long way to go regarding post-traumatic stress disorder, housing, and all other things that go with coming back from a war that we are suffering from.

The armed forces covenant has helped address some of the shortfalls, and UKIP shares the Welsh Conservatives’ belief that Wales should be at the forefront of implementing the covenant, and that Wales needs an armed forces commissioner. The Welsh Government have improved the support given to our armed forces, but there is still much more we can do, particularly when it comes to housing and welfare for ex-service personnel and their families. Eight per cent of the ex-service community reported to the British Legion that they were experiencing housing difficulties. We must ensure that the service personnel are guaranteed housing, particularly when you consider that veterans are less likely to be employed than the general population.

We must also ensure that schemes like the Veterans’ NHS Wales service are strengthened and widely promoted. Unfortunately, the website is hugely out of date and still refers to the Welsh Assembly Government. An armed forces and veterans commissioner will not only be able to drive improvements to services for armed forces personnel and veterans, but also champion our service personnel. Other nations treat their service personnel with the reverence and respect they deserve. We do need to do much better. It is no good paying lip service on Remembrance Day once a year; we should be thanking those who serve, and those who have served, on a daily basis, and, even then, we can’t even come close to acknowledging the debt we owe those brave men and women. Diolch yn fawr.

Point 2 of the motion draws attention to the families of veterans, and supporting veterans doesn’t stop with direct intervention. Keeping a family together around serving members of the armed forces, as well as, sometimes, particularly vulnerable veterans, can be the most effective support of all. The service of an individual affects their relationships with partners, children, parents and even grandparents. And, in this context, I also include friends, because, for young men in particular, their mates, or good friends, can often be the main emotional support when there are things that you don’t feel you can share with your family.

The work of a commissioner for veterans would extend beyond veterans themselves to that wider armed forces community. And, if you’re in any doubt what that looks like, just have a look at who’s going to be involved in this weekend’s commemorations. You will see that families are at the forefront.

There’s already a wide range of services for armed forces families in Wales, from the grass-roots clubs for military families right through to things like Veterans Legal Link, which is a group that gives free legal advice to families and carers as well as veterans throughout Wales. Actually, I think Elfyn Llwyd is involved with that. The public sector, including both Governments, I would say, and the very active third sector, should be congratulated on the work that they do for veterans, but it’s particularly pleasing that this is an area where co-production is given space to show its worth. Actually, Members who’ve already spoken have given very powerful examples of the kind of support that veterans and their families get from within their own ranks—if I can use that—rather than having a service applied to them. Now, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t gaps, of course, but I think co-production is one of the places where we can look to actually start to fill those gaps. I’m thinking, in particular, of—I think it was last year—when I explained to the Chamber that I’d had some difficulty trying to identify the veterans champions lodged within our local authorities. Some are much better than others, but, if the councils can’t get it right, then let society help solve the problem.

Now, while I would like to think that a commissioner wouldn’t interfere with the good work of all these players, he or she would be able to help drive improvement, as Caroline Jones said, in the experience of serving military personnel, as well as veterans and their families, because they would have an overview, and prompt action to fill the gaps that, actually, Bethan Jenkins herself was talking about. I think another key role that commissioners would have here would be to consider the implications and support and advice needed for our veterans of the future. A commissioner would not only be able to respond to the needs of today, to advocate, but to scan the horizon for new challenges and potential solutions to those, because nobody seems to have assumed leadership for that particular job at the moment. Definitely, we need someone to help us scrutinise decisions made now, such as why there is a disparity between England and Wales, where veterans’ children are automatically entitled to pupil premium support, but they’re not entitled to the pupil deprivation grant here in Wales. That’s a point that Mohammad Asghar made. But we also want to be avoiding those sorts of post facto responses to problems such as with PTSD. We want to be avoiding problems arising in the first place. That’s why I think a commissioner would also be useful in asking questions like why the £415,000 requested by Veterans’ NHS Wales is not forthcoming when it’s so obvious that that would avoid the cost of millions in crisis services that—I can’t remember quite who it was now—I think it might have been Mohammad Asghar was alluding to when you consider the kinds of problems that veterans present with, usually after they’ve left their services.

What happens now and what the future looks like are both considerations that affect any young person who’s looking at a military career. And, again, this is where the veterans commissioner could play a crucial role in helping set the tone for how those matters are thought about now, not in the future once our young people have themselves become veterans.

Last week I visited Bridgend Military Preparation College in my region of South Wales West and met both instructors and young people between the ages of 14 and 19 that they work with. They educate a significant number of young people for whom mainstream education is perhaps a poor fit, as well as high achievers, and, from these, many do go on to pursue a career in our forces. I think we owe it to those young people to make sure that they are at the front of our minds, and at the front of the Welsh Government’s mind, now, as they progress throughout their careers, and not just when they return from areas of conflict or when they are discharged from service or retire. Not all the people that I met there were from military families, but some of them are likely to become members of military families in due course, and that brings me back to the role of military families and the help that they may need too.

So, when Welsh Government says ‘no’ to a veterans commissioner, it’s not just saying ‘no’ to helping and honouring the work and sacrifices that our veterans and the forces have made throughout their lives; they’re also letting down the wives, the husbands, the partners and all the families of veterans, and it’s letting down the children of serving forces and future forces, as those young people who are just starting on their careers, and hopefully will never experience—[Interruption.] Sorry, Lee, I didn’t see you. Apologies.

Will you give way?

No, I’ve finished.

You’re out of time.

Sorry.

One of the objectives we should set ourselves is to ensure that the path into work of those leaving the armed services should be supported so that they can continue to fulfil their potential in the civilian workforce. Across the UK, veterans are less likely to be in work than the general population, and nearly twice as likely to be unemployed. Now, there are reasons why working-age veterans face particular challenges. Often, those who join the armed forces at a young age do so as an alternative career path to further or higher education or civilian employment. Some will choose that because they don’t feel they have, perhaps, an aptitude for conventional learning, and up to 50 per cent of army recruits have literacy and numeracy skills that are below the standard expected of school leavers at 16. Those in older age groups leaving the services often feel less confident, for example, in their computer skills, but—and this is a very important caveat—a career in the services can also enable an individual to develop very real and useful skills that can be a useful asset to a civilian employer.

As Business in the Community acknowledge,

‘with over 200 trades in the Army alone, armed forces personnel receive advance training in a number of technical roles, including engineering, project management, communications, logistics and IT’—

and a wider range than that—

‘all transferable to the civilian workplace.’

But the issue is often that those skills don’t result in a formal qualification that an employer outside the services can recognise as an indicator of a particular skill set and a given level of proficiency. So, one issue is how we translate those skills, which are real, into language that an employer would understand. As one veteran said:

‘There’s certain things you don’t have a qualification for. For instance being in charge of between 200 and 600 men…. I’ve been in charge of pay documentation, passports, deployments, bombs, bullets, you name it…. It didn’t mean a thing because I don’t have qualifications’.

So, I want to pay tribute to the many voluntary programmes that support ex-serving personnel with getting into work on discharge: Getting You Back to Work by the Poppy Factory, the ex-forces employment programme, a British Legion online mentoring programme, and also LifeWorks, which is here at the Assembly next week, which is a five-day course, with coaching, interview preparation, and cv workshops provided by the British Legion.

I’m also aware the Welsh Government works very closely with voluntary bodies supporting ex-service personnel, and many have benefited from the Armed Forces Employability Pathways, and also from Jobs Growth Wales. But I would ask the Government, as it rolls out its programme for apprenticeships, and the new Skills Gateway in this Assembly, to consider how they can also be used to help service personnel fulfil their potential in the civilian workforce, and I know that there’s good work happening within the apprenticeship pathway.

It is a matter of pride, as other Members have said, that local authorities—all local authorities—and health boards in Wales have armed forces champions, and I would encourage businesses also to sign the armed forces covenant, which supports veterans into work by guaranteeing interviews to veterans, recognising military skills at interview and actively seeking to raise awareness of job opportunities amongst those leaving the services.

It is important in this week of remembrance that we acknowledge the dedication of our serving personnel and ex-serving personnel, and I believe it’s our duty also to recognise the particular challenges many face in entering the world of work and to ensure they get the support they need in order to do so, so that they’re able to carry into the world of civilian employment the commitment they’ve shown in the services, and so that the talents they bring are not lost to our economy.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute in this debate, which has become almost an annual debate, just before Armistice Day, tabled by the Welsh Conservatives, and you cannot disagree with the sentiments that have been echoed across the Chamber from nearly all—well, all—the political parties here. But I do think we do need to reflect on the positive experience that people—many people—have in the armed services. It’s quite right to focus on the assistance that’s required for people with health issues and being returned back to work, but the all-party group on the armed services, which attended a recent meeting in Sennybridge, to which David Rowlands came—Lee Waters from Llanelli came as well—really saw the army, and the work that the army provides in training, the enthusiasm of soldiers of all levels, right from the hierarchy right down to the squaddies, and the pride and passion that they have for the role that they undertake. Many had many years’ service in the army, but I’m sure this will resonate in the navy and the RAF as well, and it is a wonderful experience for many young men and women in whatever they choose to do.

As has been touched on by the Member for Neath, the experience via careers and developing the character of the individuals who sign up is life-changing for many of the individuals who experience that, in a very positive way. Many people, when they return back to civilian life, wish to keep their privacy and very often wish to get on with their lives and use the experiences that they’ve gained in the military and put that to good use in civilian life.

One thing that I always remember, when we did an inquiry in the health committee, was that, when we were looking at sharing health information—the reason I use the word ‘privacy’ is because the army made the point, and the Ministry of Defence made the point, that many servicemen and women when they leave the army don’t particularly want to disclose that information or pass it on. They see it as their information. We do have to respect individuals’ rights and individuals’ rights to privacy, whilst making sure that we put measures in place that do help those men and women who do suffer the horrendous consequences of PTSD and life-changing injuries that might happen, and also supporting the families that have had bereavement through loved ones being lost in theatre and have paid the ultimate price and the ultimate sacrifice.

It is the families that we should be reflecting on because, very often, they are the ones who go on for years and decades aching for the love that they felt for that individual who laid down their life in that theatre of war, that conflict, that the Government of the day has chosen to deploy our armed services in, whether that be in special forces or whether that be the RAF, navy or the army.

I do want to reflect on how we can develop those services, because the motion today does call for us to reflect on the experience of what the Scottish Government brought forward in 2014 in bringing forward a veterans commissioner. This isn’t along the lines of the commissioners that we understand—the children’s commissioner, the older persons’ commissioner, the future generations commissioner—with an all-singing, all-dancing office with a lot of personnel and a considerable budget. This is someone who is a champion of veterans’ rights and veterans provisions within society, whether working with Government or working with private business. It does not cost a lot of money. It is a role that has proven to be very successful in providing advice and help to Government Ministers in Scotland to provide that support, whether it be in job creation schemes, in training or in promoting positive images of veterans and the armed services.

The way I’m reading the motion on the order paper today, with the amendment that is before us from the Government—I am detecting that the Government are going to support that, unless the Cabinet Secretary indicates, because the Government amendment clearly does not seek to delete it. So, I would ask the Plaid Cymru spokesperson to reflect, because her amendment does seek to delete that very important part of this motion about the creation of a veterans commissioner here in Wales.

I take the point, Bethan, about how we would need to learn from best practice and look internationally about how we might be able to increase or decrease the scope and capacity of such a commissioner, but I think I’m correct that what you were saying was that you don’t actually object to the role of the commissioner—what we need to put in place to assist was your reasoning for deleting that particular part of the motion. If that part of your amendments was withdrawn, then we would have a motion that would have the requirement for the Government to consider creating that veterans commissioner here in Wales.

I do think that that is a really important credit that the Assembly could get at the end of this debate this afternoon. So, I would implore you to give consideration to your first amendment that is seeking to delete that specific point in the motion today, because we can actually move forward on this very important agenda item if you were to withdraw that amendment from voting later on this afternoon. I urge support for the motion before us today.

First of all, I’d like to thank you for raising this as a debate today. We don’t leave soldiers behind on the battlefield, and we shouldn’t leave them behind when they come home. A ‘leave no soldier behind’ Act was something that I campaigned on during the election.

Many soldiers serve, they go through trauma, some are injured, and some unfortunately don’t come back. Those that do, what do they come back to? A lack of health care, a lack of mental health provision, especially, and a lack of housing—a real problem in finding housing. I think it’s outrageous that some former soldiers end up on the street. There are some soldiers who even come home and lose contact with their children because they’re classified as being potentially violent, which is a scandal.

We do have a covenant for the armed forces, but I don’t think it’s good enough. I think we need legislation to prioritise those who have seen active service. We hope to do this in Cardiff after May 2017 if we take over the council, because we think these people should be prioritised.

Identifying veterans should be the norm in the NHS and I’m told that it’s not, far too often. Healthcare professionals should have the training and we should be looking at best practice. For those of you who have listened to me here, I rarely congratulate the Government on anything, but when soldiers tell me that it’s much better in Wales than it is in England, then I think that is something to celebrate.

A tremendous amount of goodwill exists in this area, but as well as the parades and the anthems, concrete action is needed so that no soldiers are left behind.

I’ve had the honour of laying the wreath on behalf of Cardiff Plaid at remembrance Sunday for many years. For this year, I would ask that party politics be kept out of it. I think that would be beneficial to all.

Before I finish, I’d like to mention also the great service performed by the merchant navy, especially many people who live in this city who have done great things for our forefathers and foremothers, especially during the second world war. People from all around the world—from Somalia, from the Yemen, and many, many countries—they didn’t fight, but they were heroes also. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children, Carl Sargeant.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Members will recall that, in yesterday’s oral statement, I set out the Welsh Government’s commitment to honouring those who gave their lives in past conflicts so that we can enjoy the freedom we must have today. We must not forget them. I also set out the Welsh Government’s continued support for our ex-service personnel and serving members and their families. Working collaboratively with our key partners, we’ll continue to build on the success.

I listened carefully to the contributions made by many Members and this is a very highly emotive and a very respectful debate that we have had today. I recall when I was Minister a few years back when I had responsibility for communities. One of the most difficult visits I’d done was to an RAF base in Wales where I met families of serving personnel—not the active service personnel but the families and the young people. It was predominantly the female partners of the serving personnel and I think every single one of the members—the partners and wives of serving personnel—that I met was on antidepressant tablets. They were on very high levels of support. We’re very good at supporting the armed forces personnel, but we seem to forget the families and the units around them. I’ve had conversations with the armed forces since then—the army, navy and air force—about how can we protect our core of family units in these areas. It is because—as Bethan Jenkins related to earlier on—the fact that it’s not just the serving personnel that take the brunt of warfare, actually it’s the family as well. There’s lots of things that happen in occurrences—post-traumatic stress being one of them. The very interesting point that Bethan raised—that there is a very high incidence rate of domestic violence from post-traumatic stress—we must be there to support families and young people, but most importantly we must be there to support the sickness of the perpetrators as well. I’m very keen to make sure that we can continue to do that.

I welcome point 1 of the motion, which notes the number of serving and ex-serving members of the service community living in Wales. Wales is the better for their presence here and we remain fully committed to providing ongoing support for our armed forces community. The fairness and respect mentioned in point two of the motion are the very least we owe them.

In taking forward our devolved commitments, the Welsh Government will continue to support the armed forces covenant, the package of support that reflects Welsh Government’s commitments to ensure that members of the armed forces and their families are not disadvantaged because of their force’s life here in Wales.

Working together with our partners, we’ve refreshed our package of support, reflecting both Welsh Government priorities and policies and initiatives from charities and organisations that represent the armed forces community. The refreshed document also acts as a signpost to the support available.

With regard to the proposals for an armed forces veterans commissioner, we currently have no plans to propose one, and we undertook some exploratory work last year. The opposition Member, in good spirit I assume, highlighted the issue of what is happening in Scotland, but Scotland don’t have a 12-commissioner-style unit in an advisory group like I have advising me, from the Royal British Legion to SSAFA to all other organisations that are involved in our community supporting the armed forces. They come and meet with me and are telling me the very issue that is of concern. I’m more than happy to take an intervention from the Member, yes.

Would you confirm, Cabinet Secretary, given the amendment that the Government has put there, that you would vote for the amended motion if the Government amendment carries, and therefore you would be supporting that part of the motion? Because you have not sought to delete it, I’m therefore reading into that that you are prepared to agree for that proposal to go forward.

Well, let me just fill the detail out in terms of the process here. The Member is right to suggest that we will be supporting their amended motion subject to that, but, when we asked the armed forces—. This isn’t my decision, as Mark Isherwood alluded to when he said it wasn’t his decision; it was somebody else asking for this. Let me just explain about why we’ve got the evidence to suggest that the commission is probably not the right place to do that now. We had the armed forces expert group, and we meet them on several occasions through the year. It was agreed that the expert group should meet with officials and the Royal British Legion, and they would visit the Scottish Veterans Commissioner and other stakeholders to discuss his role and assess any lessons learned, and come back to the expert group and giving me advice on that. The findings were shared with all of the expert group, and it was agreed that it was early days to gain any real benefit from the work the Scottish Veterans Commissioner was undertaking, and the group would continue to have a watching brief over this to secure best practice across the country and beyond. I’m happy for that to continue, and if it merges into a space where recommendations come forward to suggest we should have a commissioner, I’m open to that proposal, but, at this moment in time, there is nothing other than evidence to suggest Scotland has one and that it makes for a better situation than we have here in Wales. So, I would resist the principle, but that’s why we’ve accepted in principle the motion, because we’re not ruling it out completely. That’s exactly what I think Bethan Jenkins was saying—we’re not convinced by the argument to have one at this moment in time.

Our work with veterans is based on continual contact and dialogue with veterans and charities and organisations that provide services for the armed forces community, and I do not believe that a new needs assessment procedure would improve services again in practice. You alluded to things that happen in Scotland or in England. We have some practices that happen here in Wales that don’t happen anywhere else in the UK. Indeed, the issue of the NHS support that we have in each of the health boards—that’s not available in any other part of the country, but is very specific to Wales.

The expert group, with its diverse membership, plays an invaluable role. Together, we determine our future priorities and how we can collaborate to deliver these for the future. I mentioned yesterday our new document called the ‘Welcome to Wales’ programme, tailored specifically for serving personnel and families, it provides information on where to access services and support. We know, as Members suggested today in the Chamber, that housing is one of the biggest challenges we face for veterans and their families. In consultation with our key partners, we have developed a housing referral pathway, helping veterans and their families to make an informed choice on the option that suits their needs.

Another programme that we are very proud of in Wales is providing £50,000 to the Headquarters 160th Infantry brigade and Headquarters Wales, delivering the armed forces employability pathway and again taking steps to help young people turn their lives around using the army plus situation, where we can gain benefits from their knowledge and support a confidence-building process. The Veterans NHS Wales programme, again, is the only one of its kind in the UK. We should celebrate the things that we are doing well here in Wales and not be negative in our contributions all of the time. We’re providing £585,000 a year to maintain that, but I recognise that is under pressure and we have to do more. Ideally, I believe that the armed forces should have a stake in this. As Members contributed today, when you leave the armed forces it shouldn’t be a case of just waving goodbye; there should be a pathway of support from the armed forces, from the Ministry of Defence in the UK for serving and non-serving personnel.

Can I pick up very briefly on some of the points that were raised by Members? Mark Isherwood asked me about the Royal British Legion’s Count Them In campaign. For very serious reasons, we resisted support for that in July this year, on the basis of security advice, because of the issues that Andrew R.T. Davies raised about the fact that some people just don’t want the information of being ex-service personnel in the public domain. We are content with that advice that we’ve received back from the security services, to protect the individuals who don’t want that position and we are supporting the British legion’s campaign and I’ve written to them to explain that process. So, I’m hopeful that the Member will be supportive of that.

Again, it is a regular occurrence—12 months to the day—to have the debate tabled again by the opposition. Again, we generally have two debates in the same week around this. I think it’s an important one; a landmark annual event that places on record our support, as Members, and that of this institution, to represent and respect the people who fought in many wars and conflicts to protect the society that we have today, and I’m very grateful for the opportunity to respond.

I call on Nick Ramsay to respond to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and can I concur with the comments made by the Cabinet Secretary at the end of his contribution there—that this has become an annual debate? I think that all Members agree that it is one that, every year, Members wish to take part in to show our support for our armed forces and our veterans.

Can I thank everyone who has contributed to today’s debate? It’s so important that the sacrifices made for the nation by our armed forces are not forgotten. Of course, events such as Remembrance Day provide us with a vital focus for honouring the fallen, but our servicemen and women should be in our thoughts throughout the whole year and we should always be re-evaluating how we can best support them, listening to the ideas of servicemen and women themselves.

In fact, this was a point made by Mark Isherwood in his opening comments. For some of those Members who’ve said that, or suggested, we may in some way be trying to politicise the remembrance process and Remembrance Day this year, I think the very fact that many of these ideas have come from veterans themselves—not from us or indeed from other parties in this Chamber, but from veterans themselves—shows the spirit in which we have brought this debate to the Chamber and the intentions that we have in doing so to try and improve the lives of those in our armed forces.

The armed forces covenant principles enshrined in law in 2011 aim to ensure that there is not an undue disadvantage when accessing public services for our service people. Welsh Government and local authorities should tailor their programmes to best support these principles. This is why we have called for an armed forces commissioner—clearly, probably, one of the most controversial aspects of what we have proposed today.

Plaid Cymru are keen to point out when Wales is being treated differently to Scotland—adversely to Scotland—and indeed that is their prerogative to do so, but here’s a classic example: if a commissioner is good enough for Scotland, then surely it is good enough for us here in Wales. I hear, as well, what the Cabinet Secretary said—in fact, you were leaving the door open there, I think, Cabinet Secretary. It would be wrong of me to suggest that you have shut the door on having a commissioner to deal with these issues. I think what you were saying was that you were happy with the structure that you have at the moment and the advice that you have at the moment and if that then grows into a commissioner structure, or if there’s a demand for that in the future, then you would look at that seriously. What we would say to you is that demand is there now—we believe that that demand has grown and that there is now sufficient reason to bring in this role. It’s being called for by the families of service people; it’s being called for by the service people themselves and it’s being called for by Members in this Chamber. So, I would urge you to reconsider the position at the earliest opportunity—that you are supporting that aspect of the motion that does move us towards a commissioner. So, I would suggest that if it’s good enough in the future, it is good enough now and we should move to that position as quickly as possible.

Armed forces provision has been disjointed sometimes in the past. Let’s bring together different strands of support. Let’s build far better signposting, so that the age-old issues that have affected soldiers fighting for their country and the way they’ve found it difficult to readjust to civilian life are finally dealt with.

Jeremy Miles, in his contribution, was totally right to identify the higher unemployment levels affecting veterans. You spoke of the need to develop the skills that they’ve built up during their time in the forces to make sure that those are well used, that they do regain their confidence and that they are shown that they do have a very valuable role to play in civilian life.

Finally, Presiding Officer, Suzy Davies and Caroline Jones both made very valid comments. Suzy Davies said this isn’t just about veterans; this is about the broader issue of keeping families together. That important statistic quoted by Caroline Jones—yes, 5 per cent of the population in Wales, but 7 per cent of the veterans—really is important and we should bear that in mind today. In conclusion, Presiding Officer, can I thank everyone who took part in today’s debate? Let’s do what we can to provide greater support for our service veterans. I hope this debate will send out a clear message to our servicemen and women that they are in our thoughts, particularly during this week of remembrance, but also throughout the whole year, and that all of us in this Chamber want to do what we can to try and improve their lives as much as we possibly can.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

The next item is the Plaid Cymru debate, and I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move the motion.

Thank you, Llywydd, and I speak to this motion in the name of Plaid Cymru. Now, the intention, of course, in bringing this debate forward this afternoon is not to question the Welsh Government’s commitment to this target of a million Welsh speakers by 2050, nor is it to doubt the consensus that I’m sure exists in this Assembly to work towards that particular target. But, one of the aims of tabling this debate in the Assembly this afternoon was to highlight or, perhaps, underline the enormity of the efforts required in order to double the number of Welsh speakers in just 30 years. It is an increase the likes of which hasn’t been seen in the history of the Welsh language, and an increase, therefore, that will be extremely challenging for us all, whether we be Welsh speakers or non-Welsh speakers. It’s a journey that will insist that we work in a way that is certainly creative and very determined, and, above all else, I suppose, that we are courageous in our approach. If the Government shows those characteristics in working towards this target of a million Welsh speakers over the next few years, then we on these benches will certainly be content to join you on that journey.

Now, the recent consultation on the Welsh Government’s draft strategy for a million Welsh speakers by 2050 does include a number of positive statements about that target and how it can be achieved. One of the central aspects of the strategy, of course, and the key factor in my view, and the other reason for this debate, of course, is the acknowledgment of the important role that education has to play in that effort. As the draft strategy states,

‘We need to see a significant increase in the number of people receiving Welsh-medium education and who have Welsh language skills, as it is only through enabling more people to learn Welsh that we will reach a million speakers.’

Now, the current system doesn’t promote and support Welsh-medium education sufficiently to reach that Government target of a million Welsh speakers by 2050. The statistics demonstrate that there has been a decline in the percentage of seven-year-old learners being taught through the medium of Welsh between 2013 and 2014, and no change between 2014 and 2015—22.2 per cent is the latest figure. There was an increase in the absolute number of children, but a decline in the percentage, and the truth is that the figure has stagnated for a number of years, varying from somewhere below 22 per cent in 2010 to a little over 22 per cent today.

Now, I’m no statistician, but if we are to double the number of Welsh speakers, then one would expect that we would need to double the number of those choosing Welsh-medium education, for example. If we can increase the number of year 2 pupils, which is the cohort of seven-year-olds assessed as first-language Welsh speakers, from 22 per cent to, let’s say, 50 per cent, then that would represent an additional 10,000 children, based on the 2015 figures. It would mean providing over 300 Welsh-medium classes across Wales for children at seven years of age.

That is the scale of the challenge we’re facing and the scale of the effort required. And, of course, you could multiply that, then, across the early years, primary education, secondary education, further education, higher education, lifelong learning, and so on. The early years are crucially important, because the earlier a child comes into contact with the language, the greater his or her chance is of becoming a fluent speaker. Those aren’t my words, but the words of the Government in its draft strategy, and, naturally, I agree with that. Unfortunately, of course, the level of language transference between children and their parents is relatively low. In 2015 only 6.5 per cent of five-year-olds spoke Welsh fluently at home, and that was down from 7 per cent in 2012. We are reliant, therefore, on the care and early years education system to ensure that children begin that journey of becoming of becoming bilingual, given that that doesn’t happen naturally in the home. If you get them early for the Welsh language, the likelihood that they will actually be able to speak the language and use the language is far, far greater. Now, 86 per cent of children attending Welsh-medium ‘cylchoedd meithrin’ will transfer to Welsh-medium primary schools, and the majority of those who don’t do that don’t do so because the Welsh-medium provision isn’t available to them very often.

Now, there is then a glorious opportunity, therefore, in light of the Government’s agreement with Plaid Cymru on enhancing childcare as a means of achieving much of what we want to see happening. And I said yesterday, in response to a statement by the Cabinet Secretary on that policy, and, indeed, in light of evidence that he provided to the committee last week, where he said that he would want to ensure that this policy responds to demand—I said, of course, that we need to move away from that attitude. Introducing that target of 1 million Welsh speakers has to be a statement that the days of just responding to demand are long gone. That’s the approach of the past, being reactive in this context. All the Government, education authorities and everyone else’s thinking has to change significantly to be a proactive one from here on in, and generate that demand through promoting, encouraging, and creating the provision and infrastructure to correspond, then, of course, to that. As Cymdeithas yr Iaith said, it would take more than 800 years for each child to receive Welsh-medium education if the current pattern of growth continued. And I’m certainly not going to settle for that.

Now, ensuring appropriate action for Welsh-medium education and training, of course, is crucially important for the success of the strategy—something that’s recognised by the Government, when they state that that, of course, means planning in order to support student teachers and classroom assistance, enhance sabbatical schemes for the current workforce, and significantly increasing the number of workers in the childcare and early years sector. The Government, of course, are announcing their 10-year plan for the early years workforce and childcare in the spring. Of all the plans brought forward by this Government that can influence the future of the Welsh language, this, in my view, is one of the most crucial. And this, to all intents and purposes, in my view, will be a test of how serious the Government is in terms of achieving their target of 1 million Welsh speakers.

Will the Member give way?

Yes.

Diolch. The weight of the discussions around increasing the provision of Welsh-medium education—. We know that only around 16 per cent of children are educated through the medium of Welsh, which means that the majority, the overwhelming majority, of schoolchildren in Wales get taught Welsh at some level as a second language. Now, there’s a lot of evidence to show the quality of that in English-medium schools in Wales is poor or patchy, and yet we don’t talk in these debates about how we increase the level of Welsh teaching in English-medium schools. So, what can we do to address that generation of children who are getting very poor provision at the minute?

Well, it’s a shame that the Member doesn’t recall that we raised this in the Chamber just a few weeks ago, the quality of teaching Welsh as a second language, and that the Minister himself made a clear statement about the direction of travel for Government in that particular area. I’m not going to use my time now, because that is an issue that has been previously discussed here in this Chamber, but certainly there is recognition and there is some movement on that front in order to tackle that issue.

Now, I live in the north-east of Wales, where we saw, of course, the first Welsh-medium secondary school established in the 1950s, where people had to fight very hard, as was the case in many areas in the 1960s and 1970s, for Welsh-medium education, but that battle is, of course, not over. In counties such as Wrexham, Denbighshire and Flintshire, you see the battles that are happening, not only to enhance provision but also to protect the existing provision. In Wrexham, the increasing demand for Welsh-medium education has led to parents, in certain circumstances now, not being able to get their children in to, for example, Ysgol Bro Alun, although it was only opened three years ago in order to meet demand in the Gwersyllt area. All Welsh-medium primary schools in the county are full to overflowing, but there’s no intention to build a new school. The only secondary school faces a huge challenge, with the expectation that 1,400 will attend by 2024. If we look at the WESP for the county for the future, there is no recognition that demand has gone unmet and that more places are needed.

In Flintshire, which was once so innovative in this area, there was a recent threat to Ysgol Gymraeg Mornant, the only Welsh-medium school in the north of the county, which was at threat of closure. If that had happened, it would have meant travelling to Holywell for Welsh-medium education, given that the Welsh school in Prestatyn is full. The truth is, of course, that only 5 per cent of children in the county receive Welsh-medium education—a figure that has been stagnant for many years, and I know that that is a cause of disappointment for many.

In Denbighshire—and I will declare an interest as a parent and governor of Ysgol Pentrecelyn—there has been a battle to protect the language status of the provision for children there, and it was a great pleasure for me to read the papers to be placed before the cabinet next week that now recommend that the provision should be maintained there. But, of course, that has been the result of a battle and a judicial challenge.

Now, that’s my experience in the north-east; everyone else will have different experiences. There are positive experiences, of course, and we can refer to many of those in Gwynedd, Carmarthenshire and in other parts of Wales. But the message is, of course, that planning is crucially important, and ensuring that we have strong WESPs is also important in order to drive this provision forward.

My fellow Members will expand on a number of other aspects. We know of further education, higher education, and lifelong learning too—we shouldn’t forget the provision there. But the education field is just one aspect of the effort to create 1 million Welsh speakers, but it is a crucially important aspect. I think we will see, over the next few months, how serious the Government is in reality in terms of attaining that target. And as I said at the outset, if this Government shows the willingness to be creative, determined and courageous, then I, and many of us here, I’m sure, will be happy to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Government on that journey.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. I call on the Minister to formally move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

I call on Suzy Davies to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you, Llywydd. May I thank Plaid Cymru also for tabling this debate today? We will be supporting the motion, and we would have been happy to support the Government’s amendment too, but it deletes point 2. I can’t see why the Government couldn’t accept the point, identify the reasons why and contrast that with the new ambitions for their forthcoming strategy. I move the amendment too.

Now, the reasons why—well, why don’t we start with local authorities? They should have grasped their obligation to promote the Welsh language by now. The Welsh in education statutory plans have failed. It’s a waste of money asking councils to do investigative work or promoting work if they’re not going to act upon the results. Worse than that, it just reinforces existing perceptions that Welsh language policy to date has been more about political vanity and box-ticking than a deep-seated will to develop a bilingual nation.

A lack of leadership and direction has resulted in demand for Welsh-medium education that is growing slowly and uncertainly across council areas in my region. There is no convenient concentration to plan for the building of new schools, therefore we’re seeing the centralisation of provision, drawing visible Welshness out of communities for the benefit of one site, which is sometimes at some distance from children’s homes. That doesn’t help with another of the Government’s priorities, which is to grow the use of Welsh in all communities. And it may be inconvenient enough for some families not to follow up on their good intentions, halting and reversing demand. Another temptation is to ignore demand—letting existing Welsh-medium overflow to the point where, once again, demand is stifled in its early stages.

Let us worry less about building schools in centralised locations, which will be too small or too big in the medium term, and look more closely at growing Welsh-medium use on existing school sites. Now, to be clear, this isn’t a distraction from the need for new Welsh-medium schools. It’s an additional option for councils that that are in this time trap, if I can describe it like that, which I’ve just described. I’m not talking either about bilingual schools. I’m talking about existing English-medium schools, which have Welsh-medium units that are co-located, but are separate, that grow year on year with each new intake. At the same time, as we’ve discussed before, Lee Waters, English-medium schools need to increase the use of Welsh as a medium of communication. There is still a need for those who are in the English-language system to have the opportunity to develop decent Welsh language skills for use in their future lives.

Now, I accept that this creates a huge challenge for the Welsh Government—I accept that: a curriculum that insists upon dedicated use of Welsh in English-medium schools; school sites that are flexible and that accommodate growing Welsh demand, and, possibly, dropping English demand as a result; and, of course, as Llyr has mentioned, a workforce that can educate well in such a system, or whatever. In the meantime, of course, we have to consider the children and young people who are going through the system that we already have, and how likely it is that they’ll get a chance to acquire sufficient Welsh language skills for continued use after school, and that they value enough to pass on to their children in due course. These are the generations that are facing the double-whammy of the reluctance—a poor experience at school, as Lee has said, and an employment market where employers don’t see the use of Welsh as something that is important.

Standards have a role, but as you will have heard from me before, if business doesn’t believe that bilingualism is a virtue, then you’re looking at another roadblock to your aim of 1 million speakers. There are opportunities for the Coleg Cymraeg to offer Welsh-medium education in further education colleges, and I hope, Minister, that you’re actively considering those. There are also opportunities for relevant Welsh language skills to be developed in vocational course that lead to public-facing careers, such as social care, retail, hair and beauty, and so forth. College leaders seem confused I talk about this distinction, but Welsh-medium education is not the sole responsibility of creating Welsh speakers. Thank you.

We need between 15,000 and 18,000 additional Welsh speakers every year, over a period of 30 years, if we are to reach the aim of 1 million Welsh speakers. And that is on top of addressing the number of people who leave Welsh communities and Wales. The role of education is key in getting to that target. By now, the vast majority of people who speak Welsh have learnt it at school. Compare that with the situation in the middle of the last century and before that, when the vast majority learnt the language at home. I happen to be one of those fortunate people who acquired the language in the home as the natural first language of our family, but that is not the experience of an increasing number of people, unfortunately. Because, by now, transferring the language in the home is not as effective as it was in the past, because there are fewer families now where both parents speak Welsh.

Therefore, it’s clear that there is a need to increase the Welsh-medium education provision in order to produce 1 million Welsh speakers. At the moment, the percentage of children in Welsh-medium education is not increasing, and this is despite the evidence that there is significant demand for Welsh-medium education—a demand that isn’t being met in the majority of places in Wales. WESPs are key in creating the massive change that is required. Since 2013 local authorities have had a legal duty to assess the demand for Welsh-medium education and to identify how the authority is going to improve the Welsh-medium provision in their area. And the Welsh Government has a central role to ensure that these plans are ambitious and robust. Unfortunately, that isn’t the situation. In December 2015, the Children, Young People and Education Committee found that these plans were not effective, and 17 recommendations were made to the Government. To be completely effective, the plans need to promote Welsh-medium education as well as respond to any demand, and authorities must define in their education plans where a new school or schools will be built, and when they’re going to be built.

In Caerphilly County Borough Council there has been a highly laudable effort over the years to ensure that there is a sufficient number of schools to meet the demand for Welsh-medium education. There’s been an increase from four Welsh primary schools to 11, but there is still increasing demand for places, particularly in the three schools in Caerphilly itself. A survey was conducted by the Parents for Welsh-medium Education group in Risca, and they found that a significant number of parents would send their children to a Welsh-medium school if that school was available locally.

So, the demand is there, not only in Caerphilly but across Wales. Part of the solution is to build more schools. Therefore, the Government needs to ensure that there is funding available to local authorities that want to increase the provision of Welsh-medium schools because, as far as I know, beyond the twenty-first century schools programme, which is for a different purpose, no money is available. Also, as part of the language strategy that the Government is consulting on at the moment, the Government will have to include a detailed strategy on how many additional teachers and support staff schools in Wales will need to ensure that the education sector contributes greatly to the target of 1 million Welsh speakers.

Just a quick word on the higher and further education sectors. We are proud of the success of the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol that is now extending the opportunities for Welsh-medium education in our universities. I’m very pleased to see that there will be a review of the Coleg Cymraeg by the Cabinet Secretary, which will include looking at extending Welsh-medium provision to the further education sector, as well as the higher education sector, where so many of our young people are studying.

By the way, we’re also keen to see many more apprenticeships being offered, either through the medium of Welsh or with some activities through the medium of Welsh. Out of nearly 50,000 apprenticeships only 165, which is 0.34 per cent, included some Welsh—one Welsh activity was all that was needed to be included. Clearly, therefore, there is a need for a transformational change in every aspect of Welsh-medium education if we are going to have any hope of reaching the aim of 1 million Welsh speakers.

I intend to use both English and Welsh in this contribution.

Yn gyntaf, ble fydd y 1 miliwn o siaradwyr Cymraeg yn 2050? A ydyn nhw yng Nghymru, ym Mhrydain neu dros y byd?

The 2011 census, which showed a decline in the number of Welsh speakers, compared with 2001, was very disappointing. If the decline continues at the same rate over the next 30 years, only Gwynedd will have half its population as Welsh speaking, and then only by 1 per cent. That’s what’s got to be turned around. Most alarming has been the reduction in the communities where over 70 and 80 per cent of the population speak Welsh. This is a number that people, including myself, believe is what is needed to make it a community language. When it gets down to 60 per cent, just using simple mathematics, two out of five people you’ll meet will not speak it, and the tendency is, ‘Let’s stick to English because everybody will understand me.’

More encouragingly, we have seen the number of three to four-year-olds able to speak Welsh increase from 18.8 per cent in 2001 to 23.6 per cent in 2011. This shows the continuation of the increase from 11.3 per cent in 1971. Can I just pay tribute, like everybody else has, to Mudiad Ysgolion Meithrin and Ti a Fi, who have done a tremendous job in getting children at a very young age to speak Welsh? Sorry, Rhun, about this but only Anglesey had a lower proportion of three to four-year-old Welsh speakers than the proportion of the population as a whole from the 2011 census. [Inaudible.]—scenario if it continues going forward because we need to make a change. Even the good of what’s happening with three and four-year-olds is not good enough. We need to make sure that children learn Welsh in school. I’m going to talk more about that, in Welsh, later on. So, apologies. I won’t go into it now. We need to get people to do it now, because it’s incredibly difficult to learn Welsh as an adult. We also have lots of people moving into Wales who will not be Welsh speakers; we have people moving out. I ask the question now: should people who move to London, whose children attend London Welsh School, actually be counted against Welsh speakers? That’s a question we need to give some thought to.

Growth in the number of young people speaking Welsh in Wales will ensure that the more pessimistic scenario does not occur, as long as these numbers are maintained and increased. But we need children, again, to speak Welsh. We can talk about Welsh speakers, and I’ve a lot of experience of children between the ages of three and 18 over recent years, going to Welsh-medium schools, and it’s different being able to speak Welsh and speaking Welsh. There’s a huge difference in that. We need to increase the number of people speaking it.

The current Government is doing a lot: supporting mentrau iaith; language action plans; Welsh-language promotion schemes; extra financial support for the Eisteddfod; events with the Urdd camp at Llangrannog, although my daughter, amongst others, says they could still do with a lot more investment there; and the investment in delivering Welsh-medium schools. Despite the Welsh Government’s current commitment and support—and I don’t think anybody doubts the Welsh Government’s support for this—I would like to see five policies taking place. A guaranteed place in Flying Start provision through the medium of Welsh for all eligible children whose parents request it. Let’s start young. Once children get into an English-medium environment, they’re likely to stay there. The promotion of the benefits of Welsh-medium education to parents of three-year-olds. The plan for at least a third of children in Wales to attend a Welsh-medium school. Now, my fear is that we’re going to keep on going as we are, where we’re going to end up with a population in Wales where about a quarter of us speak it, but it will vary between about 20 and 40 per cent, and nowhere will there be enough Welsh speakers for it to be the language of the community, the language people can use daily. I live in Morriston where there are a large number of Welsh speakers and an opportunity to use it, but it’s in a small number of places where you can use it. Sorry, Rhun.

Thank you very much. Would the Member agree with me that we also need to use the excellent role models that we have in sports, for example, at the moment—we think of the Welsh team and players such as Ben Davies and Joe Allen—in order to ensure that young people look up to people who use the Welsh language?

Actually, Cyril Hartson’s great-uncle had difficulty speaking English, and quite often had to ask what the English word was when I was talking to him.

The provision of Welsh-medium youth facilities needs to improve and the protection of the Welsh language being a material consideration in planning applications.

Rydw i’n gwybod pa mor anodd ydy dysgu Cymraeg. Mae’n haws dysgu yn yr ysgol pan yn ifanc. Rydw i’n meddwl bod treigladau yn amhosib, ond, mae fy ngwraig a fy merch a oedd yn mynychu ysgolion cyfrwng Cymraeg, yn eu defnyddio nhw yn naturiol.

Over half the people who will take part in the 2051 census are alive now. All the 38-year-olds in the 2061 census would’ve started school.

Yn olaf, pwy ydy siaradwyr Cymraeg? Pobl fel fi sy’n siarad Cymraeg gyda theulu a ffrindiau yn y capel ac yn y dafarn, sydd ddim yn hyderus i siarad Cymraeg yn gyhoeddus? A ydw i’n cyfrif fel un o’r 1 miliwn?

It’s a pleasure to participate in a debate where such ideas are being aired. Congratulations to Suzy and to Mike for their contributions.

I, like Sian Gwenllian, have been fortunate geographically and in familial terms to have been given a Welsh upbringing, to such an extent that I wasn’t able to speak English until I was seven and I didn’t know what the concept of a second language was. I had to learn English to be educated.

I welcome and admire the Government’s courage in aiming for 1 million Welsh speakers and I’m with you 100 per cent. Of course, we’ve been here before: it was 1900 and there were 1 million Welsh speakers at that point too. So, we are reclaiming ground here and we are determined that we will do so, particularly on a day such as today. We’ve just had that election result in the United States and it’s quite easy to feel a little despondent, but it’s worth bearing in mind that we have something very valuable in Wales with the Welsh language, and it is something that we should take pride in and celebrate that we are, on a wide scale, still able to use the Welsh language. In the history of humanity, when a minority language comes up against a strong majority language in a neighbouring country, then that minority language tends to decline and eventually disappear. In the history of humanity, only three minority languages have been able to withstand such major pressures: Hebrew is one, Basque is the second and the third is the Welsh language. In the whole history of humanity on this globe, we are part of a nation that uses a language that has proven to be able to overturn history. So, everything is not bleak by any stretch of the imagination, but it has taken hard work to date in order to have those 562,000 Welsh speakers we have today.

We have regained ground, but there is still work to be done, as we’ve already heard. I won’t rehearse the issue of schools, but it is worth noting that we do have 386 Welsh-medium schools in the primary sector in Wales. Three hundred and eighty six—I should just repeat that figure. There is a crucial contribution that the education sector makes to our language, but we can do more in the workplace, for example, with more provision to encourage and to help people to learn Welsh naturally to the level where they can use it naturally, as Mike Hedges has already suggested—a natural level that would be appropriate for the kind of work that they do.

When my oldest son was out in Germany, he was expected to become fluent in German for the work that he was doing with his degree at the time. They provided people to teach the staff from abroad on a one-to-one basis. It happened naturally, there was no cost attached for the employer and it just happened. And Aled did become fluent in German within three months of that kind of provision and was able to provide services in German to Germans in Berlin. It’s possible to do that. Of course, with a background in Welsh-medium schools, learning German was much easier—another of the benefits of having Welsh-medium education. It’s important to make it easier for people to learn Welsh as adults too. We need greater provision and we need more of a boost to the Welsh for adults scheme and Welsh in the workplace.

I note the additional funds that have been provided as a result of the agreement between ourselves as Plaid Cymru and the Labour Party, but there remains work to be done, because courses for adults, generally speaking, through the medium of Wales are very rare. Only 0.2 per cent of all funding of £17 million for those courses is actually spent on Welsh-medium courses. But, on a day such as today, after a night like last night, we want people to be very much aware of the contribution of the Welsh language, to be positive about the Welsh language, and, yes, to teach people and to teach our children so that they do become fluent in Welsh.

As I said, we’ve been here before with the 1 million Welsh speakers and with quite some effort and commitment and passion and leadership from this Government, and hard work from everyone else, without anyone being less than confident in using their Welsh publicly, and insisting as Welsh speakers that we use Welsh language services—we don’t always because of a lack of confidence, and use the English language services—. It is up to us all. We are looking for leadership, yes, and it seems that we are getting that leadership, but there’s hard work still to be done to regain that ground and reach that figure of 1 million Welsh speakers.

This has been a very interesting debate and I’ve learned quite a lot from the speeches that have been made on all sides of this Chamber. I’m very pleased, on behalf of my party, to support the Plaid Cymru motion today.

I was very pleased to hear the note of optimism that Dai Lloyd struck a moment ago and the point he made about the connection between Welsh and the Basque language and Hebrew and the way the situation has been turned around in those two other cases. It gives us a great deal of hope for Wales as well. We’ve certainly come a long way from ‘Brad y Llyfrau Gleision’, when it was the policy of the Government of the day to try and wipe the language out. Today, fortunately, we have a completely different attitude.

I’m surprised, actually, that the Government has sought to amend this motion in the way that it has because there is a consensus around the house that we should support the aims of the Welsh Government. I think it is a noble endeavour that they’ve engaged in to have this aspiration for 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050, and I think we should acknowledge that the Welsh Government has made a huge contribution towards turning the language situation around. I think, in the form of the current Minister, as I’ve said before, there is nobody better suited to drive this measure through. So, I don’t think the Government needs to be defensive in any way and I don’t see point 2 in this motion as being critical of the Government. I think Plaid Cymru probably deliberately decided not to introduce a note of confrontation into this debate in order to encourage the consensus that we all need to show towards the outside world. If it hadn’t been for the Government wanting to delete that pure statement of fact in point 2, then we could all engage in this debate on a note of complete agreement. So, it’s regrettable therefore that this debating point type of approach has been adopted. But I think we’re all agreed on what we want to achieve and so there’s no disagreement there.

I think what Llyr Gruffydd said in his opening speech today was right. We all acknowledge the enormity of the task to achieve 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050. It may be more of an aspiration than a reality, in a sense, but I think if we can make significant strides towards achieving that, then that in itself would be well worth doing. It does require the change of attitude that he described, about promoting the use of Welsh. I think we all have, as individuals, to do our bit in that respect. I’m struggling my way through the learning books at the minute because I didn’t have the great advantage of Dai Lloyd and others of growing up in a Welsh-speaking household—neither of my parents spoke Welsh. We lived in Monmouthshire, which was monoglot English at that time, until I was 11 years old, then moved to Carmarthenshire. I was 11 before I had any instruction in Welsh at all. Two years later, I had to choose between Welsh and German and I opted for German. So, in the course of my school career, I learnt French and German and Russian, and I did German and Russian at university as well, but unfortunately I didn’t take the opportunity to use Welsh when I had it. But I’m pleased to say—

You’ll need the Russian again. [Laughter.]

Maybe Mr Trump will want to make me the ambassador to Moscow as he wants to make Mr Farage the ambassador to Brussels. But one of the reasons why I’m relishing being in this place is the opportunity to improve my Welsh skills. But that’s enough reminiscence from me.

I agree with everything that’s been said in this debate so far. It’s certainly true that Welsh language education is the main source of new Welsh speakers, as the Welsh Government’s Welsh language strategy says. It is vitally important that Welsh should be acquired as early as possible in life and I’ve read this great tome produced by the Welsh language commission on the position of the Welsh language between 2012 and 2015 and I think a couple of short paragraphs of it are worth putting on record for the facts that it elicits.

‘More than 80 per cent of 3-4 year old children living in households where two adults are able to speak Welsh are also able to speak Welsh themselves, but only 5 per cent of 3-4 year olds in Wales live in such households.’

So, that’s a fact that is the background to all our discussions today.

‘80 per cent of those who learnt to speak Welsh at home consider themselves to be fluent Welsh speakers. But it is in school that children and young people tend to learn to speak Welsh today and fluency rates amongst them are not as high as they are amongst those who learnt Welsh at home. Fluent Welsh speakers use Welsh far more than those who are not fluent and therefore the shift from the home to school as the main source of Welsh speakers becomes very significant.’

Then, if we look at the figures for when children have learnt to speak Welsh, that is also very interesting and instructive as well.

‘Half of those who learnt Welsh mainly at nursery school say that they are fluent Welsh speakers. Of those who learnt Welsh mainly at primary school, around a quarter could speak Welsh fluently and fewer than one in five who learnt Welsh mainly at secondary school consider themselves to be fluent.’

So, that proves that learning Welsh from the outset within the education system for children who have not learnt the language at home is crucial when considering that school is the main source of new Welsh speakers today. So, it’s vitally important therefore that we should introduce Welsh into children’s minds as early as possible.

But I think it’s right for us to acknowledge—

Can I just say that your reminiscing has meant that you’re now out of time, so can you bring your contribution to a conclusion?

Yes. I just wanted to acknowledge the considerable increase in funding that the Government has brought forward, up from £16 million in 2013-14 to nearly £30 million next year. I believe that we should, as an Assembly, commend the Government for that and I think that we should all, therefore, be reasonably optimistic about the future.

I couldn’t speak a word of Welsh until I was 32 years of age, and I started to learn Welsh when I was a teacher, because, in my school, there weren’t enough Welsh teachers available to teach children for the Estyn inspection. I went to the university in Lampeter and followed a Wlpan course over two months, and taught Welsh within a week of finishing the course. As a language teacher, especially of Welsh, I have experience of the challenges facing people who’d like to learn Welsh, but there aren’t enough teachers who speak Welsh available to make this a reality. There is a need for better planning for the teaching workforce to ensure that there a sufficient number of teachers to teach through the medium of Welsh. There is a need for a scheme to encourage Welsh speakers to join the education workforce, and a scheme to attract teachers who speak Welsh who work in other countries to return to Wales.

In some schools, there isn’t enough time, either, in the curriculum. Sometimes, when I was a teacher, only half an hour a week was available for teachers to teach the children. How can we expect children to learn any language without the appropriate time?

Dai mentioned earlier the need to offer more opportunities for adult education. Too often, there aren’t enough courses, or courses are too costly, and this prevents people from taking part.

Rydym yn aml yn clywed am draul yr iaith Gymraeg, ac mae’r rhan fwyaf o bobl yn gwerthfawrogi’r gwerth diwylliannol, ond hoffwn siarad am y manteision economaidd, oherwydd mae’r iaith Gymraeg yn gwneud arian i Gymru. Mae’n ailgylchu arian yn y wlad ac mae’n allweddol i ddatblygiad economaidd a chryfhau’r economi. Mae’n bwysig dweud bod ‘ein hiaith’ yn bwynt gwerthu unigryw. Mae’n rhoi mantais gystadleuol i ni dros fannau eraill yn y DU ac mae’n atyniad i fuddsoddwyr tramor. Yn 2014, dyna a welodd grŵp gorchwyl Llywodraeth Cymru a dyna yw fy mhrofiad personol o fynd â buddsoddwyr o gwmpas Cymru hefyd.

Rwyf eisiau dweud bod yna rai pobl yng Nghymru sy’n dioddef bron o sgitsoffrenia gwrthnysig yn yr ystyr eu bod yn gweld eu hunain fel Cymry, ac eto maent i’w gweld yn casáu pethau Cymreig: os edrychwn ar bobl sydd am fychanu’r Eisteddfod, er enghraifft, gyda newyddiadurwr y llynedd yn creu rhwygiadau. Mae gan Undeb Rygbi Cymru wersi enfawr i’w dysgu gan Gymdeithas Bêl-droed Cymru ynglŷn â sut i fod yn falch o’n hiaith a’n diwylliant unigryw, a ‘diolch o galon’ i’r bechgyn allan yn Ffrainc yn yr haf. Ymhellach i ffwrdd, mae gennym BBC Radio 5 Live yn gofyn i bobl roi sylwadau ynglŷn ag a oeddent yn meddwl bod hil-laddiad diwylliannol yn dderbyniol, o ran a ddylai’r iaith Gymraeg fodoli ai peidio. Os ydym yn gyfartal fel cenhedloedd yn y DU, pam nad yw’r Gymraeg yn cael ei haddysgu ar draws pob gwlad? Rwy’n credu bod yna berygl gwirioneddol yn awr y bydd diwylliannau lleiafrifol yn cael eu llethu gan genedlaetholdeb gul ymosodol un maint i bawb y DU. Yr hyn sy’n fy nghythruddo yw’r ffordd y mae rhai mathau o wleidyddion yn defnyddio gwahaniaethau fel ethnigrwydd ac iaith i neilltuo lleiafrifoedd.

Rwy’n falch o weld rhai pennau Llafur yn nodio i gytuno yn y Siambr, ac rwy’n diolch i chi. Byddwn yn gofyn iddynt gael gair difrifol, felly, gyda’u Gweinidog cyllid, a gefnogodd ymgyrch Chwarae Teg dros ysgolion cyfrwng Saesneg yn fy ward cyngor yn y Tyllgoed yn 2010, 2011 a 2012. Holl bwyslais yr ymgyrch oedd bod ysgolion cyfrwng Cymraeg yn cael popeth, ac mae hynny’n gywilyddus. Rwy’n gofyn i chi wneud yn siŵr nad oes dim byd felly’n digwydd eto, am ei fod yn anghywir.

Yr hyn rwy’n falch iawn ohono yn awr, yng Nghaerdydd a Chymru, yw bod llawer o bethau wedi newid. Roedd llawer yn y genhedlaeth goll—dyna fy nghenhedlaeth i—nad oeddent yn cael eu caniatáu i ddysgu Cymraeg, ac rydym yn gwneud yn siŵr fod ein plant yn mynd i ysgolion cyfrwng Cymraeg. Yn anffodus, er gwaethaf y geiriau cynnes a chonsensws cysurus yma, pan fo Llafur mewn llywodraeth leol yn gwadu lleoedd cyfrwng Cymraeg i rieni—rhieni fel Kyle Jones—[Torri ar draws.] Peidiwch â thytian os gwelwch yn dda; gwrandewch. Rhieni fel Kyle Jones yn Nhrelái, nad oedd yn gallu anfon ei blant i gael addysg cyfrwng Cymraeg eleni. Nid oedd yn cael dewis—ni châi ddewis, ym mhrifddinas Cymru. Rwy’n cofio, yn 2013, pan ddaeth Llafur i arwain y cyngor a chanslo adeiladu’r ysgol Gymraeg yn Grangetown, ac rwy’n cofio’r hawl i gyfieithu ar y pryd yn cael ei thynnu’n ôl gan y cyngor ar draws y ffordd, hyd nes i mi wrthod siarad Saesneg yn y siambr.

Allan yno, yn yr unfed ganrif ar hugain, nid oes unrhyw beth yn agos—dim yn agos—cymaint o ragfarn yn erbyn yr iaith Gymraeg â’r hyn a arferai fod. [Torri ar draws.]

The Member is bringing his contribution to an end and will be heard in silence.

In twenty-first century Wales, the majority welcome bilingualism. And I’ll tell you what, when we take over that council next year, we’ll make sure everybody has a choice. The twentieth century was when the language was used to divide people; the twenty-first century will be the century when the Welsh language unites people, and, in a world like today’s, that is very, very important. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you for the opportunity to respond to this discussion. I was listening to the contribution from every part of the Chamber and I had written on my notes here to thank Plaid Cymru for the way Llyr had opened the debate, and I had also written to thank you for the sense of consensus that is in each part of the Chamber. [Laughter.] So, at least I can be accused of being a little bit of an optimist at times. Can I just say this? Because I do think, when we’re discussing the language and our culture it’s important that we look for consensus, and don’t look for those things that divide us, and I know that the Plaid Cymru spokesperson agrees with that. I also acknowledge the tone in the way that Llyr had opened this discussion, and also the challenge. He started his contribution with a challenge for myself and the Government, and he finished his contribution with the same challenge: are you serious? That was the question he asked. And can I just say this? I am serious and we as a Government are serious about this, and we’re going to show that, not just by words in closing a discussion here in the Assembly, but also in how we’re going to act during the years and months to come.

We’ve set a target of 1 million speakers, and, when we’re talking about speakers, we’re talking about people who can use the Welsh language, not just speak the Welsh language when there is a need now and again. And, Mike, you are one of that 1 million, and I welcomed each one of the comments you made during your contribution and also the positive contributions about how we move this agenda forward. I think that is important and it’s something that we are going to do. So, we do recognise the challenge that’s facing us, we acknowledge the challenge, and we also know where we are today. We’re not going to hide from the truth, or avoid facing the reality of where we are. We’re not going to do that. But we aren’t going to repeat the same sort of discussions that we’ve had. We’re going to take action. And that is why we’re taking time to discuss with people across Wales at the moment, and we will be, when we come to publish the strategy in the spring, publishing a strategy that will be clear, that will have targets, clear targets, for the activities that we’re going to undertake in the next few years, and clear targets about how we’re going to reach the target of 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050.

We recognise that there is a challenge, as Suzy Davies said, and others have said, from the early years to the post-16 sector. We have to take intentional steps to increase the provision if we’re going to see this vision realised. Each one of the speakers this afternoon has spoken about the importance of Welsh-medium education, and we recognise that there is a need to strengthen the strategic planning system for every stage of education and training, which is vital if we’re going to succeed. We’re looking forward to receiving the WESPs from local authorities next month. Sian Gwenllian has emphasised the importance of this, and we recognise that and we agree with you that there is a need for these plans to be serious. They need to be robust and they need to be ambitious. If they’re not ambitious and if they’re not helping us to reach the target, we won’t accept them. We’re clear on that. We’re talking with local authorities to set targets that will enable us to reach our aims.

We also want to see an increase in Welsh-medium education and ensure that we have a sufficient workforce to enable us to do that. I welcomed the words of Suzy Davies when she was talking about the importance of initial training through the medium of Welsh, and also more teachers who can take advantage of the sabbatical scheme to develop Welsh language skills. I recognise that that is happening, and I recognise that we need to increase that, and we’re going to do that. We also want to see more learners in FE and HE being able to continue their education in the Welsh language, or in both languages, and we will be developing opportunities to do that. Each Member is aware that the Cabinet Secretary Kirsty Williams has established a working group to review the activities of the Coleg Cymraeg and to consider that the Coleg Cymraeg’s role should be expanded to the post-16 sector. The working group has been established and it will be reporting back to the Cabinet Secretary next summer. We will then consider how we’re going to move that forward. I don’t want to pre-empt the findings of the group, but I’m certain that we have to take that work seriously and we have to move very quickly once we receive their report.

Can I just say this? We recognise that it’s disappointing that we haven’t reached all our targets by now, but we also have a clear focus that we are moving to set targets that can be part of a wider strategy, and that will ensure that we reach the target of 1 million speakers by 2050. We are going to do that during the next few months, and there will be clear targets published next spring.

We accept the second amendment about the importance of the way in which Welsh is taught and used in the workplace. I acknowledge what Dai Lloyd has said about the importance of this, and we will be doing everything we can to ensure that bodies that provide services, and businesses, can do so in the Welsh language as well.

So, we do think that there is consensus and agreement around the Chamber—not a cozy consensus, but a clear consensus, and a consensus that is based on vision; a vision relating to the place of our language and our culture in the future in our country. I agree with Dai Lloyd when he was talking about reviving the Welsh language and ensuring that there is a place for the Welsh language in all our communities, wherever we work and live in Wales. We will be leading on this consensus. We will be ensuring that this consensus is a strong consensus, and one that has strong roots, and we will ensure that this consensus leads a robust vision and a clear vision for the Welsh language and the future of the Welsh language.

Llyr Gruffydd to reply to the debate.

May I first of all thank everyone for their contributions? We as a party will also be supporting the second amendment. We won’t be supporting the first amendment—that’s the end of the consensus there immediately—for the very same reason that Suzy Davies outlined. We don’t disagree with what’s contained within the amendment, but it would delete the second point of the motion, and I don’t think that that’s necessary.

We were reminded that we’re talking about creating some 15,000 new Welsh speakers every year. That’s 1,000 rugby teams per year, with a language policy that is better than the Welsh Rugby Union’s, hopefully. But it will take vision and it will take clear targets, programmes and strategies—of course it will—and the Minister himself has acknowledged that the Welsh in education strategic plans, which are timely, of course, because the consultation is ongoing—. It’s encouraging to hear a clear message in this place this afternoon that the Government will not accept strategies that don’t make a sufficient contribution to this target of achieving a million speakers by 2050.

May I thank Mike Hedges, and may I congratulate both him and Neil McEvoy for making contributions through the medium of Welsh? But I do fear that Mike, perhaps, has let the cat out of the bag by asking whether we’re talking about a million Welsh speakers across the globe, or whether we are talking about a million Welsh speakers in Wales specifically. Well, if we reach a million Welsh speakers across the globe, that will be a positive step forward, without doubt. We will have gone even further with time, but let’s take one step at a time. I think the point Neil McEvoy made on workforce planning was entirely crucial, and also the economic contribution that the Welsh language makes. I know of a company developing software that has gained contracts across the globe for the very reason that they have developed software that can work bilingually, because it’s used in Wales. That, therefore, is portable in other parts of the world where developing software that operated only in one language is not sufficient, which would have meant that they wouldn’t have actually gained some of those contacts. So, there are examples out there and we need to promote those, because the economic argument is important and one which is central to this debate too.

I’m pleased to hear that the Minister states that he is serious and that the Government is serious—as serious as we are—in seeing this target attained. They will be judged through their actions, of course, and we as an opposition party, along with other parties in this place, will keep a close eye on the Government’s approach and how this area develops over ensuing months and years. But as I said at the outset, we will expect—and the scale of the challenge will require this—the Government to take determined and courageous action. If you do that, I’m sure there will be more than a million Welsh people with you on this journey.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

We now move to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will move immediately to the vote.

The first vote is on the individual Member debate under Standing Order 11.21. I call for a vote on the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. There voted in favour 45, no abstentions, none against. Therefore, the motion is carried.

The next vote is on the Welsh Conservative debate, I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. There were 12 in favour, no abstentions, and 34 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I call for a vote now on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 35, no abstentions, 11 against. So, the amendment is agreed.

Amendment 2. I call for a vote on amendment 2 tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, no abstentions, and none against. So, the amendment is agreed.

Amendment 3. I call for a vote on amendment 3 in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, no abstentions, and none against. Therefore, amendment 3 is agreed.

Amendment 4. I call for a vote on amendment 4 in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 38, eight abstentions, none against. Therefore, amendment 4 is agreed.

The motion as amended.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, no abstentions, none against. The motion as amended is therefore agreed.

A vote now on the Plaid Cymru debate. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 32 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I therefore call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, eight abstentions, 10 against. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

Amendment 2. I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, no abstentions, none against. The amendment is therefore agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Agor y bleidlais. Cau’r bleidlais. O blaid 46, neb yn ymatal, neb yn erbyn. Mae’r cynnig fel y’i diwygiwyd wedi ei dderbyn.

The next item on our agenda is the short debate, which has been postponed. That brings today’s proceedings to a close.