National Assembly for Wales

I call the National Assembly to order.

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

Scams can have a terrible effect on victims, and we are committed to making our communities safer through our funding of community support officers and through working with the police and crime commissioners.

Can I thank the First Minister for that response? I do not believe you can overestimate the problem with scams, both by phone and written. The effect on people being scammed is horrendous and can have a serious effect on their life, and actually, in some cases, it can lead to a shortening of their life. I appreciate the work done by trading standards and third sector organisations and others. There are devices to monitor and block phone calls, and there is a firm in Swansea in my constituency that actually makes them. Will the Welsh Government convene a conference of all interested parties to discuss what further can be done to reduce this problem? I don’t believe it can be solved, but at least can we try and reduce it?

The Member is quite right to point out that scams are increasingly more sophisticated, particularly those online, and we are working closely with trading standards on a variety of scams, dealing with a variety of scams, relating to counterfeit goods, and illicit and illegal tobacco. And, of course, there’s a growing focus on cyber crime, and we are committed to working with the police and police and crime commissioners on this issue. Should a conference be a productive use of that time, then we will look to do so despite our limited competence in the area.

One of the other things, First Minister, that can be done in order to combat scams is the establishment of no-cold-calling zones. This has been something that has been extremely successful in my own constituency, where Conwy County Borough Council have imposed a town-wide one in Abergele. What work do you think that we can do here in the National Assembly, and the Welsh Government can do, to make Wales the first no-cold-calling nation in Britain?

An interesting idea. We have, of course, provided funding to increase the number of no-cold-calling zones in Wales, which help to protect vulnerable people from scams, and I know, as the Member has pointed out, that most of the local authorities now in Wales do have no-cold-calling zones that look to reduce the number of cold callers. Of course, if we get to a point where all local authorities have no-cold-calling zones, then we can begin to consider the issue of whether we can declare ourselves a no-cold-calling nation.

We plan to continue to support businesses in their growth, to invest in high-quality infrastructure and to improve economic development conditions.

I thank the First Minister for that response. There has been good news on jobs recently, and I welcome the fact that British Biocell International Ltd is moving from Llanishen to Crumlin, staying in Wales and with an increase in numbers. But that does mean that these jobs are leaving Llanishen at the same time as there are plans for S4C to move to Central Square, Cardiff, and to Carmarthen, and also, at the same time as the tax offices are planning to move down to Central Square. So, there’s a huge exodus of jobs from one very small area in the constituency. So, I wondered if the First Minister had any suggestions about what strategies could be undertaken to ensure that that area does continue to be a mixed area, where there is the possibility of getting local jobs, because this is a big change to the job scene there.

Yes, I am aware that Cardiff’s local development plan seeks to deliver 40,000 jobs over the period to 2026. That includes mixed-use urban extension to the north-east of Cardiff, providing a range and choice of jobs, homes and supporting infrastructure to meet the needs of existing and future communities.

Today, the UK National Cyber Security Centre is being opened in London, and the First Minister will be aware of the excellent National Cyber Security Academy in Newport, a partnership between Welsh Government, the private sector and higher education. So, it’s very disappointing that the UK’s centre is going to be located in London, as if London hasn’t got enough support from the UK Government in that respect. So, what representations did the First Minister make to try and get the UK centre to locate alongside the cyber academy in Newport, so that our country could have benefited from the jobs that will come? And, looking further to the future, will the First Minister commit to designating Newport the cyber security capital of Wales so that we can, in future, leverage greater opportunities to that community?

An interesting idea again, and something, certainly, that I will look into. I will write to the Member in terms of what representations were made about the National Cyber Security Academy. It is an initiative, in principle, that we have supported, but I will write to him with further details in terms of how the centre was established and why it was established in London.

First Minister, as Cardiff continues to create jobs and attract very many visitors, we are seeing more and more congestion on the roads. I notice that there’s now a proposal to examine the feasibility of using the Taff and the bay as our main water arterial routes around the city—already popular for tourists, but it might have a commercial application as well in moving commuters. Is the Government prepared to look at this?

I did see that. It’s a matter, ultimately, of course, for Cardiff council, if I remember rightly, in terms of their management of the waterways. I know, in the summer, that the service is very, very successful; in the winter, less so. People tend to see the service more as a tourism service, rather than a commuting service. But we know there are examples elsewhere—not just in the UK, but around the world—where water bus services have been successful. And, certainly, I would want to look to work with the operators, with the city council and others to see whether such a service will be feasible in the future.

First Minister, you explained last week that, although the Welsh Revenue Authority is being created, nearly all of the staff are having to be recruited in London because we just don’t have the skilled people here in Wales, and this is a persistent problem. But it does rather beg the question of what your Government has been doing about skills and training over the last 17 years.

Well, the Welsh Revenue Authority was merely a twinkling in the eye 17 years ago. The issue is this: the function the revenue authority will perform has never been performed in Wales before. So, we shouldn’t be afraid of the fact that we do need to bring skills in from elsewhere to set up the authority and, ultimately, to train our own people in order that they are able to provide those skills in the future. But to criticise us for not having the foresight 17 years ago—up to 17 years ago—in terms of establishing an authority that no-one thought would ever be established at that point, I think is stretching things a bit too far.

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of Plaid Cymru, Leanne Wood.

Diolch, Lywydd. First Minister, do you support the aspiration to achieve a million Welsh speakers by 2050, and, if you do, can you tell us how you intend to meet that aspiration?

Well, she knows that I do. It was a manifesto commitment on the part of my party. There are many ways of achieving that. One of them, of course, is making sure that the Welsh in education strategic plans across all local authorities deliver what they should be delivering.

Thank you, First Minister, and I agree that the aspiration is a good one, and I’m glad that you’ve mentioned education. In your consultation on creating a million Welsh speakers, you explain how education must play a central role. Your main objective, and what you’re asking local authorities to achieve, is, I quote:

‘A significant increase in the number of children and young people educated through the medium of Welsh or bilingually in order to create more Welsh speakers.’

And that they should, and, again, I quote:

‘Move schools along the language continuum, to increase the availability of Welsh-medium school places’.

Do you accept that it is Government policy, and that means that local authorities have to increase the number of Welsh-medium schools, and Welsh-medium school places, in their area?

Yes, they are expected, of course, to show how they will do that via their Welsh in education strategic plans. Those plans are subject to approval by us as a Government, and we intend to make sure those plans are robust and that they will deliver.

First Minister, you will know that national policy has informed the decision in Llangennech in Carmarthenshire to convert a school from dual stream into Welsh medium. Now, that decision needs support from you, but it also needs calm explanation to residents. I’ve got some serious concerns about the, frankly, toxic atmosphere that has emerged on this question. And I’m aware that, among a group of residents campaigning against Carmarthenshire County Council’s decision, there are some people standing for the Labour Party in Llangennech in May’s county and community council elections. Now, it’s come to my attention that some of those candidates claim to be working with UKIP, checking and agreeing the UKIP leader’s statements on this issue—[Interruption.]

Can we hear the question, please?

First Minister, is it acceptable to you that there are Labour Party candidates working closely with UKIP on the question of Welsh-medium education? And do you agree with me that the campaign against Carmarthenshire council’s decision has become toxic and unacceptable? And will you outline what action you will take regarding Labour Party members working with UKIP to undermine your own Welsh language policies?

I agree the situation in Llangennech has become toxic. I do not think that the words used by the leader of Plaid Cymru have helped the situation in terms of turning this into a party political issue. There are some comments that have been made by politicians that I do not agree with. I’ve seen those comments, and I think it is hugely important now that calm prevails, that the toxicity—some of the toxicity that I think we last saw some years ago—is now reduced, and that the council, of course, is able to explain to the people in Llangennech as well as they can—

It’s your policy.

It is a Plaid council who implemented the policy. I make no criticism of the Plaid council in that regard, but it is important the council are able—[Interruption.] Well, if the leader of Plaid Cymru asks a question, she may want to listen, because it’s hugely important, as she has rightly said, that the toxicity is reduced. It’s hugely important now that the council is able to fully explain, as I’m sure it’s been trying to do, what its policy is with regard to Llangennech. But it is not for us to explain; it is for the council run by your party—

It’s your policy.

[Continues.]—to explain. It is for us, of course, as a Government, to enable local authorities to produce Welsh in education strategic plans so that we continue to support the language, as we do, and we continue on our quest to ensure that we have a million Welsh speakers in 2050.

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, First Minister—thank you, Presiding Officer, sorry. There is an urgent question coming a little later on the Kancoat findings in the public accounts report, but I do want to ask several questions to the First Minister this afternoon on this particular issue, given you were the First Minister when these decisions were taken. So, I think that’s an important consideration.

Given all the warnings that were in place—and it would seem pretty comprehensive from the warnings that were given that there was a weak business plan, that the due diligence was ignored, that Finance Wales said there was an unacceptably high risk and that’s why they turned down the application for funding—what on earth would you suspect possessed the then business and enterprise Minister to agree to the release of this money, despite all the lights flashing on the dashboard that were showing this was such a risky investment, First Minister?

I think what has to be remembered is that the investment panel recommended approval of the investment. The Minister, I have no doubt, was guided by that information.

First Minister, it is a fact that, as the investment continued—because this money was released over time, it was—time and time again, as I’ve said, those lights were flashing on the dashboard. Three point four million pounds was released to this company, and it has been lost, in effect; no jobs were safeguarded, that site is now empty, and you as a Government hold the liabilities of that site because the lease was offered up as security against the loan that was made available. The Government is on the line to turn that site back ready for the landlord to take possession. So, there are ongoing liabilities. As I said, £3.4 million was lost. Every indication shows that, whilst in the first place the decision might have been taken in the best interest of securing that business, as the applications were made continuously to release more money, more and more warning lights were coming on, and yet the decision was taken to release more money into this company. Do you not think that taxpayers are owed an apology by your Government for the loss of this money, and in particular for the inability to safeguard any jobs by the £3.4 million that was put into this company?

Well, the Cabinet Secretary will deal with the issue of Kancoat when the urgent question is raised. But if I just explain more generally: we deal with hundreds of businesses; some of them fold. We cannot possibly say that every business that we help will inevitably be successful. No bank could do that, and it’s the same for any Government. But I can say that, of the projects that we have supported, only 2.4 per cent of them have failed to deliver on their objectives that were attached to their request for financial support, and so we have a success rate of well over 90 per cent in supporting businesses. That means, of course, there will be some businesses that are not successful, but they are very much the exception rather than the rule. That does not mean, of course, that we should not continually review the way we conduct due diligence, and that is something that we will continue to do. But I do think it needs to be put into context, remembering, of course, that of the businesses that we have helped, the vast majority of them are successful, which is why, of course, unemployment in Wales is so low.

First Minister, you were the First Minister at the time, and I do accept that these decisions are based on risk and that some will go wrong, but the point I’ve made, through the two questions I’ve put to you, is that there were numerous warnings highlighting the risk to the Government and to the taxpayer by releasing the money into this company. Finance Wales, which is a lender of last resort, for example, said that it was too risky to release the money on a loan basis from their good selves, and their remit for operation is to be a lender of last resort after normal commercial banking has been exhausted. So, I do take that point that, ultimately, there is an element of risk in all the decisions you take, but it is a fact: as we stand here today, £3.4 million has been lost, not one job guaranteed or protected and, ultimately, the taxpayer is out of pocket and the Welsh Government have continuing liabilities from this decision. I asked you on my second question: do you think that there should be an apology on your behalf from the Welsh Government to the Welsh taxpayer? I offer you that opportunity again. Will you apologise for the loss of this money, which is taxpayers’ money, in this particular instance, when so many warnings were made and so many of those warnings were ignored by your then Minister? Ultimately, it’s the taxpayer who’s lost out.

I accept what the leader of the Welsh Conservatives has said—that he understood the situation in terms of the initial grant of support. This was a start-up business. Start-up businesses are inherently risky, but there must be an acceptance of risk by Government. Otherwise, we wouldn’t support anything. It’s the same for commercial banks; they will find themselves in that situation from time to time. This organisation, of course—the business, rather—was set up at a time when the economic situation was precarious in the aftermath, or the near aftermath, of the financial crisis. As I said, the Cabinet Secretary will go into detail in terms of what the timetable was, but I can say that we are proud to say that unemployment in Wales is so low. It’s lower than in England, it’s lower than in Scotland and lower than in Northern Ireland. Historically, that has been a tremendous achievement. We have supported over 1,000 businesses to create jobs in Wales. We’ve brought investment into Wales—the best foreign direct investment figures for more than 30 years. It’s correct to say that, on occasion, there will be businesses that fail and it is difficult then to have the money returned to Government. But in the context that we operate here, 97.6 per cent of the businesses we support are successful in providing jobs for the people of Wales.

Leader of the UK group, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch, Lywydd. It’s quite clear that the policy of the American Government is going to change in many respects as a result of the election of President Trump, not least in respect of policies on climate change. Scott Pruitt, who is President Trump’s nominee as head of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, has already caused to be removed from the department’s website the US commitment to the UN climate change negotiations. Now, given that the United States, China and India, between them, are responsible for more than half of the global carbon dioxide emissions in the world, and China and India have not signed up to any absolute reduction in the level of those emissions, regardless of one’s views on whether man-made climate change is a reality or not—regardless of views on that—does it make sense for Britain, and Wales in particular, which is responsible for only 0.05 per cent of world carbon dioxide emissions, to be saddled with a dear energy policy that is a millstone round the neck of the manufacturing industry and industries like the steel industry in particular?

Well, I have to say I look at the weight of evidence, and the weight of evidence is overwhelmingly—overwhelmingly—in favour of showing that climate change is happening, and, secondly, that human activity is causing it either to happen or to be exacerbated as a result. Those people who claim otherwise are on a shaky scientific basis. I look at the weight of evidence, and it is quite clear to me—. He will know, as he was a lawyer once, that it’s the weight of evidence you have to look at, not select what you think best supports your argument when it flies in the face of scientific reality.

It’s right to say that China and India face challenges, but China is up to the challenge. China is investing heavily in alternative fuel sources. It knows it has a problem. Anybody who’s been to Beijing and the big Chinese cities will know that there’s a problem there with air pollution. The Chinese Government recognise this, which is why they are looking for those alternative fuel sources. They know that they cannot continue with the current situation, but while they are going in the right direction, my fear is the US will go in the opposite direction, flying in the face of the weight of scientific evidence.

The First Minister has sidestepped my question. My question is not to do with the argument about whether man-made climate change is a reality or not. My question relates to: what difference does it make if we sign up to targets that are going to pose enormous costs upon us, not just in terms of cost for industry but also on ordinary people? After all, nearly a quarter of the households in Wales are in fuel poverty, spending more than 10 per cent of their incomes on keeping themselves warm in the winter, for example. So, this is a real burden on poor and vulnerable people. If it makes no difference to the outcome in terms of global emissions, why should we saddle ourselves with these enormous bills? China and India are not signed up to reducing the absolute level of their emissions. What they’re signed up to is reducing energy intensity, but that has to take into account the extent to which they expect their economies will grow, and their economies are going to grow to a greater extent than they reduce their fuel intensity. So, absolute emissions are actually likely to increase in India and China, and that makes the problem even worse, and we’re the fools who are paying the bills.

Well, that view is only valid if you accept that you’re happy to see environmental degradation; happy to see air quality reduced; happy to return to the days when, I think, it was the River Irwell in Salford that was literally flammable when a lit match was thrown into it; happy to return to the days when the River Ogmore in my home town would run different colours according to what had been thrown into the river. Because the natural journey from moving away from seeing climate change as important is to see the environment as unimportant as well. We know that those people who do not accept that climate change is happening—many of them do not accept that there’s a need for an environmental regulation either, certainly to the extent that we see now. This is not something we can dismiss. We can’t simply say, ‘Well, it’s something that we can just put to one side’, nor do I accept that this is something that imposes cost. The reality is that I’ve heard him argue for more coal-fired power stations. The irony is rich in what he says. The coal would have to be imported. So, there are issues of energy security as well. Should we not invest in wind power offshore? Shall we not invest in tidal energy, rather than over-relying on energy sources that have to be imported into Britain? So, energy security and mitigating climate change, to me, run hand in hand.

The First Minister is refusing to address the issue behind my question. Wales is responsible for 0.05 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon dioxide is not a flammable gas, by the way. So, what he said about the air quality in Peking is irrelevant. Sulphur emissions are completely different. The argument about particulates in the air everybody accepts. It was a Government 60 years ago that introduced the Clean Air Act, and everybody is in favour of that. This is a totally different question. My point is that Wales is one of the poorest parts of western Europe. We have nearly a quarter of our households in fuel poverty. They’re having to spend hundreds and hundreds of pounds, which they can ill afford, every year paying for our renewables obligations under EU directives. If the United States is now going to resile from commitments to reduce its own carbon dioxide emissions, and if China and India are not signed up to it anyway, what is the sense in us making infinitesimal difference to the amount of carbon dioxide emitted in the world—an obligation that is causing real harm and real poverty in households in Wales?

I do not think that I said that the air in Beijing was flammable. I’m not sure that the hydrogen or, indeed, the oxygen content is so high that the air would catch fire or even explode. I was referring to a particular river, the context of which is well-known. My concern is that those who say that climate change is unimportant quite often take the view that environmental regulation is a burden on industry. I do not accept that. But again, I come back to this point: the wind blows; it’s free. The tide will be there as long as the moon is in the sky. There is a capital cost, of course, of putting in place the infrastructure to generate energy, but once that is in place, the generating costs are very low indeed. I don’t know what his alternative is. He hasn’t outlined it. He talks of coal. He did his best to wreck the coal industry. The reality is that we will never produce enough coal in the UK now to supply our energy needs. We would have to import it from countries like Australia. We would have to import natural gas from countries that are not looking to do us a favour. We would have to import more liquid natural gas from countries around the world. We do that already. Now, whilst I know the energy mix in the UK is going to continue in the future—and indeed, 25 per cent of the liquid natural gas in the UK comes through Milford Haven, and that is something that will continue in the future—I do not see the wisdom in saying what we need to do is to go back to the technology of yesterday, with the pollution of yesterday, and look to ignore the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and put our heads in the sand. He is somebody who is proud, he says, to be British. Then let him display his pride by saying that he wants the UK to lead the way when it comes to dealing with climate change.

[Interruption.] Yes. We are delivering a range of actions to help new and existing businesses to develop, grow and support. That includes business support, advice and investment in digital and transport infrastructure.

I am not quite sure why the backbenchers are muttering there. It’s perfectly within the right of a Member to raise a question in this place, and First Minister’s questions is the time for that to happen. First Minister, I have commended the Welsh Government previously for the money they have made available for transitional relief around the business rates scheme. They made an announcement on 17 December of an additional £10 million—or the Welsh Government made an announcement on 17 December of an additional £10 million—to assist in the recent revaluation exercise of businesses in South Wales Central and, indeed, across Wales. To date, no more information has come out from the Welsh Government as to how that money will be delivered, despite us on these benches, and others in the Chamber, pressing for some more information. We were told that that information would come out in early February. To date, I don’t think that information has been forthcoming from the Welsh Government. When will the Welsh Government be coming forward as to how you are going to distribute that money, so that businesses can make the decisions that they need to make ahead of the new financial year?

By the end of this week.

Thank you.

In the climate change committee, we heard evidence that businesses that have actually done the right thing and put solar panels on their roofs are actually being charged additional business rates. So, my question is, really: what levers does the Welsh Government have to support businesses that have a positive social and environmental impact, e.g. healthy food establishments, and to discourage businesses that have a negative impact, e.g. betting shops, pay-day lenders and other organisations that Mike Hedges raised earlier?

We do this mainly through procurement. Wales’s procurement policy encourages the Welsh public sector to apply approaches whereby community benefits or social clauses are core to contract award criteria wherever possible. By doing so, contract award decisions can favour those suppliers who provide strong evidence of delivering against our social clause requirements. So, procurement can be an effective tool in encouraging good business practice and, indeed, good business practice in the community.

First Minister, the real question you should be answering is what you are going to do to try and restore just some credibility in the Welsh Government after giving the business community in Wales 53 million reasons to lose faith in you. At least £53 million is how much your Government has lost in gross incompetence with business support and land deals—£53 million lost at least. When will a thorough investigation take place?

In terms of the answer I gave some moments ago, I can say to him that 97.6 per cent of the businesses that we support are successful, and that is an excellent record in itself.

We are taking forward a range of actions to support the creation and safeguarding of high-quality jobs in Newport and, indeed, across the whole of Wales.

Thank you, Frist Minister. The Office for National Statistics, based in Duffryn in Newport, is opening a data science campus in March. The campus will act as a hub for analysis of big data, which will allow collaborative work between academics, Government, the public sector, industry and third-sector partners that wish to push the boundaries of delivering their services. Providing rich, informed measurement and analysis on the economy, the global environment and wider society, the campus will become a world-class facility. The aspiration to create a Silicon Valley for Wales is the intention, and that it will be a hub for innovative data science research, helping to create jobs and attract investment. Will the Welsh Government work with its partners and the ONS to promote this endeavour to create a ‘dyffryn silicon’ for Wales?

Yes, we will. It is hugely important, we know, that where there is an existing level of expertise, clustering new businesses and new innovations in that area helps everybody. Newport is acquiring for itself, very rapidly, a good reputation for software and for ICT more generally, and that’s something, of course, we're very keen to encourage in the future.

First Minister, Newport is one of the worst-performing towns or cities in the United Kingdom when it comes to empty shops. More than a quarter of shops in the city were empty in the first half of 2016, according to the Local Data Company. What scheme does the Welsh Government offer to provide incentives, such as tax breaks, to people to open new businesses in areas where there are large numbers of empty shops, such as Newport, to create jobs and regeneration of our city centres?

Well, I think that councils do a good job of encouraging businesses, but landlords also have to play their part. Landlords have to understand that the days of being able to charge an unrealistic rent for a long-term lease are gone. They're not there anymore. It's hugely important that landlords are flexible and they look to encourage pop-ups for those businesses that want to test the market for three months but don't want to get involved in a lease that's five to 10 years long. Landlords will find that, by doing that, they will potentially fill their shops, because some of those businesses will not succeed, some of them will succeed, and if they do, of course, the landlord then has a longer-term tenant. So, it's not just down to councils, in fairness; it's also important that landlords are able to work flexibly to provide opportunities for businesses for the twenty-first century.

The third sector plays an important role in Wales. There are over 33,000 third sector organisations providing services in every sphere, from the environment through to supporting health services.

Diolch, First Minister. Are you aware that Public Affairs Cymru revealed that over half its members had stated that the examples have occurred—I'm quoting now—

‘where lobbyists and campaigners have been asked to reconsider standpoints or not to say certain things with which the Welsh Government is not in agreement’?

Well, first of all, I thought lobbyists had no contact with Government—we've been told in this Chamber—but, really, in other words, your Government is leaning on people, and leaning on organisations. It's censorship, and it’s undemocratic. So, in light of this scandal, in light of these scandalous allegations, why won't you investigate this matter?

I don't know if he's suggesting that the third sector, which is was what his question was actually about, is involved in this, because, certainly, the supplementary wasn't to do with the third sector. It's something that I think exists mainly in his own mind. What evidence is given to a committee is a matter for the committee to consider and produce a report, not actually say in the middle of an inquiry that—. It's not appropriate, I think, for a Member, in the middle of an inquiry, to comment on the evidence as the inquiry is ongoing. We as a Government respond to reports in due course, but the evidence hasn't been considered. I can say that, as far as we're concerned, we don't tell organisations what they should or should not say. Otherwise, there’d be little point in having organisations whose job it is to hold Government to account, as well as this Assembly.

Will the First Minister join me in celebrating the recent anniversary of one of the leading third sector organisations in my constituency, Tiddlywinks children's centre in Ystalyfera, where I recently visited and saw for myself the excellent service that’s provided by an organisation that was the first of its kind in Wales and is now a self-sustaining social enterprise? There are many others of the same ilk in the Neath constituency. I was with one with the Minister for lifelong learning on Monday, discussing the work of the Valleys taskforce. They provide key childcare services and are a significant source of employment. So, will he join me in acknowledging the invaluable role of the third sector in providing childcare services, both in Neath and across Wales, and does he agree with me that the third sector, a vibrant third sector, can actively shape policy and, with the right support and imagination, can also deliver services to our communities, making them more resilient? And does he agree with me that it is, and should be, a priority for the Welsh Government to support the sector?

I thank the Member for the question. I'd like to congratulate the staff, trustees and volunteers who have been part of Tiddlywinks’s journey over the last 20 years; they shaped and influenced the minds of many children who, I've no doubt, have fond memories of their time there, and I, of course, hope they're able to continue do so in the future as well.

First Minister, Fairtrade Fortnight runs from 27 February to 12 March, and I think we should be rightly proud that Wales has been a Fairtrade Nation since 2008, and it's the first ever. Eighty-two per cent of local authorities and 93 per cent of universities have fair trade status, 150 schools, and a further 50 per cent are registered on the fair trade schools scheme. The Welsh Government has fair-trade status, but concerns have been raised with me about some ambiguity as to how you are applying the fair-trade model. Will you look into this to ensure that it isn’t just a status, that there is a culture of fair-trade acknowledgement in terms of procurement within your own departments across the Welsh Government?

If the Member could provide me with further information I would be pleased, of course, to look at this for her.

First Minister, the third sector and its army of volunteers save the public purse millions of pounds each year and provide valuable services that the public sector cannot. The third sector protects us when we go to the beach or the rugby, provides valuable research into numerous diseases and conditions, campaigns for better rights, housing and a whole host of other services. Without the third sector, our lives would be much, much poorer. First Minister, what more can the Welsh Government do to ensure the third sector can continue to thrive in Wales and provide recognition and thanks to the volunteers who drive this sector?

The Member’s right. The Wales Council for Voluntary Action’s research suggests that the value of the third sector in Wales is £3.8 billion. The sector employs 79,000 people and works with 938,000 volunteers, a startling number. That’s nearly one in three people in Wales volunteering in some capacity. We have provided £4.4 million in 2016-17 as core funding for the WCVA and Welsh county voluntary councils across Wales, and they, of course, are in a good position to assist voluntary organisations in terms of their own financial security, and in assisting them to understand where they should go to seek financial help. So, that money goes a long way in terms of providing support to so many organisations that provide so many services to so many people.

We are currently procuring an operator and development partner for Wales and borders services from 2018 and also the metro infrastructure. That process includes discussions with bidders on how services in the south-east of Wales can be best delivered as part of the wider provision of the south Wales metro.

Thank you for that, First Minister. As you are well aware, the Newport to Ebbw Vale passenger rail link remains a top propriety for local people, and there is a deal of frustration and impatience that it’s not yet established. Are you able, First Minister, to provide further reassurance today that that passenger rail link between Newport and Ebbw Vale remains a priority for Welsh Government? And are you able to provide any timings as to when it will be in operation—the latest timings, if possible?

It’s not possible to give a time as to when the service might be in operation, but I can give the Member an assurance that service provision on the Ebbw Vale line is being examined as part of that project. He has on many occasions in this Chamber over the years emphasised the importance of a service going to Newport, and that is very much part of the developing thinking over how the metro will operate in the future.

First Minister, the renewal of the Wales and west border franchise is fast approaching. Has the Welsh Government at least begun the process of ordering or considering ordering new rolling stock for that franchise? I ask the question because, given that it takes up to four years to commission new rolling stock—it’s not like buying a car at the local garage—do you share my concerns that there’s a danger that the new rail operator will have no choice but to rely on existing stock at the start of the franchise, will almost certainly end up refurbishing it, and that would hardly be the fresh start for the new franchise that the public would be hoping to see?

It will be absolutely clear as part of the franchise proposals that rolling stock should be modern, certainly not 40 years old, as some of the stock is on some lines at the moment, and that that stock should provide facilities to passengers such as Wi-Fi, which isn’t provided at the moment. So, I can give the Member an assurance that this is very much part of the tendering process for the new franchise. We want our people to have the best rail services in the UK rather than services that rely on outdated stock.

Following on from the question from John Griffiths, AM for Newport East, Arriva Trains Wales tell us that the Ebbw Vale line is at full capacity with those wishing to travel to Cardiff. It would seem that only a twin track through to Ebbw Vale would alleviate this problem. Would the First Minister inform us if there are any plans to implement this option?

Well, it can be double track, it can be partial double track, and it can be signalling that makes the difference. It’s good news, of course, that the service is so well used that frequency needs to be increased. These things, amongst other things, will be looked at, working with organisations such as Network Rail, to provide an improved service in the future. Again, that’s very much part of the thinking on the metro and the new franchise.

We are working with the industry and highlighting to the United Kingdom Government the fundamental need to secure continued unfettered access for Welsh shellfish to key markets post European Union exit.

Thank you for that response. In 2015, marine agriculture was worth some £12 million to the Welsh economy. It is an important industry and employer in my constituency and the ability to sell in a single market without tolls has been an important contribution to the success of the industry. To give you some figures, 98 per cent of the produce of Bangor Mussel Producers is exported—some 70 per cent to the Netherlands, 20 per cent to France and 10 per cent to Ireland. May I quote one of the leaders of the industry, who has praised some of the negotiations that have happened internally in Wales since the vote? He said that he fears the worst for Wales because of the fact that Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland will not have a direct voice in the negotiations on exiting the European Union. Can the First Minister tell us, therefore, what the Welsh Government strategy will be from here on out to try to safeguard the future of these important industries?

Ninety per cent of the fish caught in Wales are exported, so any tariff or toll or any other kind of obstacle will be bad for the export market. We know that the United Kingdom market is too small to secure a future for them and that is why it’s so important to ensure that the United Kingdom Government sticks to its word in order to ensure that there is a strong voice for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland over the ensuing discussions over the next two years and more.

First Minister, I hope that the Cabinet Secretary’s meeting in April will be fruitful in promoting our shellfish to the whole of the world, not just to the European Union. But, as you know, the level of parasites found in cockles from the Burry inlet, just off the Gower coast, is higher than expected. Of course, if we are to meet the global demand, we need our cockles to survive. The European Court of Justice took action to limit the number of spills permitted in the area to help limit the rise in certain bacteria, but the cause of the disease that limits some cockles reaching maturity is still unclear. The great repeal Bill—following that, I hope the environmental laws will continue to go some way to protect cockle health. But I think we need to commit to a further sturdy on the cause and prevention of early cockle death. I’m wondering if you’re able to give that commitment to the Chamber today.

I can say that investigations into cockle mortality on the Burry inlet do continue. A progress review of an investigation we have funded will be released by Natural Resources Wales when that is complete. We are working with the industry to develop legislation to improve the management and sustainability of Government-managed cockle fisheries as well. It is a complex issue. Some years ago. I remember diarrhetic shellfish poisoning affecting the cockle beds—it was never clear what the cause was. There were different theories about what had happened. What we do know, of course, is that the affliction was there in the cockle beds. So, it’s important now that a thorough investigation is finished in good time so we have an answer. Once, of course, we have answers, we can then provide the most effective legislative response possible.

The First Minister is aware, from his time as Minister for fisheries and agriculture, how crucial the shellfish industry is to the Welsh coastline. But given that the shellfish industry was never part of the common fisheries policy or the common agricultural policy, isn’t it reasonable, therefore, that it could be expected that that industry could continue to sell into the European continent as it has done over the years?

It’s all-important—we know that shellfish is extremely important to the fisheries industry in Wales. The majority of the boats that we have are relatively small, they catch shellfish, and they don’t go very far from the coast. And they know, and we know, that there is a strong market for them in Europe. If anything were to happen to weaken their position in that market, well, they don’t have any alternative means of making the same profit. And that’s why it’s so important to ensure that the European market is open on the same terms in the future as it is now.

Yes. I know that Torfaen local authority has over £86 million earmarked for band A of the twenty-first century schools and education programme, which extends over the five years to 2019. I know that projects to the value of over £66 million have already been approved, with six projects either under construction or completed.

Thank you, and I was delighted to welcome the Cabinet Secretary for Education to Torfaen last week to officially open two new primary schools in Cwmbran: Llantarnam Community Primary School and Blenheim Road Community Primary School, and these have been constructed as part of the twenty-first century schools programme. With Ysgol Panteg, which is due to open to pupils later this month, combined, it means that the investment will be some £20.5 million. Will you join with me, First Minister, in welcoming the commitment and investment by Torfaen council and Welsh Government, who are working in partnership to deliver first-class education facilities for our children?

Indeed. My friend the Member for Torfaen is absolutely right: more than £20 million invested in schools in Torfaen—a good example of the local authority working with Welsh Government to deliver the best for our children, and yet another good example of the Welsh Government and a Labour-controlled local authority delivering schools that are fit for the twenty-first century and good for the children of Torfaen.

First Minister, existing sixth forms at Cwmbran High School, St Albans Roman Catholic High School and Croesyceiliog School will be phased out soon. Given that sixth-form staff in these schools will have to compete for jobs at the new centre, will the First Minister advise how many redundancies are expected as a result of this reorganisation and what discussions his Government has had with Torfaen council in this regard, please?

Well, local authorities are responsible for the organisation of education in their areas, and, of course, Torfaen, as other authorities are doing, are looking to provide the best and most modern provision possible.

Thank you, First Minister.

I have accepted an urgent question under Standing Order 12.66 and I call on Russell George to ask the urgent question.

Yes. I and my officials have assisted the Public Accounts Committee at every stage of its considerations of this issue. I have received, and very much welcome, the committee’s report and will be fully responding to it.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his answer? The report produced by the Public Accounts Committee raised some very serious concerns, I would say, Cabinet Secretary, over the conduct of the Welsh Government, as yet another substantial pot of taxpayers’ money—£3 million—has been lost. There are some questions over accountability, and this is sadly not the first time that taxpayers’ money has been wasted by the Welsh Government. We’ve had numerous other questionable decisions, including the regeneration investment fund for Wales, Kukd and Triumph. I certainly do not believe that Governments should not take risks; I certainly believe they should, but they should do so in a balanced way. In relation to Kancoat, time and time again, the expert advice given to the Welsh Government warned that the company had a weak business plan and was a high-risk investment. So, can I ask why, in your opinion, Cabinet Secretary, was the advice ignored—also bearing in mind, of course, that the Government’s investment arm, Finance Wales, rated it as being unacceptably high risk? What is your determination on this, given the changes I know that you’ve made in your department since you’ve come into post, and is it your view that the department you inherited was simply not fit for purpose? Have you mentioned—? You’ve mentioned in recent statements that you’ve now put new procedures in place; what are these new procedures? I think that’s the crucial question here. And finally, where do you think accountability lies? Is it with your predecessor, or is it with officials?

Can I thank the Member for his questions? We are learning at all times and, indeed, my predecessor made changes within the department when she inherited it. Indeed, my predecessor introduced the investment panel procedure to strengthen oversight of investment considerations and to ensure that where risk was being considered an informed decision could be made. The deputy permanent secretary is on record as saying that, in this instance, the investment panel got it wrong and, therefore, provided advice to the Minister that was wrong. But I think, and the Member recognises the fact, that we have to balance risk against opportunity. And it is, as the First Minister has already identified, a case, a fact, indisputable, that in the previous Assembly term, during which time my predecessor oversaw record growth, the success rate of businesses supported by Welsh Government was more than 97 per cent. That compares incredibly favourably to the Welsh average and, indeed, even better to the UK average. So, I think it is actually a very proud story that we have to tell about the business support success of Welsh Government. Nonetheless, not all businesses survive, not all businesses succeed. We will do what we can to help businesses thrive, but there will be cases, especially in the context of the post-financial crash, where businesses were established and where the economic climate was not such that it was stable and enabled the forecast growth to be achieved.

We do have a number—and the Member recognises this—of procedural changes that have been implemented. I’d happily write to all Members with details. In fact, as the leader of the Conservatives, I think, wishes to know what they are, I will offer them now: consideration of commercial loans now forms part of the investment panel procedure; the senior management team must now ratify any recommendation by the investment panel for commercial loans above £1 million; as part of the financial approval process, a standalone appraisal of all projects involving commercial loans must now be undertaken; the monitoring of loans has moved to the central monitoring team—that was an agreed departmental protocol; loan applications are more robustly assessed for their ability to repay by undertaking appropriate financial due diligence; a further change in procedure, which the WAO recognised was a standardised approach to risk assessment, has been introduced to ensure consistency across funding schemes, and where multiple interventions are being considered, they are now considered by a single body, with appropriate advice from the property leadership team. There are other procedures that we have introduced in the fourth Assembly. There are further procedures that I’ll be introducing as well.

In terms of the recommendations that are made by the committee, and I do value the work of the committee and, indeed, the report that’s been produced, I think it would be very difficult to disagree with any of those recommendations that have been made that are relevant to my portfolio. Whilst I will be responding in due course to all of the committee’s recommendations, I can say that I already accept a number of the recommendations and, indeed, I’ve already implemented some.

Of course, one recommendation you can’t respond to, but which must lay on file for the moment, is the wider recommendation on ministerial responsibility, taking decisions that are important to a Minister’s constituents and constituency, but not actually based in the constituency. The Public Accounts Committee says that the perception of a conflict of interest is just as important as an actual conflict of interest. On this occasion, I suggest that the First Minister took his eye off the ball and didn’t realise what procedures should be followed, and another Minister should have taken this decision.

Can I also ask the Cabinet Secretary and tell him that I wrote to his predecessor, Edwina Hart, on 1 August 2014—several weeks before the company went into administration—raising with her several serious concerns expressed to me by workers at the company who are resident in my region, in Llanelli, because workers from this company are spread over quite an area? They were particularly concerned at the lease that had been taken out by the then Welsh Assembly Government, which I was told was worth £1.25 million and ran for five years without a break clause within those five years. Can I understand, therefore, are you still subject to that lease and what is the ongoing cost of that lease to the Welsh Government? Because that would seem to be in addition to the costs we’ve seen so far in the Public Accounts Committee report and I’d like confirmation of that.

The second element that gave great concern to the workers at the plant was the fact that several directors, at the time they were laying off workers, were employing themselves for a period of time at a cost of up to £7,000 per month, as self-employed consultants or otherwise employed full-time with Kancoat. This was a time when the company was seen to be struggling publicly, and I raised this directly with your predecessor. The answer I got from her was simply one to say that all full and thorough due diligence had been undertaken. We now know that that doesn’t seem to have been the case. What do you say now, two years down the line, to the workers there who were raising these concerns, and are you completely assured that the directors of this company did not take any money for themselves, personally, out of the unfortunate situation that the company found itself in?

Can I thank the Member for his questions as well? I do believe that the question of ministerial responsibilities is one for the First Minister. I would warn against requesting that all perceived conflicts of interest are dealt with in a way that would potentially cause inertia within Government. We are a small country with—particularly in south-east Wales—a very wide travel-to-work zone, and so it’s important, whilst recognising the need to ensure that there are no perceptions of conflicts of interest, that we do enable Ministers to be able to make decisions on a regional basis. However, this, as I say, is a matter for the First Minister to respond to. I’ll happily review all correspondence, with his permission, that the Member sent to my predecessor, which he’s raised in the past, and the concerns that he has expressed in the past. I’ll check against due diligence, but it’s not necessarily the case that due diligence would have failed. It is that a risk assessment was carried out based on the information that had been provided, and then a decision was based on that, further to the investment panel’s considerations.

In terms of the question of the lease, this relates—I believe—to recommendation 11, and the wider question of any ongoing financial costs to the Welsh Government. There is active interest from investors in the site, and once the outcome of the negotiations is known, officials will share any financial implications with Members of this Chamber. I also will undertake to investigate, with regard to the final question the Member has raised, whether the directors of that company stand to benefit at all post the company’s collapse.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for your earlier answer. Can I firstly welcome the Welsh Government’s commitment to providing a full response to the committee’s report on the Kancoat situation? As you said, your response to the report will be considered in full by the committee, so I don’t want to prejudge that stage of the process, or indeed be repetitive with questioning. I’m pleased to hear that you’ve already said that, in principle, you are prepared to accept a number of the recommendations of that report, and I think you also said that you’ve already taken steps to see that those are put in place, and that’s a really positive step, so thank you for that.

Can I ask you, on a broader issue, do you welcome the intention of the Auditor General for Wales to undertake a broader value-for-money examination of the Welsh Government’s approach to business finance, and will you and your officials co-operate with this examination later this year? It’s obviously, if it goes ahead in the format that the auditor general is considering, going to be a very large piece of work, but I think it will be a useful one, both for the Government and also the public to have confidence that procedures are in place to make sure that the sorts of problems with due diligence, and the rest that we’ve seen with Kancoat, don’t happen again. Can I just say, Cabinet Secretary, that the committee does recognise how vital Welsh Government funding is for business in ensuring the future prosperity of Wales—a point made by Russell George in his opening question—and we want to ensure that it’s administered to best effect? We welcome the planned work in ensuring that taxpayers’ money is well spent in the interests of efficiency, value for money, and with wider economic benefits, and I look forward to your response to the committee, and I’m sure that we can move this situation forward.

I’d like to thank Nick Ramsay for his questions, and also for overseeing this inquiry as Chair of the Public Accounts Committee. Yes, we will be working closely with the auditor general, and I very much welcome his intention to carry out a broader investigation of business support by Welsh Government. One of the additional procedural changes that are being introduced through a wider level of activity for the investment panel is the ability to pause and reflect on the work that’s being carried out by the team of officials that will be the project lead on investment programmes and I think that has enabled us to get some peer review of the work that’s taken forward by one group by a different group in Government. I can tell the Member at this moment that, in terms of the 11 recommendations, I’ve already stated with regard to the final recommendation that there is active interest, and I will provide Members with more information about the outcome of negotiations as they are completed.

Running briefly through each of the recommendations, with regard to recommendation No. 1, we’ve already started to define advanced materials and manufacturing, and I think that the advanced manufacturing research centre in Deeside is a case in point. With regard to recommendation 2, that, I believe, should be accepted, and we’ve already begun incorporating the recommendation into procedures. With regard to recommendations 3, 4 and 5, again, in principle, we accept the recommendations, and it’s entirely appropriate to revisit the guidelines on non-repayable business finance in light of changing business needs and the economic climate. With regard to recommendation 6, again, a recommendation on risk identification and proposed mitigation is accepted I think—should be accepted—and, again, is being implemented.

And, turning to recommendations 8, 9 and 10, again, we’ve accepted those, and are implementing them.

I accept what the Cabinet Secretary said about the nature of risk. Indeed, the First Minister said earlier on in questions that not all investments, however careful you are, are going to succeed, and it would be unreasonable to be too critical when they fail for reasons that are beyond our control. The deputy secretary said in evidence to the Public Accounts Committee that the Government’s role here is effectively as a lender of last resort, and he said:

‘Financing things that the private sector won’t finance implies taking risks that the private sector won’t take, which implies things are going to fail.’

So, you start out from a position where you have to be hyper critical.

But what we’re dealing with here is a case where the due-diligence advice that was received by the Government’s own advisers was not accepted, and I don’t think the Cabinet Secretary answered Russell George in this respect earlier on. What the due-diligence review said was that the business plan in 2013 was ‘weak and inconsistent’, and the inherent risks of the start-up remained. The replacement of Coilcolor as a major shareholder, and the loss of their guarantee, left the risks identified essentially as unmitigated. And the proposal invited the Welsh Government taking on a significant landlord risk in addition. So, the project was identified as high risk in the initial assessment, and then there was a revised assessment, which actually increased the level of risk rather than mitigated it. So, what we really need to know here, to put this in the context of the Government policy on using taxpayers’ money for these purposes, is why that due-diligence report, which, on the face of it, seems to have red lights flashing and alarm bells ringing in a big way, was not accepted. What was it that the advice given to the Minister contained that overrode all those apparently very obvious warnings?

Can I thank the Member for his questions, and also for recognising that there are inherent risks in meeting market failure insofar as business support is concerned? I do believe that, as a result of implementing 10 procedural changes that have been recognised by the Wales Audit Office, we have improved the system of monitoring and evaluating the risks applied to requests for business support. It’s not the case that due diligence was rejected outright. It was that the due diligence was considered alongside the potential benefits, and therefore the investment panel made a recommendation on this basis to the Minister. But, as I’ve already said, it’s accepted that the advice that was given by the investment panel was wrong. They got it wrong, and this has been recognised from within the civil service.

I think we need to reflect on the context—the economic context—against which the decision was made. There was an appetite to ensure that we had economic growth at a time when we’d just come off the back of severe problems caused by the financial crash, and therefore the appetite for risk was perhaps greater than it might be today, where we have been able to build up economic growth over a number of years, improve employment levels now to near record levels, drive down unemployment rates to below the UK average—indeed, to a record low. And where we can now say with confidence that, as a consequence of business support during the fourth Assembly term—where I do recognise there were some failures—as a result of the support, we ensured that 97.4 per cent of those businesses thrived and succeeded. That is way above the Welsh average across the economy, and, indeed, even better still than the UK average.

Isn’t part of the problem that the investment panel that provides advice to Ministers wholly consists of civil servants, who are accountable to the same Minister? And that doesn’t really therefore constitute independent advice, particularly in cases where the Minister may be thought to have a particular view about a project.

Now, of course, we have the Welsh Industrial Development Advisory Board, which was set up precisely for this reason, is independent—actually, where the Minister goes against their advice, they have to report to the Assembly, so that we can have proper transparency. Surely, every decision on business support should be given over to that independent body, or, actually, if the Minister wants to go even further, he could take it out of Ministers’ and civil servants’ hands completely, and give it to the new development bank, which will probably, it seems, be led by Finance Wales, which, in this particular case, showed themselves to have a better assessment of the risk that this represented than his own officials. And, finally, could I ask him, since the head lease that the Welsh Government entered into represented a contingent liability, was it listed in the Welsh Government’s consolidated accounts?

Can I thank the Member for his questions? I will need to check the details of the final question that the Member has raised, and I’ll write, not only to the Member, but to every Member in the Chamber.

With regard to the WIDAB, that was a sponsored body that’s had statutory status since 1975, or, rather, under the Welsh Development Agency Act of 1975. And, as the Member is aware, it considers decisions where a grant is sought that is in excess of £1 million. There has been a review of the threshold level. That was conducted, indeed, by my predecessor, and that was in January 2013. I think it’s timely for us to review that again, as the Member has suggested, and I’m happy to do so. Consequently, because there was the £1 million threshold, it was not presented with any of the Kancoat cases, as they were not within the remit of the board.

But I do have to say again that my predecessor strengthened procedures. Indeed, she inherited a department where there was no investment panel to consider carefully, as a pause and reflect mechanism. Before my predecessor took charge of the economic portfolio, decisions were largely made by the Ministers, on the basis of advice from officials, without that important pause and reflect mechanism that my predecessor introduced.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is the business statement and announcement, and I call on Jane Hutt.

Llywydd, I have three changes to report to this week’s business. The Minister for Social Services and Public Health will make a statement on Sport Wales shortly. The Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children will then make a statement on ‘resilient communities—next steps’. And, finally, I’ve reduced the time allocated to the Counsel General’s oral Assembly questions tomorrow. Business for the next three weeks is shown on the business statement and announcement, found among meeting papers, which will be available to Members electronically.

Leader of the house, I’d like to request two statements today, please. Firstly, I’d welcome a statement from the health Secretary regarding any discussions he may have had with the UK Government about future access to the European Medicines Agency. Currently sited in London, this will move to Europe as a result of Brexit, and, more importantly, if we lose our membership of the EMA, not only will scientific research and our biosciences industries suffer, but Welsh citizens could find themselves last in line when it comes to accessing new medicines.

Secondly, I’d welcome an update also on the city deal. It’s excellent news that the last local authority has now approved the deal. But I’d welcome an update from Welsh Government, setting out the next steps on what could be a real game changer for my constituency of Cynon Valley.

Thank you very much to Vikki Howells from the Cynon Valley. Clearly, in terms of the European Medicines Agency, this is a matter of concern but the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport is leading discussions with the Department of Health and also with the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, responsible for matters related to regulation of medicines. There’s been regular contact with the agency in terms of current arrangements for regulation, licensing and safety of medicines at UK and European levels, and we would expect to be involved in discussions leading into the future. Let’s just remember that EMA—the European Medicines Agency—protects public and animal health in 28 EU member states, as well as the countries of the European Economic Area, by ensuring that all medicines available on the EU market are safe, effective and of high quality.

Your second question on the Cardiff capital region city deal: it is excellent that the last local authority—I believe it was the Vale of Glamorgan—last week approved the deal. I very much see that this will take us forward in terms of prospects for the whole of the region, the Cardiff capital region, and for your constituency, if you look at the fact that, over its lifetime, the Cardiff capital region city deal is expected to deliver up to 25,000 new jobs and leverage an additional £4 billion of private sector investment. Of course, a key priority for investment will be the delivery of the south-east Wales metro, including the Valleys lines electrification programme.

I’d like to request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government. A number of residents in Blaenau Gwent are concerned about reports of further hikes in fees and charges for the use of sport and recreation grounds in the borough on top of previous hikes. So, could we have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government on the issue more generally, and especially how such hikes are compatible with the much celebrated provisions of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015?

Well, clearly, this is a matter for local authorities in tough times in terms of UK Government austerity policies, but it is a matter where, of course, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government would wish to engage and be involved with local authorities in terms of the impacts, and also to recognise that we have got real opportunities. We’ve just been talking about the city deal, but we have opportunities, I think, in terms of support, and, indeed, looking at the transitional rate relief, the extra £10 million that’s just about to make its way to our high streets as well in terms of the business rates relief fund, which, of course, we have agreed with you—with Plaid Cymru—is a very important way forward.

May I ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for health on upfront charges on foreign patients using the NHS in Wales? From April this year, NHS hospitals in England will have a legal duty to charge overseas patients upfront on non-urgent care if they’re not eligible for free treatment. Emergency treatment will continue to be provided and invoiced later. There is a danger that pressure on the NHS in Wales could be increased by foreign patients seeking non-urgent treatment here, rather than in England, unless a similar scheme is introduced in Wales. Could we please have a statement on this issue?

Secondly, I’m very grateful—only a couple of weeks ago I raised this issue that Newport was getting really bad on antisocial behaviour issues. The very next day, the police in Gwent took very strong action and they did a wonderful job. I hope south-east Wales police do the same thing and clean up our cities. Could we please have a statement from the community Minister about how police are tackling antisocial behaviour and other problems in inner cities, in our south-east Wales areas? Thank you.

I think in terms of your first question, Mohammad Asghar, I have to say it’s quite horrifying to see people approaching people in beds with a machine to get them to pay up; that horrifies me. But, clearly, we have to look at our own—. We do have guidance, we have guidance in regard to overseas patients—. [Interruption.] That’s in England, of course. We have our guidance and we’re going to publish our guidance in terms of updating in due course and that’s a matter for the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport to take forward.

On your second point, I believe I answered that very clearly when you raised this point a couple of weeks ago, looking at the robust partnerships at a local level within our powers so that we can ensure that we have safer communities and communities that also care for each other.

I wonder if we can find time for a debate or a statement on the construction industry in Wales, and I draw Members’ attention to my register of interests—the two unions I’m involved with have a construction interest. But, it’s following the latest data from the Construction Industry Training Board that shows that output growth in Wales is forecast to be stronger than any other part of the UK, with infrastructure projects again driving growth, that Welsh construction is set to grow almost four times faster than the UK average, with an average growth rate of 6.2 per cent compared with 1.7 per cent across the UK, creating nearly 20,000 jobs. And if we have that debate, we might have time to see how much that’s being driven solely by Bridgend County Borough Council and the two new primary schools that they did the ground breaking for last week, part of an £11.1 million funding in infrastructure, jointly funded by Welsh Government and Labour-run Bridgend County Borough Council.

Thank you, Huw Irranca-Davies. Only just a short while ago, we heard about the investment by Torfaen County Borough Council, a Labour-controlled authority, with the Welsh Labour Government. The twenty-first century schools programme is playing a huge part in terms of enabling us to have those very good forecasts from the Construction Industry Training Board, predicting strong growth in the sector in Wales. And it reflects our continued commitment to long-term infrastructure planning and investment. I think Construction Futures Wales is also very important in terms of capacity and capability, working very closely not just with CITB Wales, but Welsh companies in terms of taking this forward. And, of course, our national infrastructure commission for Wales will play a big part in this.

Leader of the house, can I call for a statement on the future of Colwyn Bay’s Victoria Pier? You will be aware that there was an announcement over the weekend by Conwy County Borough Council that an agreement had been reached with the Colwyn Victoria Pier Trust over the dismantling of the pier in order to protect it from further deterioration, after recent storms gave it a battering and caused some significant damage. That will allow the pier potentially to be refurbished and re-erected at some point in the future, but it’s highly likely that that will need the support of Welsh Government Ministers in order to allow that dismantling to take place, and potentially may need some financial support there in the future as well. Can I call for an urgent statement on that, please, in order that we can have some clarity as to the timescales by which the Welsh Government might be able to make a decision in order that this can happen rapidly? Thank you.

I think we all welcome that. It was very disheartening to see the result of the disintegration of that historic pier, and very welcome that the trust is taking that lead in terms of responsibility. I’m sure this will lead to the development of partnership discussions on the way forward.

Cabinet Secretary, can I ask for two statements today? One is from the Cabinet Secretary for environment in relation to the issuing of guidance and strengthening the guidance to local planning authorities when it comes to opencast mining, because we might be in a situation in my constituency where, once again, on the Parc Slip site, the application currently is to delay restoration. When they make applications they promise the earth, then later on in life they promise a bit of the earth because they haven’t got the money. Now, they’re not promising anything, because they say, ‘We got to delay it again’. It’s important that if applications are approved, the individual organisation is held to account for its application. Can we therefore strengthen the advice on that area, please?

On the second one, can I ask for a statement from either the First Minister or the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure as to what discussions they have had with the UK Government following the leaking of document information regarding the priorities placed upon industries for Brexit discussions? I understand the priority for steel is low, and therefore a major aspect of our economy in Wales is not considered important enough for the UK Government? So, can we have a discussion as to what has been said and what discussions have been going on, to ensure that steel is not at the bottom but at the top of the agenda for Brexit?

Thank you for those two very important questions, David Rees. In terms of Parc Slip, the fact that an alternative restoration scheme has been put forward at the site is important, and I understand that the details, as you say, are still being finalised. Of course, they will go to the relevant planning authorities, acknowledging your point about what impact we can have in terms of those regulations. I think it’s important to note, of course, that the Welsh Government has been clear that the UK Government, who benefited from the receipts of privatisation, should assist with the effect of restoration of the site, and I think that is, of course, crucially important in terms of the way forward. I think your point is very pertinent in terms of the importance that we place, as a Welsh Government, and indeed as this Assembly, in terms of steel when we face the daunting prospect of Brexit. I think that’s where we look to our White Paper, particularly, which does, of course, include that very clear message in terms of our priorities, economic, of course, being at the forefront, and steel being a key part of that in terms of that sector and your constituency.

Leader of the house, in response to the question I put to the First Minister this afternoon on business rates, he indicated the Welsh Government would be coming forward with the information that many Members have been calling for by the end of this week. I was hoping that maybe you could use your good offices, as leader of the house, to try and get that information in Members’ hands sooner rather than later. It is a fact that, at the end of this week, we break for the half term recess, and given the interest many Members across the parties have obviously expressed in this matter, if there were to be questions that Members would like to raise on behalf of businesses and constituents, there would be little or no opportunity to do that for at least 10 days.

I’m sure the Presiding Officer’s hearing what I’m saying, because it does seem to be a trend that these announcements are made on the eve of recess, where it does fall off the radar by the time we come back, and I think that’s a missed opportunity. It is our job to actually ask the questions that our constituents and businesses ask of us, and I fail to see why the Government can’t bring this information forward sooner in the Plenary week so that Members can ask the questions that they require, rather than leaving it to the end of the week, just like the initial statement that was brought out on 17 December, which was during the Christmas recess. Again, Members were not able to put the pertinent questions that were asked of them by the businesses in their community, as you would have seen first-hand when you came to Cowbridge and listened to businesses’ concerns in Cowbridge, when they were merely just seeking answers.

Well, I would have hoped that Andrew R.T. Davies would welcome the fact that we have actually secured an additional £10 million of rate relief for our high streets. Of course, that formed part of our final budget package before Christmas, and I hoped at the time that you would welcome it. Certainly, I had some good response in terms of that announcement before Christmas.

You also have to recognise that we’ve got a £10 million transitional rate relief scheme. Those businesses who are eligible for that will automatically get their fair share of that £10 million. In terms of the £10 million special scheme, it is a special scheme, as the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has explained to you. The £10 million rate relief scheme is being targeted specifically at high-street ratepayers, including shops, pubs and cafes. We have to target effectively and we have to support those retailers most in need, so we’re working very closely with local authorities on the design and implementation of the scheme, and a statement will be made shortly by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

Leader of the house, could we, as a matter of urgency, have times to discuss Wales’s response to the plight of child refugees in the European camps? I’ve been contacted, and I expect many in this Chamber have been, by constituents from Mid Wales Refugee Action, and other groups, who express, and I quote, their deep sadness and horror about the UK Government’s decision to limit the number of unaccompanied child refugees to Britain to a

‘paltry 350, rather than the 3,000 that Lord Dubs calculated would be our fair share.’

The Government says it is because local authorities have no space. I’d like to hear from the local government Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children on that specific point. As you know, the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee is currently looking at some of these particular issues and we hope to report our findings next month. But this is actually important.

It’s interesting to note, in her recent interview with the ‘New Statesman’, the Prime Minister stated that her proudest achievement was delivering the Modern Slavery Act 2015. Yet, by refusing sanctuary, she is exposing thousands of children—the most vulnerable of children in the world—to trafficking and worse. This Chamber should have time to say and to do something about that.

Thank you, Joyce Watson. I think, in response to the first point of your question about working with local authorities, the Welsh Government does work very closely with the Welsh Local Government Association regarding local authorities and their willingness, ability and capacity to accept unaccompanied refugee children. Also, we are very much aware of placements being offered in the last week, for example, by leaders of Welsh local authorities, who are expressing a desire to take children under the Dubs scheme. But I think it is relevant to share with the Chamber that the First Minister has written to the Prime Minister today, and he has said that he wants to urge her ‘to reverse this decision’ in terms of concluding the Dubs scheme at the end of March. He says this closes a

‘vital route to sanctuary for some of the most vulnerable child refugees…I urge you to reverse this decision and work more effectively with devolved administrations and local authorities to identify placements for the affected children.’

Also going on to say to the Prime Minister and, of course, Members are aware, that

‘We are currently investing £350,000 in building social services capacity to ensure additional places for unaccompanied asylum seeking children can be identified.’

I think, finally, I would say that the First Minister says that

‘Wales is an outward-facing nation which takes its moral obligations seriously.’

And

‘Reinstating the scheme would send an important message about the type of country we want to be in the context of the recent hardening of attitudes towards refugees elsewhere in the world.’

Thank you, Minister.

The next item on our agenda is a statement by the Minister for Social Services and Public Health on Sport Wales, and I call on the Minister, Rebecca Evans.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I’d like to update Members on the way forward in relation to the board and governance of Sport Wales. Members will recall, late last year, the decision was taken to suspend the board’s activities, following clear indications that relationships among some board members had become strained, and, as a result, it was not in a position to discharge its duties effectively.

As I said to Members at the time, the suspension of the activities was a neutral and temporary act, designed primarily as a cooling-off period in order for all of those involved to reflect, and to provide time for me, as Minister with responsibility for Sport Wales, to be briefed on the background to the situation that had arisen, through an assurance review carried out by civil servants. My overriding objective throughout, and my responsibility as Minister, is to secure a sustainable future for Sport Wales and to ensure that there is a well-functioning and cohesive organisation.

The assurance review found that a clash of cultures had developed between the chair and other board members. This clash of cultures and styles led to a deterioration in the relationship between the chair and other board members and, ultimately, to the no-confidence vote being taken last November.

I have a duty to take action when it is needed, however difficult or complex the problem. This has not been an easy process for anyone involved, and my focus has been on trying to find a strong and stable way forward for Sport Wales, its staff and the board, who are the ultimate custodians of more than £20 million of public money annually. At this point, my concern is to ensure that staff have the support they need to work effectively, and I pay tribute to their resilience over the last few months—they deserve great credit.

Because of issues relating to data protection and confidentiality, and on the basis of legal advice, it would be inappropriate for me to comment in any detail on the findings of the assurance review. I do want to make clear, for the avoidance of doubt, that the conclusions are principally related to a significant breakdown of some interpersonal relationships at a senior level within Sport Wales. There are some outstanding issues to be addressed as a result of the assurance review process. In addition, a number of formal complaints have been received by the Welsh Government subsequent to the review being finalised.

Based on advice I have received in relation to these, I have decided to take the following actions: I have suspended the chair, Dr Paul Thomas, in order for a proper and formal process to be undertaken as a result of the complaints received. I stress that this is, once again, a neutral act and in no way prejudges the outcome of the process. Dr Thomas has been informed of this development.

I have also suspended the vice-chair, Adele Baumgardt, due to separate concerns that have arisen around the cohesive functioning of the board and its relationship with Welsh Ministers. As with Dr Thomas, this is a neutral act, and she has also been informed.

I would like to see the remainder of the current Sport Wales board stay in place, under interim leadership. My officials have spoken to board members today to inform them of the situation and to ask them to carry on. From today, therefore, I am reinstating the board’s activities. This will enable a number of important steps to be taken, for example the budget-setting process ahead of the new financial year in April.

I am today appointing Lawrence Conway as interim chair. He has over 40 years of public service, with specific experience of the interface between Government and sponsored bodies. He will help to guide Sport Wales through this difficult period, and shares our key objective of restoring organisational stability. I have also asked John Taylor, the former chief executive of ACAS, to work with him in a consultative capacity in order to ensure that the board can operate as a cohesive functioning body. It is not possible or indeed desirable to give a timescale for the current temporary arrangements, but I want to reiterate the importance I place on due process being followed, out of fairness to the individuals concerned. I would like these processes to be concluded as swiftly as possible.

Looking to the future, it is important that Sport Wales as a whole remains fit for purpose as an organisation. The contribution of sport at both an elite and grass-roots level to the physical and mental well-being of our country is vital, and Sport Wales must remain at the forefront of that. I therefore want to see the review of Sport Wales, which commenced last year, completed, preferably by a member of the existing independent panel and reported to me as soon as possible. I’ll update Members further on this in the very near future.

As I said earlier, this has been an extremely difficult period for all, and I regret I have not been able today to give the certainty about the future that I would have wanted. However, what is needed here is a long-term solution, not a sticking plaster, and I need to be assured that the governance of Sport Wales is fully fit for purpose and resilient in the coming months and years. That, I believe, is an objective that can be shared across this Chamber. Thank you.

Before I reply, could the Minister please confirm who Lawrence Conway is? Is it the same Lawrence Conway who headed up Rhodri Morgan’s office? [Interruption.] Yes? Is that right, Minister?

You have an ability to ask a number of questions or you can only ask one. If that’s the only one, you can sit down.

No, it certainly isn’t. I think it has been confirmed by the Chamber that we are talking about the same person. Really, Sport Wales is just another disaster of a recurring theme of your Government, really. We have a crisis that you hadn’t seen coming and things have got so bad that you’ve had to undertake major surgery instead of resolving things at an early stage. I’ve already raised serious incompetence on the behalf of your Government earlier, adding up to £53 million. I’ve raised concerns about the allegations from Public Affairs Cymru, where your Government has leaned on voluntary organisations to stop them saying things that they don’t want to hear. The thing about Wales is that sport is such an integral part of our culture. So, if you have to get one thing right in Wales, it has to be sport. If you look at the second paragraph on page 2, I’m very concerned at the lack of transparency, and I’d like your assurance that, at some point in the near future, everything will be published. Maybe, if things are unable to be published, then they could be redacted instead of things being hidden completely.

I really must raise, as a matter of concern, the history of the chair, because, as I mentioned earlier, he seems to have very strong Labour Party connections. Concerns were raised by none other than the former Permanent Secretary to the Welsh Government when Mr Conway was appointed as a special adviser to Labour Cabinet Members in 2013, because civil servants don’t often switch between a neutral role and a political role. For many of us, this is just another example of the Labour Party card being used as the main criteria to fill a public sector post. This is the kind of nepotism that causes problems in the first place. The first question, Minister, is: why didn’t you see this coming, and why didn’t you intervene before this crisis arose? As I said earlier, major surgery. Why can’t you give us a date for when these interim arrangements will come to an end? How much is the chair being paid when he is suspended, and how much are the new people costing the public purse? And why didn’t you appoint a clearly independent person to chair the organisation, rather than somebody with such open Labour connections again? Let’s be honest: there are so many appointments undertaken by the Welsh Government where there are clear, clear political connections. Is Sport Wales carrying out its proper function? This is a really important question given the context of what Public Affairs Cymru has said: when the chair produced a report—or came out with a report—that said that the organisation needed a major overhaul, did you shoot the messenger, or have you appointed somebody who will come out with the party line instead of maybe a conclusion that you don’t actually agree with or enjoy? Finally, and certainly not least importantly, what about the 160 staff employed? Your statement offers no assurance to them, so can you please give the staff some assurance about the longevity of the future of the organisation and their place in it?

I thank you for those questions. We’ll start with the bit we can agree on, and that is that sport is very much an integral part of our life and our culture here in Wales. The role of Sport Wales is extremely important in that. A strong part of my statement today has been about the importance of the staff at Sport Wales and seeking to offer them some assurance, and to express my personal gratitude for the professionalism with which they have conducted themselves and continued working with such passion for sport in Wales over the recent weeks and months, which I know have been difficult for them. As I got to my feet today, a statement went around to all staff at Sport Wales again expressing my gratitude to them.

You asked when the concerns first came to the fore. Well, as I said in my statement in November, those concerns came to the fore in November. On Tuesday 22 November, there was the unanimous vote of no confidence passed by the board in the chair, and then I took action on 23 November, with the full agreement of the chair and vice-chair, to suspend the activities of the board until this assurance review could be completed. That, as I said at the time, was a neutral act. I think that the Welsh Government did act swiftly when concerns were first raised.

You referred to the review of Sport Wales that the chair was undertaking. The assurance review itself didn’t consider the review that the chair was undertaking or the wider effectiveness of Sport Wales as an organisation. However, the review did find widespread support for the review that the chair was undertaking. As I said in my statement, I want to see that review completed and reported to me as soon as possible, and I would like one of the members of the independent panel that was advising that piece of work to conclude that work on my behalf.

With regard to Lawrence Conway, I am extremely grateful to him for taking on this role at such short notice and at no cost to the public purse, I have to say; he’s doing it without remuneration. His credentials, I think, speak for themselves. He has over 40 years of public service experience, with specific experience of the interface between Government and sponsored bodies. He will help guide Sport Wales through this difficult period. He joined the civil service in 1968 and worked in various roles throughout his career in the Welsh Office, including a secondment to the Cardiff Bay Development Corporation in the early 1990s as assistant to the chief executive. More recently, he headed the division in the Welsh Office responsible for sponsoring a number of arm’s-length bodies, including the Welsh Development Agency, and was appointed head of the Cabinet Secretariat and subsequently the First Minister’s department in 1998. He served in that capacity until his retirement in 2010. He will certainly be undertaking his role within the context of the Nolan principles, in which we would expect all people in these positions to operate.

Can I thank the Minister for her statement today, and can I also state that I think that it is particularly important to thank the staff, who have been through a very difficult period? Many concerns have been raised by staff not of their making, and I think tribute should be paid to them through this difficult time. The organisation, as a Government-sponsored body, has been accused of being unwilling to listen, lacking transparency and being obsolete in its thinking. So, now you have had time to reflect, can I ask: do you believe that you did act early enough and at the right time, and were the correct governance procedures in place before you suspended the board? Can I also ask: can you give an assurance today to the Chamber that you think the right governance procedures are in place now and, indeed, ongoing?

Can I also ask when you expect the review to be completed and made public? Also, with regard to the chair's previous review on the effectiveness of Sport Wales—I wasn't quite sure when you previously answered this question—do you intend to investigate the structural issues identified in there as part of your all-encompassing review? I’d just like some clarification on that.

You have provided the credentials in some detail of Lawrence Conway, so I thank you for that, but I wonder if you could also provide us with some more information on John Taylor. Clearly, there’s a big task of work to do, and their ability to fulfil the roles is, of course, a question that I think we all need to have some assurance on, so, please, some more information on John Taylor's credentials.

And finally, could I ask how the business as an organisation has been affected? And by that, I'm referring to the day-to-day running of Sport Wales, but also more long term as well, especially with regard to financial planning. You mentioned it in your statement about making these changes now for the new financial year, but have some of those issues of financing with regard to the new financial year been affected as a result of the suspension of the board?

I thank the Member for those questions. With regard to the review, it was specifically a governance review, so we didn't ask the reviewers to explore those wider issues of the effectiveness of the organisation and so on. Those were issues that were being looked at by the review that the chair was leading on, and now we’ll be asking a member of the panel that was advising and helping in that works to take forward that. I would expect that work to be concluded in the coming weeks—it's not a piece of work that I would expect to go on for a long period. I understand a substantial amount of work had already been completed, and I look forward to seeing that review in due course, and, obviously, I'll be updating Members on that.

With regard to the governance that we have in place for Sport Wales, I can confirm there is a framework document in place. There's also a remit letter in place, but I intend to issue the board with a refreshed remit letter in the light of where we find ourselves at the moment. There's a Welsh Government-approved business plan in place with the organisation, and Welsh Government internal audit service conducted an audit in October 2015 and did provide those reasonable assurances that the controls are in place to ensure effective oversight within the organisation

With regard to your questions about further information on John Taylor, well, John Taylor has held a range of posts, mainly in the public sector, before serving as ACAS’s first chief executive for 12 years from 2001. His previous roles included being the chief executive of the Development Board for Rural Wales and the south-east Wales training and enterprise council in the 1990s. In more recent years, he's been deputy chair of the University of West London, chair of the careers service for Wales, the Workers’ Educational Association, and is currently chair of the major contractors committee for the electrical contracting industry. So, again, I think that he and Lawrence are both well suited to undertake this interim arrangement that we have in place for Sport Wales. Again, I would just echo the comments that you have made about the professionalism with which Sport Wales have undertaken their work as staff members in the recent period, which I know has been difficult for them, and to reassure you that there have been no issues of policy or finance that the board would have to have dealt with, but there are things now that the board will have to deal with in the very near future, such as setting the budget for the next financial year and various matters that will have to be signed off relating to national governing bodies and so on. So, there's plenty of work for the board to get back to doing now that their responsibilities have been reinstated.

Thanks, Minister, for your statement. There do seem to have been some problems at the top end of this organisation in recent months. The Minister may well recall that the last chair, Laura McAllister, stayed in post beyond her intended term of office because the Welsh Government felt that a suitable replacement couldn’t be found at that time. You then came up with Paul Thomas, but he’s seemingly quickly fallen into dispute with the rest of the board. Now, I don’t pretend to know the reasons for this, but I hope that we do get a full report on this, and, more important, that the board quickly becomes a functioning operation once again.

Sport Wales plays a key role in delivering a lot of Welsh Government targets in important areas, which could potentially increase physical activity and tackle the huge problem of obesity. So, this is the crucial thing: that Sport Wales does get on with its remit, regardless of any boardroom shenanigans or internal politics. So, echoing what Russell George was asking you earlier, I wonder if you could amplify a little bit on how the organisation has been performing without the guidance of the board in recent weeks. How has it been delivering its day-to-day functions? I know you said the budget setting hasn’t been affected, which is good to hear, but can you shed some light on, or give us some assurances, rather, that the performance hasn’t been adversely affected by recent events? Thanks.

I thank you for those questions, and I’m grateful for the opportunity to provide you with those reassurances that performance hasn’t been affected, and the day-to-day functions of Sport Wales have continued seamlessly throughout. Again, that’s due to the work of the staff who have been doing that. I’m very pleased that you recognise the role that Sport Wales has, and the potential that Sport Wales has, for so many of Welsh Government’s priorities, including the physical activity agenda as well, because Sport Wales has incredible potential to make a huge impact on both the elite end of sport but also the grass-roots end, and the physical activity end as well. I know it’s doing good work and I look forward to working closely with the board as we move forward.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children on resilient communities—the next steps. I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Carl Sargeant.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. In October I set out my vision for a new approach to building resilient communities focused on employment, early years and empowerment. This ambition flows from the Government’s core commitment to investing in the prosperity of our nation: generating new jobs, creating 100,000 all-age apprenticeships, piloting a new Better Jobs, Closer to Home project, delivering the most generous childcare offer for working parents anywhere in the UK, establishing the Valleys taskforce, creating the north and south Wales metros, giving children the best start through an extended pupil deprivation grant, and promoting financial inclusion.

Llywydd, resilient communities are ready and able to work; they offer children the best start in life—they are empowered and engaged. I want safe, strong, resilient communities. At the same time I indicated that I was minded to phase out the Communities First programme and launched a broad programme of engagement with external stakeholders. This involved an online survey and meetings with interested people and organisations, including councils and public services boards. There were more than 3,000 responses to the engagement exercise and I’d like to thank all those who participated.

The feedback demonstrated the many ways in which Communities First has benefited individuals. I would again like to thank the Communities First workforce for the difference that they’ve made to thousands of people. Respondents recognised the need for change and highlighted ways in which Communities First could be improved. A significant number felt that far-reaching reform was needed. The engagement exercise has highlighted broad support for resilient communities and a new approach focused on employment, early years and empowerment. Stakeholders also emphasised the importance of early intervention as a basic principle that should underpin our approach to building resilience. Llywydd, in light of the feedback, I have again considered options for Communities First and have concluded that it should be phased out.

I recognise the support for Communities First voiced by those who work on or have benefitted from the programme. However, in reaching my decision, I’ve also taken account of a range of other responses and factors. The Welsh Government’s approach to prosperity for all, and the policy, legislative and financial contexts in which Communities First has operated have changed fundamentally. Individuals have clearly benefitted from Communities First but, as the Bevan Foundation highlights, performance has been mixed and poverty remains a stubborn and persistent challenge. No single programme can tackle poverty. We need a holistic approach encompassing the Welsh Government, local authorities and public services boards’ members.

I know the potential impact on individuals and communities. So, I will adopt a careful approach going forward, seeking to preserve some of the most effective aspects of the work done by Communities First. I will ensure that lead delivery bodies have sufficient time and resources to plan the transition. And so, I have decided that funding, at 70 per cent of current levels, will be provided until March 2018. I will establish a legacy fund of £6 million, to be introduced in April 2018, which will enable local authorities, in consultation with communities and public services boards, to maintain some of the most effective interventions or community assets developed by Communities First.

I know how important community buildings are, too. I therefore will be providing an extra £4 million of capital funding to the community facilities programme in 2017-18 and in future years, with priority for Communities First areas within that programme, to help protect valuable community assets where renovations or alterations might help to provide a sustainable future.

We are clear as a Government that we must now transition into a new phase in our fight against poverty in Wales. Our interventions—our support for those who need it most—will not end with this programme. Indeed, our aim is to intensify our efforts to give people the tools they need to have a more equal share of the nation’s prosperity. At the centre of this must be the promise of good, secure work. So, while maintaining the valuable legacy from Communities First, I want to take forward our new approach to resilient communities.

Reinforcing my commitment to employment, I have already announced the extension of two key programmes, Communities for Work and Parents Childcare and Employment—the PaCE programme. Now, I want to go further to help create a more prosperous, secure and equal Wales. As we take forward our wider Welsh Government employability plan, led by the Minister for Skills and Science, we can develop a new infrastructure to support those furthest away from the labour market into employment.

Llywydd, from April 2018, I will introduce a grant to develop this infrastructure, building on the successes of Communities for Work and Lift. I will provide nearly £12 million a year to enable councils to enhance support focused on those people often faced with complex barriers who are furthest from the labour market. It will also allow this support to go beyond the tightly defined geographical boundaries of Communities First, which currently constrain the reach of such services. My officials continue to work closely with those leading on the wider employability plan. Enhancing and expanding employment support in our most deprived communities will be an important part of the wider employment offer.

Llywydd, investing in our children is an investment for the long term. It is the most sustainable means of building a more prosperous future. I have been encouraged by the very positive responses to date to the development of children’s zones. We will be bringing it forward, together with partners, to work with a defined community in a strategic way to improve the life chances of children and young people. I will be making a further announcement on the next steps in developing children’s zones.

Along with the Cabinet Secretary for Education and the Minister for Social Services and Public Health, I have also announced the establishment of an ACE hub to help organisations, communities and individuals across Wales tackle adverse childhood experiences, which can have such a devastating impact on children’s life chances. I will continue with the support for StreetGames in developing innovative ways of engaging our young people in positive activities. These initiatives, together with our continued investment in our successful Flying Start and Families First programmes, will ensure there is comprehensive support for children as they grow up.

People knowing and accessing their rights is crucial to building empowered communities. It is why and for that purpose I will continue to support Citizens Advice Cymru in the vitally important work that they do, helping to build resilience in the face of welfare reform changes. The reforms proposed by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government to strengthen local democracy and the role of local councillors and support more effective community and town councils are fundamental to the development of empowering communities.

Building resilient communities is the work of Welsh Government as a whole. We are committed to prosperity for all, a stronger economy that creates sustainable, quality employment opportunities and is accessible to all, delivered through a new joined-up approach that tackles individual issues through wider action. Llywydd, we will make the most of enabling and once-in-a-lifetime schemes and developments. These include city deals and the development of the metro, tidal lagoons, Wylfa, and other major investments. Together, we can build the resilient, safe, strong communities for all, and we want to continue to engage with communities and stakeholders as we move forward. Llywydd, change is never easy, but we cannot ignore the combination of new and deep-rooted challenges we face. We must have courage to find fresh ways to respond to this. That is why and what I will do, and all of my Government colleagues are determined to do so. Thank you.

Today’s statement marks the latest phase in the Labour Government’s winding down of Communities First, which was once described as its flagship anti-poverty programme. I would share the disappointment felt by many about the lack of progress in terms of reducing poverty in Wales, and I would like to add Plaid Cymru’s thanks to the existing workforce. Communities First has been a matter of some controversy. I have personally been very critical of the programme’s inability to meet its original objectives, or even to try to measure its success, or otherwise. But I wouldn’t want to see the good elements, or indeed the principle, of an anti-poverty programme disappear. Now, the Cabinet Secretary himself has accused Plaid Cymru of jeopardising this programme over several years. In April 2011, he stated that the scheme was, and I quote, only safe with Labour, and that under Plaid Cymru, I quote again,

‘we can kiss goodbye to the Communities First programme that has helped lift so many deprived areas out of poverty.’

Neither of those statements were true; they were pure spin, and now we see that it’s a Labour Government that is winding down Communities First. Unfortunately, the second part of the Minister’s statement in 2011 wasn’t correct either: the programme hasn’t lifted enough people out of poverty. It didn’t have enough resource or focus. It didn’t follow through on focusing on the communities’ priorities, and the scale and the scope of Communities First was never explained to those communities in an honest way.

Nearly a quarter of people in Wales live in poverty. That figure goes up to nearly a third when we talk about children. If this anti-poverty programme didn’t work, then the question has to be, ‘What do we do instead?’ The problems of poverty and disadvantage have not gone away. In today’s statement, no sufficient replacement scheme is set out, and frankly, that is absolutely scandalous.

The legacy fund for public service boards, at only £6 million, won’t make a dent into deep-rooted poverty issues in our communities. The extra money for community facilities is welcome, but it will be spread very thinly. What happened to your principle of targeting? An extra £12 million on skills from 2018 is simply not sufficient. It will reach too few people. None of this adds up to an anti-poverty programme to replace Communities First, and given that we’re talking about some of the most deprived communities in the whole of the European Union—communities that risk losing that extra funding that they currently get from the EU because they are so poor—now you want to take this money away from them as well.

Nothing, nothing at all, in this statement today shows the urgency with which we need to tackle poverty in this country. There is so little ambition here, and there is so little in the way of new investment or funding. Of course, we’ve got plenty of buzzwords—exactly the same buzzwords that people in our poorest communities have been sold for years. Well, let me tell you something, Cabinet Secretary: people have had enough of those buzzwords, and they have had enough of being let down by this Government. Will the Cabinet Secretary acknowledge that what he has done in this statement is to just list a number of schemes that are already happening, and will he clarify whether there will be a budgetary saving to phasing out Communities First, and if so, how much? Will he commit today to reinvesting the entire amount of money currently spent on the programme, and, finally, will he accept that what he is doing with his statement is pulling the rug out from underneath our poorest communities, giving us little, if any, assurances that there will be an alternative way of focusing on and tackling poverty? This is you walking away from our poorest communities. Isn’t that the case, Cabinet Secretary?

I thank the Member for her contribution. Clearly, she wrote the contribution prior to my making this statement, because all of the things I listed in the statement were what the Member didn’t mention. Purely politicising poverty is not the way to go forward, and the Member should know better about that. The Member started off by making reference to when I made statements back in 2011. That’s six years ago, and I accept I made those statements—you’re absolutely right I did—but just before then, her Cabinet colleagues were around the table when Communities First was being discussed and didn’t raise that issue, when that Member was also on the benches in this Chamber, so don’t start to lay blame about responsibility and what poverty is and what poverty isn’t. The Member is running into an election and hoping that an attack on us regarding this Communities First programme is something that she will gain benefit from. But let me tell the Member what she didn’t raise: the issue of Flying Start, the issue of Families First, the issue of adverse childhood experience hubs, employability pathways, childcare, the pupil deprivation grant, community assets. These are all programmes—[Interruption.]

Can we just listen to the Cabinet Secretary please?

[Continues.]—delivered by this Government, which the Member didn’t make one reference to. The fact is that she can’t make a contribution on tackling the issues of poverty because she hasn’t got a clue about it. The fact is that we are trying to tackle this very stubborn issue of tackling poverty. And I will not politicise this.

How is that going?

I will not politicise the difficulties that our communities are going through. What I will do is make investments in our communities with a partnership approach between Governments, local authorities and other public bodies. The Member should perhaps reflect on her statement because the content of it was just a political swipe rather than an opportunity to make a constructive statement here today. [Interruption.] She may chuckle from the benches there; she does, she finds poverty funny, clearly, but what she really needs to do is come back to this Chamber with some ideas, because the Member clearly doesn’t have any.

You are the Minister.

Thank you. Mark Isherwood.

In drafting this statement, and your proposed or announced way forward, what consideration have you given to the Welsh Government grant-funded ‘Valuing place’ report by the Young Foundation, which was only launched in the Assembly a week ago today, based upon research with people from Aberystwyth, Connah’s Quay and Port Talbot? It was commissioned and funded by the Welsh Government. It said that establishing a local network to help encourage, train, mentor, coach and connect people together who want to take local action, whatever their skill set or resource, should be a priority. We need to allow for positive development of place that is inclusive and participatory. As I say, that included the great population of Connah’s Quay, and is a very valued report that doesn’t appear to have been—not necessarily the report, but the recommendations of that report—considered in the statement you made today.

At risk of being accused of being party political, let me say that although the annual report on income inequality from the Office for National Statistics released last month said that there’s been a gradual decline in income inequality over the last decade—UK obviously rather than Wales specific—and although the Communities First programme, according to the Assembly Research Service, has had nearly £0.5 billion invested in it between 2001 and the end of last year, it is, I’m sure you’ll agree, regrettable that the number of working age people not in employment in Wales, in the latest published figures, has gone back up to 524,000 people, with Wales ranking tenth out of 12 UK nations and regions for poverty, and with the eleventh lowest weekly earnings.

You refer to the north and south Wales metros. Could you answer the question that your colleague the Secretary for Economy, Infrastructure failed to answer last week, as to when the Welsh Government will be responding to the North Wales Economic Ambition Board’s ‘Growth Vision’ document’s specific calls for internal devolution of some matters to help close that prosperity gap that widens the further west you go in north Wales? Because so much depends on that and, simply, the metro proposed by the Welsh Government will be a sticking plaster compared to the opportunities that could be delivered with both Governments and the region working together.

You identify, rightly, broad support for a new approach, focused on employment, early years and empowerment, and stakeholders’ emphasis on the importance of early intervention. Looking back—and I’ve just heard your comments, obviously, to Leanne Wood, Member for Rhondda Cynon Taf—do you now recognise that you could have perhaps taken forward the WCVA and the Centre for Regeneration Excellence Wales’s proposals, ahead of the last Assembly election, for what should follow post 2012, which is the model that my party had proposed? We were not proposing to scrap Communities First, but simply to develop that model, which detailed proposals for a vision that would be more effective at tackling deprivation, building stronger communities, fewer bureaucracy costs, more community ownership, and where community organisations in an area would be the focus themselves for services and activities to meet local need.

You refer to the Bevan Foundation statement that performance has been mixed, and poverty remains a stubborn and persistent challenge. Well, their submission, the ‘Communities First—Next Steps’ document, which I believe was drafted by the respected Victoria Winckler, also says that Communities First did not reduce the headline rates of poverty in the vast majority of communities, still less Wales as a whole. So, how do you respond, and you appear not to have done in your statement, to her, or their, statement, that a new programme should be co-produced by communities and professionals, and not be directed top down, i.e. by local authorities, and it should be based on a clear theory of change, building on people’s and communities’ assets, not deficits, and that local action should be led by established community-based organisations with a strong track record of delivery, and which have significant community engagement, again, not by the public sector directly? Although, clearly, corporate governance arrangements would have to be firmly embedded in that.

You refer to ensuring that lead delivery bodies have sufficient time and resources to plan the transition, and the need for recognising support for those who need it most, and, therefore, that support will not end with this programme. What consideration have you given, therefore, to the submission by Cytûn, Churches Together in Wales, where they said that any changes should be gradual rather than wholesale, where they highlighted a problem with staff working in Communities First receiving redundancy notices, or leaving early, losing the most experienced and best-qualified staff, seeking employment elsewhere and being lost to those communities when they’ll be the people desperately needed during the transition period?

Are you winding up, please?

And they also—

Are you winding up, please?

If I may, how do you respond to their statement that the 2012 programme, the clusters programme, actually, in terms of their evidence, led to a loss of local ownership, which, in some cases, has been critical in reducing local support and the effectiveness of Communities First and its work?

And, finally, if I may, you refer to building on the success of Communities First—sorry, Communities for Work, and Lift. Two months ago, I asked you a question and raised concern that the Welsh Government had been unable or unwilling to release data on the outcomes of Communities for Work and Lift, where it’s understood that UK Government Work Programme providers in Wales have been able to deliver jobs to the people furthest from the workplace for an average of £3,000, where it’s understood that the cost of jobs to these schemes could be up to—

Will you wind up, please?

[Continues.]—five to 10 times higher. Thank you.

Thank you. Cabinet Secretary.

Thank you, and I thank the Member for his constructive approach to the change in the programme.

First of all, he mentioned the Young Foundation programme. There are lots of think tanks and charities that offer views on how to build resilience in communities in Wales, and in England. And we look at those reports very carefully, to see how we should or could involve the good ideas that are brought forward in them. I’m grateful for the Member bringing that to my attention.

I think what we’ve moved into here is a very clear approach to the employability plan, and that’s why just under £12 million will be introduced into a delivery scheme for the clusters across Wales, where we’ll be engaging with the hard-to-reach individuals, either through Lift or Communities for Work, or PaCE. And it’s something I’m very keen on, working with other Ministers, that we can get people back into the jobs market.

I can’t answer the Member’s specific question on the issue of the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, but I will ask my colleague to look at that and perhaps write to the Member with regard to specific issues around the metro. I think the Member’s right, actually, to want to know about the metro because the metro is just one part of a jigsaw, a suite of tools, that will enable people to get into the work profile through access to modern transport systems. What we’ve got to remember, again, without laying blame anywhere, is that this is about times changing from where the Communities First programme started to where we are now, 17 years later. The whole landscape, fiscally and economically, has changed dramatically and welfare reform has had some indirect consequences on our communities on trying to tackle the issue around poverty. That’s why we are shaping a different direction.

The Member may look at Victoria Winckler’s Bevan Foundation report; he should look at it closely because, actually, what we’re proposing here isn’t that far off from what the Bevan Foundation are saying. About the employability pathway, the Minister will make a statement on that very shortly, but my part of the employability pathway is at the very front end, and we’re looking at how we get people into the education system, into the skills opportunities, and move them in to employment, which is a very important point. With regard to designing programmes with people as opposed to to people, the Well-being of Future Generations Act (Wales) 2015 is very clear on that; we will, from this statement, make a very clear commitment to go back out into those communities to talk with individuals—both workforce and organisations—that can help us design opportunities with the legacy fund as it moves forward.

Cytûn and others have made representation on the softening of the structural changes, and I believe we’ve done that. We’ve offered a 70 per cent funding model until the end of this financial year, and then, from there, we’re introducing a legacy fund. I think that gives authorities or clusters time to start shaping a different conversation about how they can develop, but that is a matter that we hope will be able to enable and empower as opposed to make sure that we deliver that process. It will be delivered from the ground. But, I think the offer here is about refocusing on the issue of how we tackle poverty, recognised by the Member that the stubborn effects of poverty are very difficult to tackle, but we are committed to doing that as a whole-Government approach.

Can I thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement? What I would say at the outset is that I do understand the Government’s position on Communities First, and your concern that, of itself, it hasn’t achieved its ambition to lift people out of poverty. In some areas, it really hasn’t delivered at all. As you recognised in your statement, I think it’s probably difficult to imagine that any devolved administration can deliver any one policy that would lift a population out of poverty as poverty is also linked to the macro-economic situation of the United Kingdom, which is outwith the control of Welsh Government. Of course, again, like you’ve alluded to, Cabinet Secretary, there’s the unfair benefits system, which hits the poorest the hardest. It’s again something over which Welsh Government has no control. However, you know from my previous contributions in this Chamber and in personal representations that I’ve made to you that I have nothing but praise for the benefits that Communities First schemes have brought to my constituency. My concern in ending the scheme was that we could end up throwing the baby out with the bath water, and that much of the excellent work currently being done could be lost. So, I would like to thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for the way in which you have listened to the representations from myself and other Members.

It’s welcome that Welsh Government has recognised the real benefits that some Communities First schemes have delivered, and is putting a generous transition arrangement into place. I also welcome the fact that, during the transition period, local authorities will be able to directly prioritise those schemes that are most beneficial to the community, allowing time for them—as you’ve said in response to Mark Isherwood’s question—to refocus on what they do and to seek alternative funding streams where necessary, so that work that has made a difference in those communities can continue. I’m thinking particularly about the work around health, well-being and social inclusion. The transition period, I can see, Cabinet Minister, will allow Welsh Government time to refocus its anti-poverty priorities, directly moving the emphasis towards employability, which we all accept is the key to lifting people out of poverty, and this policy does move across areas currently not covered by Communities First.

And can I say, I very much welcomed the strategy that was set out by Alun Davies last night at the Valleys taskforce public meeting in Merthyr Tydfil, which homed in on the need for employability skills to be at the centre of revitalised Valleys communities, together with the provision of well-paid, quality, secure jobs, but also continuing with Flying Start, Families First, ACEs and the children’s zones, which you set out in your statement? So, my question, Cabinet Secretary, is whether you can agree with me that when, as part of the transition arrangements, the legacy money is allocated to local authorities, those councils must prioritise the work that successful Communities First schemes have delivered for some of our most deprived areas, and that they will be given clear guidance on how to do so, and that consideration will be given to ring-fencing this money to ensure that that happens.

Thank you, Dawn, and thank you for your question. Can I say, I’ve been lobbied by many Members, of all parties, and lots have fed in to the consultation documents? People like Dawn, Lynne Neagle, Hefin David, and many others around this Chamber have been very robust in their views of Communities First. Can I say also, I genuinely believe that the staff in many Communities First clusters have done a fantastic job in trying to tackle the very most severe poverty? And I believe the Communities First programme has probably prevented some communities from getting poorer. What it hasn’t been able to create—and that’s not anybody’s fault, but it hasn’t been able to make that big shift into making a proactive track in terms of tackling poverty head on, and that’s what we’ve got to do, and I absolutely believe that this has to be delivered by giving people employability skills, jobs growth skills, but also jobs—and I know David Rees has raised this with me in the past: giving people skills is one thing, but giving people jobs is another, and it has to be approached on a complete basis.

Can I say, in terms of transition, what I’ve tried to do here is soften that process in terms of taking a longer-term approach to change? Change is always difficult, but we need to do that. I think it’s ambitious, it’s brave, but, actually, it’s not working. The current position is what we’re trying to deliver on. So, I will be giving guidance to local authorities on the revenue legacy, to look at how their well-being plans reflect the needs of their community, but I don’t want to be very specific in terms of programme. I think it is really important that people who understand their communities better are able to make the influences of change, with the finances attached to that.

Thanks, Minister, for your statement today. A lot of the discussion today has been about Communities First; well, that scheme is now going, so we do have to ensure that any kind of programme that replaces it is going to be effective, but, mainly, today, I wanted to talk about the other side of the poverty issue, which is what Dawn Bowden alluded to: employability.

Now, you’ve previously stated, Minister, that in-work poverty is a growing problem and, in fact, the Welsh Government identified this issue when they brought out their report on building resilient communities in 2013. One thing the Government can do is to try to attract more jobs, and, hopefully, better quality jobs. Now, I know that your Government is mindful of this aspect, because your economy Minister, Ken Skates, came to the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee last week, and he was talking about this issue, and he said it’s not just any work, it’s quality of work, that matters, and I think that that is important to bear in mind. But we are up against a number of problems in this regard. In the same week as Ken Skates’s remarks, we also had the First Minister, as I mentioned earlier today in First Minister’s questions—he informed us that the Welsh Revenue Authority was coming to Treforest, but that nearly all of the jobs were going to be taken up by people recruited in the London area. Now, I appreciate that we haven’t known forever about the Welsh Revenue Authority, but we’ve known about it for some time, so I do still wonder as to—[Interruption.] Well, it’s been mooted for some time, let’s put it that way. I do wonder why, in these situations, Welsh people can’t be trained up to fill these roles.

I don’t want to focus particularly on that, but I just want to highlight the issue of training and upskilling people. The Welsh Government is now looking to take over responsibility for procurement in order to use this as a lever of job creation. We do have some major infrastructure projects in the pipeline such as the south Wales metro and the Swansea bay tidal lagoon. But the possible outcome here is that we won’t have the skilled people in Wales and we will have to again import them. So, we may not be creating jobs for the local community at all, or, at least, not many. We could, in fact, be putting more pressure on housing supply for locals and thus inadvertently exacerbating problems associated with poverty. I know that there is a Government employability programme for upskilling, overseen by Julie James, which is touched on in your statement, but, to repeat what I said earlier to the First Minister, one does wonder what the Government has been doing about upskilling over the last 17 years, because this is not a new issue, clearly. You would know more about that than I, so, if you could enlighten me, I would be grateful.

We are also faced with other problems regarding the employment market in the shape of automation, which Lee Waters has alluded to several times. Jenny Rathbone asked last week, ‘Who will benefit from it?’ Well, it certainly won’t be the relatively low-skilled workers. So, this exacerbates the problem of upskilling. What practical things can be done to improve employability? Well, Ken Skates talked last week about using what he called ‘labour-market intelligence’ in designing apprenticeships. We do need all-age apprenticeships now, which I believe is part of the programme of employability. We do need them, because the employment market has become so fluid and there are no jobs for life now. We do, perhaps, need greater Government interaction with private industry, as the public sector is likely to contract.

Transport, I would say, is a major issue. Many new jobs are created in industrial areas on the edge of towns, often without public transport, and, of course, a lot of it is shift work. How will workers get to their workplace without a car? So, can the Welsh Government liaise effectively with transport providers? Most workers will have to work initially through employment agencies. Many of these agencies are not very good, in my experience, in communicating effectively with their workers. Often, management is poor in these agency jobs. Does the Welsh Government have any plans to work with these agencies in future? What are your plans for working with transport providers, and what are your plans for working with private industry? Thank you.

Well, the Member raised many questions there, but I think the premise of most of it was based around employability and employability pathways. I did make reference in my statement to the employability programme we are introducing: nearly £12 million-worth of investment at the very difficult end of interaction with some of our most difficult to gain market training and advantage. But, look, we shouldn’t talk Wales down. Wales is the most successful part of the UK in unemployment stats. We have done particularly well, despite the economic difficulties we face. What we have done is created many jobs, and many decent jobs. We legislated for decent jobs only a few years ago.

In terms of large projects, we do have a procurement process. There is a community clause in our programmes, where we encourage—in some cases, expect—apprenticeship schemes to be introduced. I’m sure that will be part of that whole concept around the metro and the new franchise as we talk on the issue around travel. Preparing for the future, automation is a big problem. We have to think about that very, very carefully, training and giving people the skills today for the future. We’ve got plenty of cutting-edge companies in Wales, the GEs, the Airbuses—all at the cutting-edge of technology, but we’ve got to embrace that and build upon it.

The Member raises often the Welsh Revenue Authority. Look, we’re talking about 17 very highly-skilled jobs here, and some of them will have to be brought in because of the skills base. But, in general terms, we are working with employers, we are working with our schools and colleges, to give people the right skills for planning for the future, because, if we don’t, we will be not the best in the UK in terms of our unemployment figures; we’ll be one of the worst. That’s why it’s important to change with the times and that’s what we’re doing with this programme.

This is a very sad day for Swansea East and a sad day for health, as smoking cessation, smoke-free homes, exercise classes, healthy diet and slimming programmes end. A sad day for educational attainment, as Easter exam preparation, homework clubs and family learning programmes end. A sad day for people who would have benefited from money awareness courses, utility bills advice, basic budgeting courses, and income maximisation programmes. Last year, the first supplementary budget found an extra £10 million for higher education. Will the Cabinet Secretary ask the finance Cabinet Secretary for £10 million for Communities First in this year’s first supplementary programme?

I’ve had many conversations with the Finance Minister, and a sign of the times is that we are moving into a different space of tackling poverty. The Member is wrong—quite clearly wrong—to say that all of those programmes will end. He doesn’t know if they’ll end; I don’t know if they’ll end. What it does mean is that we’ve got to talk to communities about how we make them more resilient for the future. I’m very aware of the Swansea clusters—I’ve visited many clusters across the whole of the UK—so it is rather unfortunate that the Member uses that type of language to frighten people as opposed to being constructive in the way he approaches this in the Chamber.

I’d like to thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement today. In many ways, this is a bittersweet moment, and I would like to join with you and with previous speakers in acknowledging the ways in which Communities First has improved so many lives in some of our most challenging and challenged communities, but the nature and shape of poverty is not a static concept. It is quite right, therefore, that, as a Government, you should look to addressing the changing shape of poverty, and I certainly welcome the move to do that.

So, looking ahead, I welcome the Welsh Government placing employment, early years and empowerment at the heart of its new, proactive, joined-up communities policy, and also the way that the new approach ties into the employability agenda, the Valleys taskforce agenda, and the wider economic strategy. My first question relates to the issue of community assets. I welcome the commitment to a legacy fund, and the extra money for the communities facilities programme, but I would welcome any extra detail, Cabinet Secretary, that you could provide for me today on this. When Communities First services in my constituency merged in the past, this often led to a centralisation of services, with implications for the community assets that formerly housed the programme where Communities First was the anchor tenant, allowing other organisations to use the space for the benefit of the community. How will this new funding help to ensure that that kind of situation is not the case moving forward, and also will the fund that you have referred to be open retrospectively to former Communities First venues that have already lost the Communities First provision during previous mergers?

Secondly, I welcome your commitment to supporting those furthest from the labour market back into employment. However, there may be challenges here around the skills agenda, so I’d be grateful if you could tell us what assessment has been made of this, and also of any particular approaches from Communities First that could be retained in any future model.

Finally, I welcome the holistic partnership working that’s at the heart of the Welsh Government’s vision that you’ve spelt out for us here today. What response has the Welsh Government had from public services boards, local authorities and other partner organisations to these proposals?

I thank Vikki Howells for her questions today and, again, another Member that’s been very forthright in her views on Communities First for her community. Vikki, what I would say is that we should be ambitious and we should be optimistic for the future. We are absolutely committed to tackling the issues around poverty. We will have the most generous childcare pledge anywhere in the UK delivered in your constituency and constituencies right the way across Wales. Tackling the issues of adverse childhood experiences that have devastating effects on our children longer term—generational issues that are not only morally right that we tackle, but also fiscally right for public services. We need to change direction and that is what we will do, working in partnership with Flying Start and Families First and children's homes in Wales, tackling the issues that matter to us, that matter to the people of Blaenau Gwent, Rhondda Cynon Taf and Swansea, and the areas where we’ll be delivering pilots on childcare in September of this year.

The issue the Member raises around the issue of capital spend and the community facilities programme—we’ve attached £4 million to that for a four-year legacy from 2018. I expect that to be used with a degree of flexibility with local authorities, which will help them change their capital and sweat the asset they have. So, whether they need to construct new kitchens or new boiler facilities where that may enable that facility to become the new childcare facility for your area, or a place where we can deliver more training and employment agencies, these are the opportunities that I see where local authorities and local people are more at the forefront and can deliver these programmes. The made-in-Wales approach to community asset transfer is something I’m talking to the finance Minister on, and we will make a further statement on that in the near future.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement, and also thank him for his engagement with me as a backbencher who’s been deeply worried about these proposals, and also for meeting with my local authority? I firstly wanted to place on record my thanks, and pay tribute to the staff who are delivering Communities First in my constituency, who have done an absolutely sterling job. I know that the Cabinet Secretary is well aware of the excellent performance of Communities First in Torfaen, but just to remind him, we are first in terms of getting people into employment, second in terms of boosting skills, third in terms of improving numeracy and literacy and improving mental and health well-being. So, we have quite a track record there to try and protect. I also think that it is very important to guard against the narrative that this programme has not tackled poverty, coming, as it has, for the last nearly seven years, against the backdrop of swingeing benefit cuts, which can be dismissed by the Welsh Conservatives, but which have undoubtedly had a deep impact on our poorest communities, and which are set to get worse with the roll-out of universal credit.

As you know, I have been very clear in my representations to you, and also in my written response, that it is absolutely crucial that we do not throw the baby out with the bathwater in this programme. With that in mind, I very much welcome the fact that you will be maintaining funding for the coming financial year at 100 per cent until June, and 70 per cent until the end of the financial year. I also welcome the fact that there will be a four-year transition, but I am sure you will not expect me to be anything less than very concerned about the significant decrease in funding for that four years, which, for my constituency, will mean a reduction of £1 million per year. So, I hope that that is something that we can continue to keep under review, as it is funding for our most deprived communities.

In terms of questions, I would be interested to know some more detail on how you see this legacy fund working and how you will ensure that is targeted to the areas that can be most effective with the funding in question. But I’d also be interested to know, in terms of the employability money, how much flexibility local authorities are likely to have in using that money. Because we know that a lot of people in Communities First areas are not by any means employment ready, and a lot of the softer interventions that Communities First has been so good at are absolutely vital to ensure that they even have a fighting chance of benefiting from those employment measures.

I thank the Member for her contribution, and I agree with the Member. Torfaen is one of the authorities that has been very good in demonstrating the way that they can engage with their community at a very local level. Caerphilly is another example of where there has been very good activity on the ground. I’m not saying that the Communities First programme has been broken; I’m saying we need to do something different, because the things that we are trying to tackle—the stubborn effects of poverty—aren’t being tackled as well as we were hoping they would have been. That’s why we have to have a change in direction. The Member shouldn’t be shy in coming forward either: while Torfaen has many firsts in it, the Member was one of the first to come to see me, as well, in terms of saying what her concerns were on the effect of this programme.

I’ve visited some of the success stories from the Lift and Communities for Work programmes. We’ve got a great result on employment programmes and getting people back into work, but these are a cohort of individuals who sometimes are just not ready for work and we need to do more with them. I’ve seen a great success story in Cardiff, which I visited recently, where we were able to give people confidence; enough just to get over the doorstep, to start talking about the jobs market, then giving them confidence to get into that skills basis. Hopefully, from there, we can move them through the system: through Julie James’s employability programme into the work placements—and Ken Skates has been very successful in attracting businesses to this area.

With regard to how the revenue streams will operate, I will be issuing some guidance, following consultation with stakeholders, about how I see the PSB or the local authority being part of the well-being plan, making sure that the areas that should be tackled—tackling poverty in those areas—are the ones that are given priority to do that. That’s something I’ve already spoken to the children’s commissioner and the future generations commissioner’s offices about—making sure that they are on top of this to ensure we target the right places. But it will be, of course—there is less money going into the system in this space, and that will have impacts in that. But what we have been able to do, and I’m grateful for the Member’s acknowledgement of this, is give this a softer landing in a process where we can plan for a future where, hopefully, education, health and other organisations in the third sector can come to the table to talk about what the success is in these areas and move that forward as we go on.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary. I apologise to all those other Members who wanted to come in, but we have gone over time.

Item 5 is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on the establishment of the national endowment for music. I call on Kirsty Williams to make the statement.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I believe that all young people, no matter what their background, should have the opportunity to develop their talents and skills through music. I am pleased that, alongside the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, we are announcing £1 million-worth of investment to support the establishment of a national endowment for music. An initial contribution will be provided to the Arts Council of Wales to cover the set-up costs. A further contribution will then be made to the seed fund of the endowment once it is in place, taking the total to £1 million.

This work represents the joined-up approach that we are taking to ensure that music opportunities continue to be available to all young people, and are enhanced in the future. Over the coming weeks, the arts council will begin the process of establishing the endowment, including assembling a steering group to inform the scope, use and timings for the eventual operation of this fund. Building up the fund to a level where the annual interest will be sufficient to make grants will, of course, take some time. It will rely on attracting contributions from a variety of public and private sources. This, therefore, is an initiative for the medium and long term.

Deputy Presiding Officer, we are a nation with a rich musical heritage. If you were to ask people around the world to name things that they associate with Wales, their list would undoubtedly involve music. From our traditional choirs to musicians who perform across the world, Wales truly punches well above its weight. Although, of course, we must guard against viewing our musical heritage as something of a cliché, our inheritance, to resonate down the generations, is one of variety and vitality: the experimentalism of John Cale; the originality of the Super Furry Animals; the accessibility of Ivor Novello; or the modernity of Kizzy Crawford and Marina and the Diamonds.

Yet music tuition isn’t just about performance. It promotes a range of positive outcomes that support the four purposes at the core of our new curriculum that will drive up standards in our schools. We want our young people to grow into healthy, confident individuals, enterprising, creative contributors, ambitious, capable learners and ethical, informed citizens. Learning to sing or play a musical instrument helps our children cultivate discipline and perseverance. It teaches that practice does indeed make perfect and it helps children build confidence and discover what inspires them.

We all want an education system that gives learners the chance to engage in these valuable experiences. Through the expansion and extension of the pupil deprivation grant, schools are being better equipped to provide musical experiences to their learners, which is especially important for those many children who perhaps would not be able to afford to participate in cultural activities.

This complements the aims of the ‘Creative learning through the arts’ plan, a joint Welsh Government and arts council programme investing £20 million in schools to promote and support creative teaching and learning. This programme also supports schools to develop practice that will contribute to the new curriculum, helping our young people to become enterprising, creative contributors.

So what is the purpose of all of this? Music is an enrichment activity that allows us to express ourselves personally and to share in our collective culture. As Longfellow said,

‘Music is the universal language of mankind’.

The national endowment for music is our long-term and sustainable approach to funding. Rather than replacing existing music services, it is designed to enhance them. Although it will take time to build the fund into the robust and productive endowment that Wales needs and deserves, I am keen that we push forward so that this can happen at the soonest possible opportunity. The national endowment for music was a recommendation of the music services task and finish group, and I would like to thank the members of that group for their hard work and for providing and producing such a valuable report. The endowment will be a genuinely innovative, made-in-Wales, groundbreaking initiative, and I therefore call upon Members here to support us in exploring how best to target this fund, to identify areas of need and help us build a successful endowment that can provide for young people for years to come.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement? Clearly, it is something that we are more than happy to support in terms of creating this national endowment for music. As you say, music can give people expressive experiences. It can give them a sense of empowerment. It certainly enhances people’s confidence and, as you’ve already acknowledged, there is an educational benefit as well as a well-being benefit. It’s an important element when it comes to strengthening mental health, and so on and so forth. So, I warmly welcome the fact that this endowment is to be established and that this statement—although it was made public previously—has been made this afternoon.

Just a few questions on practicalities. You say that this is a joint initiative with the Cabinet Secretary for the economy. You talk of £1 million. Is there a financial contribution coming from the Cabinet Secretary for the economy’s department, and if so, what is that? And from what budget within your own department will this funding come from? Do you anticipate that you will be contributing annually to this endowment, or are you looking no further than that £1 million and expecting the rest—you talk of a target of £20 million—to be contributed by others? And by when do you expect that £20 million to be in place? Clearly, you expect this to be paying out by 2020. Would you expect that that £20 million will be in place by then?

Now, clearly, your forecasts are for the medium term and long term in terms of seeing this endowment fully operational, but there is pressure today on many of these services. It would be regrettable to lose much of the provision that currently exists in this area whilst waiting to get to that point where this endowment becomes operational. So, I would like to hear from you what your intentions are in terms of ensuring that the current services remain sustainable in the meantime. Because having lost that infrastructure, the task of strengthening services will be so much greater.

I don’t know whether you’re aware of the Denbighshire Music Co-operative, where a number of the providers, in the face of the cuts that have been made, have come together to create a co-operative initiative that will ensure provision for our schools. I think that that will be a model that you and those involved with this endowment should look at, and perhaps you could tell us whether that’s the kind of approach that you would like to see being supported by this endowment.

Also, you referred, towards the end of your statement, to the music services task and finish group and that there were 15 recommendations—and this is one of them, now being implemented. Perhaps, not necessarily now, you could give us a written update at some point of where the rest of the recommendations are in terms of progress made against them, so that we can be clear on the broader work ongoing in terms of taking this agenda forward.

I thank you, Llŷr, for your comments and questions this afternoon and for your welcome of the establishment of the endowment. This is, indeed, a joint initiative between myself and my colleague, and the split is 50-50: 50 per cent, or £500,000, from myself, and the same from my colleague. I have to say that, at present, we have no plans to add additionally. The task and finish group, as you will be aware, recommended that there should be a feasibility study into the possibility of setting up an endowment. Work was carried out previously with regard to that, and I was very keen, as was my colleague Ken Skates, to be able to make progress on that recommendation as quickly as possible. The purpose of the Government’s funding is: (1) to enable the arts council to set up the fund—so, there is somebody needed to find that resource so that the fund could initially be set up—and then the additional money is there as an incentive and a contribution to having the initial investment into the fund, and a demonstration to others that the fund exists. Hopefully, we will be able to attract other investment from both public and private sector sources as we go forward.

Our ability to be able to make payments from the endowment will indeed be subject to how quickly we can raise the capital needed. I would love to be in a position that we can start making grants from 2020, but it is dependent on how quickly we can grow the fund into a sizable lump sum that will then allow the interest to be made. It’s too early, Llŷr, at this stage to say whether the co-operative that you talked of would be subject to funding. That is for the steering group that we anticipate the arts council will set up. So, it’s not just the mechanics of actually setting up the fund but actually setting up a steering group that will look at all these issues—identifying need and the kind of projects that we feel would be worthy of being funded. That kind of co-operative approach I think has demonstrated the commitment of people on the ground to try and overcome some of the undoubtedly—and I don’t want to shy away from this at all—real challenges that music services in schools have faced. There have been groups such as the one you mentioned—and I am familiar in my own constituency with the South Powys Youth Music organisation—which have really worked very, very hard to address the gaps and to find new ways around the very difficult financial situation to continue to provide those opportunities for young people. I would want to take this opportunity to applaud groups, like the one you mentioned and others, that are working so creatively to create these opportunities for people.

With regard to the task and finish group, as I said in my statement, this was a recommendation from the group. The majority of the recommendations from that group were for local government to take forward. Civil servants here in my department and in Ken Skates’s department continue to work very closely with the WLGA and local authorities around moving forward on those recommendations. I would be more than happy for my colleague—I’m sure he would be more than happy to provide a written update on those because that falls under his portfolio. I’m sure that that would not be a problem at all.

Can I also thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement? I think it is disappointing, of course, that the announcement was made to the media yesterday rather than in this Chamber. But we are having a statement today, and at least that gives us an opportunity to ask you some questions about the plans that you have announced. I want to welcome the establishment of the endowment. It is a key recommendation that has been taken forward and I think it’s important that we put on record today the fact that, very often, we’re talking a lot about the STEM subjects—we’re talking about maths, we’re talking about English, we’re talking about science, we’re talking about Welsh—but we ignore the arts at our peril. I think it’s really important that we do more for the arts here in Wales, and that’s why I want this endowment fund to be a success and to grow. I wonder what discussions you have had with potential philanthropic sources to expand this fund rapidly, so that it can begin to get some cash out of the door and into people’s pockets, in order to support them in the development of the arts in their own lives.

I think, also, I am a little disappointed, or perhaps confused, as to the timing of the announcement, because of the ongoing work of the committee, which is looking at some of the aspects of music provision at the moment, and I think that, if we’re going to see a sort of joined-up working in this Assembly between the National Assembly and the Government, it is important that, sometimes, Ministers hold back from making announcements when there are useful discussions actually already taking place. I noted that, just a few weeks ago, in the culture committee, Dr Owain Arwel Hughes was talking about music, and he was saying that we're at this crisis point at the moment here in Wales, where investment is needed if we’re going to deliver the sorts of success that you mentioned we've had historically. Do you agree with Owain Arwel Hughes’s analysis that we are in a bit of a crisis when it comes to music education in Wales? I noted that the uptake of students taking music at GCSE and A-level, for example, seems to suggest that there has been an exodus from music examinations. We've seen a fall of 25 per cent in people taking music at GCSE, and 35 per cent taking music to A-level. Is that a concern to the Cabinet Secretary, and what action specifically will you take in order to address the decline that we've seen in people taking up music as a GCSE and to A-level?

Can you also tell us, in terms of the taking forward of those task and finish group recommendations, you mentioned in your response to Llŷr that many of those recommendations are the responsibility of local government. I appreciate and understand that that was the case, but, as has been the case on so many occasions here in the National Assembly, it often takes the leadership of the Welsh Government in order to realise those things, even when there are recommendations made to 22 different local authorities, all very often with different approaches to things. So, I wonder, are you going to show some leadership on this, not just in terms of establishing this fund, but in terms of taking forward your role in leadership across Wales in terms of education to make sure that music isn't overlooked in the future? And what discussion have you had with Professor Donaldson to ensure that music does feature within the new curriculum that is being developed? It's not been something that I've heard a great deal about in terms of the work of the pioneer schools, for example, but I'm sure that there is work going on and perhaps you can tell us a little bit about that.

You will know also that the culture committee's inquiry has been looking at examples in Scotland and England in terms of their music education provision, and that, in both of those nations, there's been an element of ring fencing of funding that has been made available to local education authorities, and that there has been some innovation in the way that musical instruments have been procured and that other services have been delivered via hubs coming together. I wonder what discussion you have had with colleagues, or your officials may have had with colleagues, over the border in England and up in Scotland, about those arrangements and what Wales might usefully learn from them. And can you also tell us what role the regional consortia might have in delivering improvements in music education and access to music education in the future? I didn't hear any reference to the regional consortia at all in your statement, and I think it is important that we understand what their role might be in future arrangements. So, perhaps you can just share a little bit about your thoughts on that. Thank you.

Thank you, Darren, for the series of questions and your welcoming of the principle of setting up the endowment. The timing of this announcement is in no way meant to be disrespectful of the work of the committee. I understand that work came to a close on 4 February, but, with all due respect to the committee, we've already had a report that has recommended the establishment of this endowment. I don't need another report to tell me I need to establish the endowment; what we need to do is to get on with establishing the endowment, which is what I'm doing today. But, of course, I will be hugely interested to hear from the committee its recommendations and its findings, and Cabinet colleagues and I will reflect on that in how we take this agenda forward. But, as I’ve said, we've already had a recommendation that this needs to happen, which is why we are doing it.

With regard to GSCE music, it’s also interesting to note that there has been a drop in the number of students taking GCSE drama also, so there is undoubtedly an issue around children, for whatever reason, making different decisions about the subjects that they take. But you’re absolutely right—a balanced education is one that, yes, pays due regard to maths and English and science, but also one that, as a historian, I know myself pays attention to the humanities as well as creative endeavours. One of the things that we have done in relation to GCSE choices is that schools told me that the emphasis on the capped nine was making them narrow their curriculum and was actually making it more and more predictable to choose these subjects. As you know, we will not be using capped nine as the sole, high-stakes accountability measures in schools, thus allowing them to move away from that. So, that’s one of the practical things that we are trying to do to ensure that our curriculum doesn’t narrow in a way that makes it more difficult for children to take either GCSE music or GCSE drama, because I want our children to have the broadest range and the widest range of education experiences possible. Of course, that is the absolute philosophy behind our Donaldson curriculum reforms.

With regard to that, you’ll be aware, Darren, that I mentioned in my statement the role of the creative schools. So, we have a network of creative schools that are supporting us in the development of new approaches to creative education. They’re also then forming part of the area of learning experience groups that are looking at the frameworks for individual areas of learning experience for the curriculum, and as I mentioned in my statement, we have a multimillion pound fund in conjunction with the arts council to be able to use different ways, and creativity, to engage within the curriculum. So, for instance, literacy can be a particular issue for boys, and engaging young boys in literacy and writing can be a challenge. Through our work with the arts council, schools are being able to bring in lead practitioners, and in some schools they’ve employed a rap artist, and actually by the use of rap music, and writing music and lyrics of that kind, it has got young men thinking about writing as well as performing. That’s a way of engaging children in literacy in a way perhaps they wouldn’t.

So, we’re looking at creative learning in its broadest possible sense. I am very aware of what was said to the committee about the state of the music education that there is. I wouldn’t describe it as a crisis, but I would also recognise the evidence that was given by Karl Napieralla about the difficulties of unpicking a situation where we have seen lots and lots of money being delegated to schools and individual schools choosing how to use those resources in a way that meets their children’s needs. Last week, I was in Woodlands Community Primary School—that’s in Cwmbran, a deprived part of Cwmbran—where they used that resource to bring in professional musicians to the school to work with children. On that day, it happened to be samba that they were listening to and participating in, and enjoying it they were, too. The school has made that decision, unpicking that resource back out of the school. But I would expect schools and local authorities to work creatively together to address needs within their community.

I’ve also been greatly cheered by the use of the pupil deprivation grant. So, Cefn Hengoed Community School in Swansea uses their pupil deprivation grant to pay for membership of the local youth orchestra, because for some of those children, membership of the youth orchestra may be beyond them. So, they use some of that resource to ensure that their children get to be a part of the youth orchestra, as well as the local drama group. So, it’s a creative use of that money to ensure that those children get access to those activities that would not be available to them in any other way. But our expectation on local authorities is to work collaboratively to address these points.

We are to ensure leadership by the establishment of this fund, but, Darren, at some stage we live in a system that has local government, and local government have to take their responsibility seriously. If Welsh Government keeps doing things because local government doesn’t do it, it does beg the question: why have we got local government? It is quite clear they have a responsibility in this area, and as I said earlier, my officials are working with them to ensure that they’re taking forward the recommendations in the task and finish group.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. I welcome the announcement of the endowment fund for music that you’ve made today. I’m very supportive of any constructive ways that we can improve music tuition in schools and bring more children and young people into enjoying and loving and playing and taking part in music. I would like to ask you for some detail, though.

How long do you think that it will take before the fund is of a sufficient size to support the award of grants? Welsh Government is putting the seed money in, but how will you work to promote it among public and private organisations to encourage them to contribute to the fund? Extending the pupil deprivation grant is all very well and good, but a young person may not be entitled to free school meals and yet buying an instrument and paying for tuition may well be out of their parents’ grasp. How does the Cabinet Secretary propose to help such young people?

I note that the Cabinet Secretary boasts that £20 million is being spent on the Welsh Government’s creative learning though the arts plan. However, this plan seems to cover more than music. So, how much of that £20 million is being spent on music and actually going into music provision? What measures are you going to be introducing to ensure that funding intended to support music in schools is actually spent on music in schools?

Young people should be able to continue their music studies if they wish after school, particularly those young people who are musically gifted. How is the Welsh Government supporting music in the community so that people can continue with their music once they leave school? It’s great to teach young people the skills of how to play an instrument and to learn a love of music, but we don’t really want to kill it dead right at the end of school age. We want to be able to encourage people to continue that and to bring their music into the community. So, how are you going to be supporting music in the community so that people can continue with their music once they leave school?

The task and finish group made a number of recommendations around terms and conditions of service provision, cost of music provision, communication of local authority preferred delivery model, et cetera. How is the Cabinet Secretary addressing the problems and issues outlined in the report of the task and finish group?

And then, finally, I do totally support your objective to improve access to music in schools. This fund, hopefully, will go a way to support that. But, there really isn’t any substitute for qualified and passionate music tuition in schools themselves. Therefore, what measures are you going to be taking to encourage trainee teachers to study music education at teacher training level and to encourage musically gifted people into the teaching profession in the first place? Thank you.

Thank you, Michelle, for your questions. With regard to philanthropy—and I think it was Darren who raised this also, and it was remiss of me not to have addressed that—a great deal of work has been done, in conjunction with the arts council, looking at opportunities. We have to get better at philanthropy. There are many organisations that we can be looking to, and individuals, to support this work. We’ve got to get better as a nation. I hope that, by creating this opportunity, it will be an easy opportunity for people to do that. But the establishment of the steering group by the arts council will have people who are particularly qualified in this particular area to give advice about how we can make the most of these opportunities. I wouldn’t hold up my hand to be an expert in this area, and the whole point of having a steering group is that we can rely on people who do know how to do this to be part of that group to maximise the opportunities of the fund being successful. The quicker we can find them, the more quickly we can get money out of the door to support the work that you and I both want to see in our communities.

Creative learning through the arts, as you said, is a £20 million programme. We do not specify that that has to be spent on music. It is a general arts programme and it is very much led by the individual schools. So, for instance, the programme has a number of different themes. We’ve talked about lead practitioners going into schools. Again, that is a choice for the individual school, it’s not for me to dictate. It also has a go-and-see element to it. So, if people actually want to go and see a live production, whether that be drama, music or whether they want to take their children to an art gallery, there’s a go-and-see element to it. So, individual schools again, teachers, can identify what they feel will be of benefit to their pupils the most and apply to the arts council for a grant so people can actually go to physically see something and hopefully be inspired by that and take it back to the classroom.

Music in the community actually falls under the auspices of my colleague Ken Skates, but you’re absolutely right, we need to give children the confidence and a love of music so it’s not just something they do in school time, but actually it’s something that they do out of school. That’s why organisations like the ones that Llŷr described, South Powys Youth Music, which put on fantastic concerts, from the very youngest pupils right through to those just about to go off to university—. But also you see it happening in unexpected ways. Last week was the annual drama festival of Brecknock Federation of Young Farmers Clubs, at which, every night for a week—and this week it’s Radnor’s drama festival—every night, last week on a stage in Brecon and this week on a stage in Llandrindod, we will have young people singing, dancing, playing musical instruments and being very proud of that, and I think that’s one of the big challenges.

There will always be a cohort of children who are very passionate about their music and want to go on to the stage, but actually what do we do with slightly reticent teenagers who get to that age when they want to drop their music, where it’s not seen to be cool anymore? And I know, because I’ve got one in my own family. The frustration of getting to grade 5 flute and violin and, all of a sudden, ‘It’s not cool, I don’t want to be seen to be doing that anymore.’ So there’s a job of work to be done to really enthuse children and demonstrate, and that’s why the fund and music education needs to be music education in the round, not just about classical music, but actually addressing music in a way that is relevant for children and giving them the desire to be a part of it.

On teaching, you’re right, we do provide courses on PGCE, and you will know that we are reviewing all our incentives and the way in which we recruit to that course. I don’t have the figures for music in front of me, but I can tell you that applications for PGCE courses for this year are up on where they were last year—generally and in most subjects, and that’s encouraging.

Firstly, I suppose I should declare an interest in this topic, as a musician. I was born on a council estate and accessed the world of professional music via state provision and its exemplary county and national youth orchestras. I was a recipient of a thriving music support service that provided access to instrumental tuition, not just to me as a clarinettist, but to members of my family who went on to play for renowned world-class orchestras. And I became a music teacher and visiting lecturer, and I’m still indebted for those opportunities; I would not otherwise have had them. I place a great value personally on those institutions, organisations and tuition structures—the engines that gave me the skills as a working-class child that I needed to succeed in my chosen career path.

I wish to pay tribute also to the hard work of the task and finish group members on the music services and youth arts review bodies. I wish to welcome very much the potential for the co-operative approach that was mooted earlier, and I also welcome the innovative reforms and initiatives that this Labour Government has introduced to strengthen the arts in Wales: constructive and ambitious reforms, such as Donaldson’s creative ‘Successful Futures’ curriculum, which has been mentioned, to enrich classroom and individual access to the arts curriculum; the pioneer creative schools and pathways co-ordinators and the lead practitioners; the ambitious artists in schools projects; the co-constructed funding initiatives, such as the ‘Creative Learning through the Arts’ action plan, which is collaboratively groundbreaking, and is a far-reaching collaboration between Welsh Government and the Wales arts council and, as has been stated, to the tune of £20 million to broaden arts access; and also the considerable increases to the pupil deprivation grant for our most vulnerable and early years pupils, who are better able to access opportunity through an enriched arts-based curriculum. So, as such, I want to thank the Cabinet Secretary for Education and the Cabinet Secretary for economy, infrastructure and skills for their collaboration around this important matter.

I, indeed, welcome the announcement today of the music fund for Wales. It is, indeed, a unique and innovative provision, and it’s a resource for Wales in a time of great austerity, passported to Wales from unprecedented cuts to the Welsh block grant and subsequent difficult times for local government. It is right that we retain, sustain and grow our nation as the land of song and that we are ambitious about our place in the global arts world and as a land of culture, and as a creative, industrial, economic powerhouse.

Further to my cross-party statement of opinion, which is OPIN-2016-0026, which was cross-party signed, I wish to ask the Cabinet Secretary if she would agree with me and other esteemed arts organisations and Welsh musicians that this welcomed music endowment fund is, firstly, well placed to broaden access of opportunity to all, and, secondly, is a welcome spoke in the wheel to the development of a national music performance strategy, a national music performance plan for Wales, and a subsequent core offer. Thank you.

Presiding Officer, could I thank Rhianon Passmore for her comments and questions and for constantly badgering me on this subject since she was elected to this place? I’m always in awe of people who have talent in this area. I declare that I have none whatsoever. So, people like Rhianon who can play the clarinet maybe could get together with Bethan and her viola and Mick here and his mandolin and his tin whistle—he can do the tin whistle too. And the Presiding Officer, I think, from time to time, sings. So, perhaps we could use the opportunity to highlight the talents that we have here and perhaps we could have a fundraising concert made up of contributions from Assembly Members, the proceeds of which could go into the endowment, because we obviously have very talented people in the Chamber.

Rhianon, I want children to have the experiences and the opportunities that you had and that is proving more and more difficult. But that’s why we encourage schools to use their PDG for those children from a more deprived background, creatively, to make sure that they have their instrumental opportunities that perhaps their better-off counterparts would enjoy, because we don’t want people’s talents to be stifled by a lack of opportunity in this way. You’re quite right: this is only a spoke in the wheel. This is not the answer. This programme and the resources that hopefully will come from the endowment are there to enhance, rather than replace, what should be happening. It cannot be the silver bullet, but it is a way of ensuring that more can be done for children and young people than has previously been able to be done and I thank you for your support and your commitment to this agenda.

I’m just responding as Chair of the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee in the context—as mentioned by Darren Miller earlier—of the inquiry we’re conducting into music in education, not because we as AMs wanted to do it, but because the public, through an opinion poll that we set up, decided for us that we should look at this issue because, despite the many task and finish groups, many of the decisions have been delayed and many of the actions on these issues have not come to fruition. I will say that we welcome this investment, but I think, as has been mentioned earlier, you cannot look at this endowment fund in isolation as a solution to local authority-run services. I think that’s where, potentially, we needed to have seen a more holistic statement here today. Not taking away from the fact that this is necessary, but, minded of the evidence that we’re receiving in committee at the moment, I think this is a concern of mine at the moment because those in the sector have already told me today, and these are their words, not mine, that this is ‘a drop in the ocean’ and to have parity with England in terms of pupil offer that this fund should be between £4 million and £5 million in Wales. Scotland has a £10 million fund already and that is in addition to their general music services. It is good to have a national endowment plan, but while areas across Wales are losing music tutors and peripatetic support as we speak, on the ground, would you not agree that it is not a viable solution to have instruments without looking at the wider picture and the haemorrhaging of music tutors locally?

I’d also like to understand who will get the funding. There’s no detail, from what I can understand, as to whether they will be pupils from more deprived areas or will it be for everybody in general to apply for this fund. I’d like to get some idea as to how much from this £1 million will be set-up costs and how much of it will actually be able to go into the actual acquisition of new instruments. What funds are going to be put in to bridge the funding gap between local activity and the national ensembles? You may find that people won’t be applying for this fund as young people will not be coming through the system in the first place. Will you be looking to set up a central protected funding mechanism for the delivery of music in education nationally?

Can you tell me if, and how, the fund will support the national ensembles? The Welsh Government’s task and finish group, which has been mentioned many times here today, suggested that National Youth Arts Wales should be a key beneficiary of any endowment fund and its interim board is in the process of setting up its work plan as we speak. So, can you tell me what conversations you have had with them about this particular new endowment plan? You mentioned setting up a steering group via the arts council on this. Can you just let me understand a bit more about why the new youth arts body could not have done this work, as opposed to setting up something via the arts council?

The BBC article on this issue suggested that the fund should start making payments in 2020. Will there be any support in the meanwhile? As I’ve mentioned previously, and I think it’s important to reiterate again, many of the services currently in operation simply will not be in operation in 2020, and I am told this by people on the ground, and, again, not by myself. There will be fewer pupils to access the endowment fund. How will this be targeted by yourself? The press release from Welsh Government said that the new fund is an invitation to private and corporate donors to join the Welsh Government in nurturing young musical talents. What evidence has there been that private and corporate donors will be willing to contribute to this particular areas of investment? Do you have names of businesses, for example, who are ready to step up to support music as opposed to, say, science, engineering, or other areas of interest for those businesses in Wales?

My final question is we have had evidence to our committee, and it’s on the record, that there simply is no link at the moment between creative learning through the arts plan—the £20 million that has been quoted quite a lot here today—and music and education. That’s from, again, people in the field. So, you say today that it’s going to complement that work. I really need to get an understanding as to how that will complement the work of the £20 million fund, considering that people are saying to me that it has nothing to do with the peripatetic delivery locally. I think that’s something that you should be mindful of when you’re potentially developing new policies.

I think, in the round, nobody—I don’t think anybody involved in music would go against the fact that this endowment plan is something that is positive, but it cannot, I believe, work in isolation to the issues of the fact that many schools—you know, many schools you’ve visited do good things, but there are many schools who are not investing in music at all, and they’re putting their money elsewhere. Tutors are having to leave music entirely to go and work in other professions because they simply cannot get that level of investment from individual schools. So, I would urge you to look at that, because some schools may be amazing but, if those schools down the road are doing nothing, how are we then going to be encouraging people to rise up the pyramid of musical development, so that they are then able to join the national youth choirs and orchestras that I and others in this Chamber have benefited so greatly from here in Wales?

Thank you very much, Bethan, for your comments and questions. You said at the outset that you didn’t want any more task and finish reports, reviews and updates—you wanted action. Well, this is an action. The task and finish group said that there should be an endowment fund, and I am announcing the establishment of that today. This is an example of how we are actually trying to move things forward in a positive way, rather than just simply writing another report.

Now, why the arts council? We feel that the arts council is best able to be in a position to have the expertise, the experience and the ability to bring in the right people that will set up the steering group. Who will get the money? That is not a matter for me to decide. It will be a matter for the board who will have responsibility for the fund to decide who gets funded under this, and that is absolutely appropriate that that should be the way. The task of Welsh Government in regard to this endowment is to get it started—to kick-start it, to give a signal that we think that this is important, and to provide the initial set-up costs and the initial seed funding to make this a reality. I would expect no more than £250,000 to be involved in the set-up costs and the establishment of the board, and the rest of the investment to go into the fund. I hope that we can start making payments as quickly as possible, but that depends on our success in being able to attract additional funds. And, again, advice from the arts council is—not that I have spoken directly to any potential funder—that there are people, individuals, organisations, who want to be able to contribute to this. I must say that there are already organisations who are contributing hugely to music in Wales—private foundations, individuals, and companies that are doing that.

Without the permission of the company involved I don’t want to name them here today, but I am aware of a company that is providing funds to the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama that substantially—substantially—reduces the tuition fees for children to be able to attend the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama’s musical instrument lessons on a Saturday, and provides the funding for outreach in west Wales, so that those children who find themselves living in Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, who cannot travel to Cardiff to access the expert tuition, are being funded by a private company. I won’t name them, because I don’t have permission to do so, but I have written to them personally to thank them for what they are doing as an individual company to support music education in our nation. And they’re doing it without fanfare and without a fuss—they’re doing it because they believe it is the right thing to do for those children, and I am grateful to that company.

If they are willing for me to pass it on, and you would like some evidence of that, I’m more than happy. I appreciate that your committee’s work has now closed, but I’m sure it’s not too late to be able to let you know, and I would urge you to speak to the Royal Welsh Collage of Music and Drama. The vast majority of children who access their provision on a Saturday, where it’s music, and drama on a Sunday, are on highly subsidised fees where people are making a contribution for those children—children that they will never meet, children that they will never know, but they’re willing to do that.

Do I wish I could do more, Bethan? Absolutely. But if you tell me you want a fund of £4 million or £5 million, you have to show me in my budget where you’re prepared to cut. Because to put more money into this requires me to not fund something else, and, if you would like to tell me what you want to disinvest from, then I will be happy to do this. Perhaps you could have a discussion with your colleagues for when they negotiate the next budget—maybe this would be one of their priorities, because I’m not aware that it was raised in the budget negotiations this year.

I’m slightly less—[Interruption.] I’m slightly less pessimistic than Bethan has been, because I can name individuals who are patrons of the arts: former collier David Brace and his wife Dawn Brace, who put £20,000 a year of their own money—Dunraven Windows is their company, the double glazing, but they fund the entirety of the Bridgend young singer of the year, which is a Wales-wide competition that competes with the best in talent and prize money that we see across here in the millennium arts centre, and it’s on in a fortnight if you want to come along.

But I would say to the Cabinet Secretary, be ambitious, because, if you look at the funding of the Welsh National Opera, which regularly has to go to major fundraising events in London as well as here—. And it’s the quality of the way that they go at it, the people they have involved in the fundraising. I have no doubt that there are significant individuals, patrons, benefactors, and organisations in Wales that will want to get involved in this, if it is done well. But my question, bearing in mind that next week is the fifty-second anniversary of Jennie Lee’s White Paper—the famous White Paper on the arts under the 1964 Harold Wilson Government, this idea of music and the arts for all, in its wide diversity, the elite art, yes, absolutely, but also the art that anybody would want to enjoy, from the ukulele band in the men’s shed down in Tondu, to the children’s choir in Maesteg, to the very high quality orchestras that perform in my schools from Pencoed, Archbishop McGrath, Y Dderwen, Maesteg and so on, which rely upon the dedication of teachers and peripatetic teachers as well, the Ogmore Valley Silver Band and more—my question to the Cabinet Secretary would be: in making this a success in the years to come, will all of these potentially be able to benefit from it so that we do actually do—? We have to fight this battle year after year, generation after generation, but the idea that music is for everybody, the arts are for everybody, it should not just be one type, one institution, one type of school, one type of organisation, it should be for everybody—will all of those people who put so much effort now into creating music, and giving those opportunities, as Jennie Lee said, not just for young people, but that arts should occupy a central place in British life, and Welsh life, as we would say, and be a part of everyday life for children and for adults, that we can realise that for all of music in all of its diversity in all my communities—?

Thank you, Huw, for the comments and the questions. You are absolutely right. We have to start from the basis that the arts, and culture in its broadest sense, are for everyone. To deny people access to their cultural and their musical heritage and, innately, what lies within them, is to deprive them of something very important and very special indeed. You’re also right to point out that, despite the very challenging times that face school music—and I in no way want to underestimate the challenges that face music services in our schools—there are amazing things going on in schools and in communities the length and breadth of Wales, and that is down to the enthusiasm and dedication of volunteers, teachers, and tutors, who want to share their passion with young people.

I’m not in a position to say, at this point, who will be the beneficiary of the interest arising out of the endowment. That is a job for the steering group and the board that will eventually run this. The other important principle around the arts is that Government should be removed from it, in that sense. It should not be for Governments to be able to commission and say, ‘That gets funded’ or ‘That gets funded’ or ‘That gets funded’, because that way danger lies in being able to twist. Some of the greatest artistic challenge to politicians comes from that particular sector, so there’s an arm’s-length principle to be preserved here, and it’ll be up to the board of the endowment that will make decisions on what is funded, not politicians.

Finally, Suzy Davies.

Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd. Can I just thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement as well? Any money going towards the arts is not going to find complaint with me, but I think there are some important questions that still need answering, despite your answers to various individuals who’ve asked them today.

I completely take your point that the decisions about how this money should be spent are matters for the arts council. However, the arts council is going to need some kind of steer from Welsh Government about what this endowment fund actually really is for. I’ve read your statement and listened to what you’ve said. You say that music is an enrichment activity. Who’s going to disagree with that? You talk about complementing, supporting, enhancing, but what is the Welsh arts council going to think you mean by ‘complementing, supporting and enhancing’? I’m really just trying to get a sense of what it is you expect this fund to provide at the very—. What is it genuinely for?

The reason I ask that is, if you can’t give us an answer about where you think this might take music, we’ve no idea whether £1 million is going to be enough. We’ve no idea what your offer to the public and private funders that you’re hoping to contribute to this might be. There may be, actually, a better way to spend this £1 million if we’re not 100 per cent sure what it is you expect from it. Nevertheless, maybe you can tell me that there’s been some steer from the committee that recommended that we have an endowment fund, because I certainly don’t say we shouldn’t have one; I just need to be clear that this is the best way of reaching an aim that, to me, is not particularly specific at the moment.

Secondly, music services are already looking down the barrel of a dirty great hole in funding after the £300,000 to whatever the NYAW is going to look like at the end of this year. If we’re looking to philanthropists and public bodies to help support the endowment, and I certainly hope they do—Huw Irranca-Davies made a very good case for why they would—are we going to be diverting sources of support from the core music services that we’re trying to keep going here in Wales at the moment? There may well be enough money out there for both the endowment and supplying money to core services, but the evidence we’ve taken in the committee so far—and I know that the First Minister is not keen on us referring to evidence, but, actually, I’m an Assembly Member and I’m going to use our evidence. They’re not confident that they’re going to be getting this money for core work in the years to come, so I’m wondering if—you’ve already heard our concerns about the Arts and Business work and what they do. So, I think there is a genuine question about whether we’re asking perhaps a bit too much of philanthropy here.

Then, just finally, I certainly think you have, in your statement, made connections to the aims of the national curriculum, and that kind of made sense to me, but I’m wondering whether you can explain whether there’s any possibility that this endowment will be accessible to anyone beyond school age. Is this strictly for supporting school-age music services or are adults going to be able to—when you’re putting your remit letter to the arts council, will you be saying this money should be made available to adults to continue to develop their elitism, if you like, to become the best they can, to make it about standards and range, as well as access to all? Thank you.

If I could just make it clear about the practicalities. So, the Arts Council of Wales will be establishing a steering group to guide the set-up of the endowment for Wales. The arts council will be able to draw upon its unique position as a Wales-wide arts, culture and heritage charity to identify members who are best placed to contribute from their respective sectors. Their job will be to create an independent board, which will eventually manage the running of the endowment once it is established. That board and the team supporting it will make the decisions regarding donations, beneficiaries and the awarding of grants. It is to that board that we will make our initial contribution. As I’ve said from the very beginning, in answer to Llŷr Gruffydd, it is not the intention of the Government to add any more. It is the intention of the Government to create the opportunity for the endowment to exist and to signal to people that there is an opportunity to contribute in this way.

There have been a great deal of discussions since the recommendation of the task and finish group with the arts council and those involved in this sector who believe that this vehicle will be an attractive vehicle for organisations in the private sector—that they will want to contribute to it. I’m mindful of the fact that that might mean diversion, and we will have to be aware of that and mindful of that as we go forward.

It is the primary intention of the fund to support young people in particular. It will be my intention that both the bottom and the top end of the music education pyramid that Bethan referred to would benefit from the endowment. So, I want the endowment to ensure that, at every stage, no young person is deterred from progressing due to an inability to afford to do that. So, that would be my main focus of the work of the endowment.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

We move on to the next item on our agenda, which is the Education Workforce Council (Accreditation of Initial Teacher Training) (Additional Functions) (Wales) Order 2017. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to move the motion—Kirsty Williams.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. If I may take just a brief opportunity to outline that the Order sets out the functions that the Education Workforce Council will undertake in relation to the accreditation of initial teacher education programmes in Wales through the accreditation of the initial schoolteacher training committee, the remit for which will be set out in regulations that will be laid before the National Assembly subject to the approval of this Order today.

The timing of this transfer of functions to the council will be aligned to the implementation plans for the new curriculum over the next three to five years. The arrangements for accrediting initial teacher training provision, however, will need to be in place by no later than the autumn of 2017 to ensure that all new courses of ITT delivered from September 2019 are accredited against reconceptualised accreditation criteria.

In 2015, the teacher education accreditation group, chaired by Professor Furlong, was tasked with developing the reconceptualised criteria for accrediting ITT programmes in Wales. The aim of the new criteria is to improve the quality and consistency of provision and introduce a new approach to ITT in our nation.

Central to the vision underpinning the new criteria for initial teacher training is the recognition that high-quality professional training and education necessarily involves a number of different modes of learning. Some dimensions of teaching can only be learned experientially while other forms of learning are intellectually based. However, the largest part of all teacher training and education should be based on learning that is both rigorously practical and intellectually challenging.

I want to encourage a partnership approach in the design of future ITT programmes, with higher education institutions working in close collaboration with a number of lead partnership schools. If truly collaborative teacher training and education is to be achieved, then HEIs working with partner schools must take joint responsibility for the contribution to the programme.

Also, Presiding Officer, I am pleased to announce a rare opportunity by which the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development—the OECD—has offered their services as renowned leaders in education to work with our ITT partners through the development of a theory-based approach to ITT in Wales. This will be achieved via an international workshop to be held in the spring, during which an ITT framework will be designed, aimed at building capacity and a truly unique set of Welsh initial teacher education programmes.

Finally, Members will note that the council will be able to charge a fee in connection with providing the accreditation service, which will be subject to a separate consultation undertaken by them. I would expect a fee structure to be in place by 1 September 2018.

I call on the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee—Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Lywydd. I welcome the opportunity to speak very briefly on this Order—on a small point, but I think it is an important point—on behalf of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee. Our report to the Assembly identified one point of interest—it was a point of merit—related to the dependence of this Order on a set of regulations yet to be laid by the Welsh Ministers and yet to be scrutinised by our committee. So, in essence, the criteria for the accreditation of the initial teacher training, as described now by the Cabinet Secretary, which are referred to in articles 2 and 3 of the Order, will now be included in separate regulations if the Order is approved today. Now, while the Welsh Government acknowledges the need for these regulations in its explanatory memorandum, and as laid out today, it is, nevertheless, important to draw this dependency to the attention of the Assembly. We have had confirmation from the Welsh Government that these regulations are very close to being laid. Nevertheless, it would be helpful if the Minister today could simply explain why the two instruments couldn’t be laid together and considered as a package. As a final point, we acknowledge that this kind of scenario can occur occasionally. It is not unique. But, we wish to place on record our intention to monitor these situations quite closely and to report accordingly in the interests of good, efficient and transparent law making.

Plaid Cymru won’t be opposing these regulations—[Interruption.] We won’t be opposing these regulations, just for clarity, today, but I think it is important maybe that we do reflect on some of the concerns that have been raised, primarily by teaching unions but also by others in this sector, about the configuration of the Education Workforce Council. Now, clearly, it is currently made up of people appointed by Ministers, whereas we know of other models where the sector elects its membership. There is reference in one piece of correspondence that I’ve received to the Scottish GTC, where I think around 19 members of the board there are elected. Now, as the responsibilities and the remit of the Education Workforce Council are extended, as they are now, of course, through these regulations, ensuring that it does reflect the sector it presides over becomes even more important in relation to its ability to do its job, but also in relation to having the confidence of the sector as well. So, I just wanted to ask the Cabinet Secretary whether she was open-minded to that kind of development, and, if she was, at what stage she thought we should be looking again at that, so that we can make sure that some of the views presented to us as Members in relation to these regulations are actually ones that we consider and take on board.

Can I put on record that we will also be supporting these regulations, notwithstanding the reservations of the legislative affairs committee in terms of the further regulations that are yet to be published for scrutiny? One thing, however, that I am a little concerned about is that, obviously, within the remit of the EWC are also responsibilities for FE lecturers, for example. I just wonder why regulations around PGCEs and initial training for further education lecturers aren’t being laid today. In addition to that, Cabinet Secretary, this Education Workforce Council also now has responsibility for youth workers and a whole host of other professionals. I think it is very important that the responsibilities of the Education Workforce Council are expanded to allow them to actually set the professional standards, in the same way that similar organisations are able to elsewhere around the UK and, indeed, around the world. Why is it that the Welsh Government feels that it is the responsible organisation to set those professional standards, rather than the body that people will have to register with? I wonder whether you could tell us where you are up to in terms of setting new professional standards for the teaching workforce, for FE lecturers and for youth workers, now that that is also within their remit. Everybody is looking to you, as a Welsh Government, to ensure that these things move at pace. I have to say, I think that had these responsibilities been with the Education Workforce Council, they would have been published a long time ago.

I noted with interest your announcement during your opening remarks about the OECD and the work that they're going to be doing to try to enhance initial teacher training here in Wales. I'm very pleased to hear that they are involved and, hopefully, it will add some value to what’s already taking place. Can you tell us when you expect to receive some sort of outcome from the workshop? I think it was just a workshop that you announced. Is there going to be anything else on top of that? Is this going to be some continuous work with the OECD, or is it just that simple workshop from which you are hoping to glean something? Thank you.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Could I say I'm very pleased to hear that Plaid Cymru and the Conservative Party will be supporting the Order today? That is in line with the vast majority of the responses that the Government received in relation to its consultation. Over 80 per cent of the respondents to the consultation believe that it is the EWC that should accredit teacher training as we move forward in our initial teacher training reforms.

If I turn to the point raised by the Chair of the CLAC committee, just to reassure him that my officials did place a copy of the accreditation criteria in the Members’ library for their consideration. In addition, paragraph 1.1 of the explanatory memorandum made clear that the regulations would follow, subject to the Order we are debating today receiving the approval of the Assembly, and, as you have heard from officials, that is imminent. This approach was taken in order to ensure that we were not presuming the will of the National Assembly by pre-empting any decision to grant the council the functions of accrediting the programme of study of initial schoolteacher training. In addition, if the Assembly determined in a vote that the council should not have had the powers set out in this Order, the regulations setting out the requirements of the council to establish the accreditation of the initial schoolteacher training committee would have been superfluous. It's a question of timing, and we expect full scrutiny of the regulations that will come to pass.

At present, I have no intention of changing the way in which the EWC is currently constituted, but, as you know, Llyr, the role and responsibilities of the EWC are developing. It's a new institution and we are constantly looking to see what the future will hold. So, as things develop, there may be opportunities to look at whether the body is constituted in a way that is fully reflective of all its roles and responsibilities. To be clear, this Order would require the EWC to set up a teacher training committee underneath those, and I would expect that to have a broad range of representatives who can really add value, and to ensure that the accreditation process is robust, and I would expect a wide membership of that.

Can I assure Darren Millar that the professional standards for both teachers and school leaders will be published later on in the spring? I can assure you that they have been done in full collaboration with the teaching profession itself—not with the EWC, but actually with teachers. They're currently being trialled in some schools at the moment to receive feedback, and we're making progress in that regard. I'll give way.

I'm very grateful for you giving way, Cabinet Secretary, and very grateful for the clarification in terms of the timetable for the publication of those. But do you accept that it is very unusual for an organisation like the EWC not to have responsibility for developing those standards, and that it is unusual that it sits with the Welsh Government? Why is it? What's the argument for retaining those responsibilities with the Welsh Government, rather than giving them to the EWC, as the proper body, to develop these things?

Well, Darren, I believe that we are well placed to be able to work with the profession to establish a set of professional standards. I don't think that they have been produced as quickly as perhaps they should have been. It was a commitment within the Furlong report to look at these issues, and part of previous announcements, but we’re making quick progress now, and, as I said, we have developed them in close collaboration with the profession itself. They've been road tested in schools and refined as a consequence of that, and they will be published in the spring.

Presiding Officer, I’m grateful for Members’ support for the principles that are contained within the Order.

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

The next item on our agenda is the legislative consent motion on the Higher Education and Research Bill, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to move the motion—Kirsty Williams.

Thank you again, Presiding Officer, for the opportunity to speak to this legislative consent motion. I would also like to thank members of the Children, Young People and Education Committee for their scrutiny of the initial and supplementary memorandum. Additionally, I would like to record my appreciation of the engagement by Universities Wales, NUS Wales and the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales with this matter.

The UK Government introduced the Higher Education and Research Bill to the House of Commons on 19 May 2016. The Bill subsequently transferred to the House of Lords where it passed its Second Reading on 6 December, before proceeding to Committee Stage, where it was subject to significant debate. Higher education is a devolved matter. However, legislative change proposed by the UK Government in this area inevitably has implications for Wales. In seeking provision in this Bill, my priority is to ensure that students and institutions in Wales are not disadvantaged. I consider that limited provision should be made for Wales in relation to the matters set out in the two memoranda for which consent of the Assembly is required.

I’m pleased to note that the scrutiny committee did not raise any objections to the agreement of the motion and has no concerns with the approach being taken. The committee reported that a number of concerns were raised in consultation responses. Nevertheless, the committee concluded that the consultation did not raise any matter that impacts on whether the policies contained in the relevant provisions should be extended to Wales.

I should like to respond to the two topics of concern, namely the teaching excellence framework, or TEF, as it has become known, and the interaction with tuition fees in Wales. I not only recognise but I also share some of the concerns with regard to the TEF proposals. They are not the criteria that this Welsh Government would put forward as, to be frank, we do not share the same marketisation agenda that they have across the border. However, we have to deal with the realities that we face.

The Welsh Government is committed to the local, national and international success of our higher education institutions, and we do not therefore want Welsh institutions to be at a disadvantage in comparison to those in the rest of the UK. The provision being sought in the Bill is enabling, and will give Welsh Ministers the power to provide or withdraw consent for Welsh institutions to participate in the TEF in the future. But let me be absolutely clear: tuition fees will not be linked to TEF ratings in Wales, and I have made it clear to the UK Government that I don’t want to see the ability to recruit international students linked to TEF either.

The Welsh Government will continue to set tuition fee levels to its own criteria, taking account of financial stability, how we maintain our international competitiveness, and the impact on students. I believe that the proposals will enable us to keep our distinct approach to higher education while ensuring that institutions in Wales, the students who study at them and the Welsh Ministers’ ability to deal with the implications of the UK Government’s reforms are not adversely impacted. I therefore, Presiding Officer, ask Assembly Members to support the legislative consent motion.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her opening remarks, much of which I would agree with, particularly from the point of view of the TEF? I welcome that clear message about your direction of travel on that issue. Indeed, there is much in the LCM that, certainly, I wouldn’t oppose. But there is an increasingly important question arising for me in terms of the possible impact for research in Wales, as a result of the proposed Bill in Westminster. We know how important funding sources from the research councils are for education institutions in Wales. We know about the BBSRC, which significantly funds our IBERS, we know of NERC in Bangor, and there are other examples across Wales. In this interim period, I’ve become more and more aware that any developments that could put those funding sources at risk are ones that we as an Assembly should guard against.

We must pose the question, in looking at the Bill: where will Wales’s voice be in this proposed UKRI? There is no certainty at all that Wales will have any considerable input into that body. Indeed, if we look at one of the amendments that was passed to the Bill in Westminster, it mentions that Westminster Ministers should consider whether it would be desirable for one of the devolved nations to have representation. That is, ‘have regard to the desirability of’—that was the wording used. Well, surely we should insist that each of the devolved nations should have a voice on UKRI? Indeed, the Bill states that there has to be a student representative in some of those contexts, so why not give the same status to the Welsh voice in this process?

Plaid Cymru, like many others to be fair, has consistently over the years highlighted the fact that Wales is underfunded in terms of research. There is a risk now, I think, that that unacceptable situation could get even worse.

The Bill provides powers to Welsh Ministers to provide support for research, including grants and so on. And I would just ask myself: what’s the intention here then? Because at the moment, the Welsh Government does fund, through HEFCW, much of this research, or at least it’s part of the dual support mechanism, this core funding that provides the infrastructure for universities to compete for much of the funding from the research councils and others.

That mechanism is one that provides a great flexibility for the HE sector when it comes to research. Indeed, Sir Ian Diamond highlighted much of this in the work that he undertook most recently. But there is a risk now that we could see a situation where Ministers in Westminster would say, ‘Well, if you’re not happy, then Welsh Ministers can directly fund research.’ That is a risk I think that we shouldn’t leave ourselves open to. So, I do feel that there should be an element of ring-fencing here. I’m sure that many would agree with that from the point of view of research in Wales. But, certainly, I do think that Wales should have a stronger voice than what’s currently proposed in the Bill. You referred to evidence from other organisations as part of this process. Universities Wales is one body that’s expressed concerns about this. HEFCW too has expressed concern about where this could lead.

So, there’s a great deal, as I said, that I wouldn’t oppose, but unfortunately we can’t amend or propose amendments to an LCM in any way. So, we, as a party, will be voting against the LCM this afternoon.

I rise to support and endorse what Llyr Gruffydd has just said. I have been increasingly concerned over the past few weeks about the work of this UKRI. I have asked several questions, but unfortunately I haven’t reached the list for oral questions yet. But I did receive a written answer to the question that I had hoped to ask the First Minister today. The response says that the Government and Kirsty Williams as Cabinet Secretary have met with the chief scientific adviser and the responsible Minister in the UK Government to make an application for Wales to be fully represented on the UKRI. I take it that that has taken place. Of course, the LCM before us today does state clearly—or the context states, as Llyr has said—that Wales is not fully represented on that board. So, the Government has asked this—this is the Government’s policy—and having failed to achieve that, it comes to the Assembly to ask it to approve a policy that it hasn’t succeeded in achieving. That’s not good enough in this context as there are genuine risks for Wales, our research councils and for funding in our universities with the establishment of UKRI.

What’s happening is this: all of the research councils are gathered together in one body. Research funding from HEFCE, the council in England, is placed in that pot too, and also innovation funding from the UK Government with regard to England. So, rather than having research councils that look across the United Kingdom—and there are problems with those anyway, as Llyr pointed out—you have a new body that is dominated by the interests of the university sector in England, and it is also under the increased influence of Ministers in England as well, without any direct representation by Wales on that body. The response that I received from the First Minister today goes on to say further that it’s only very recently that we started discussions with the universities with regard to the relationship with his body. Well, again, that’s not good enough. We don’t understand how this body is going to work, the effect it’s going to have on research funding in Wales, and, for those reasons alone, we will oppose this LCM today.

To conclude, may I give one specific example? I’m aware of the work that is happening in IBERS in Aberystwyth, because I live in Aberystwyth and represent the region, but, for many years now, IBERS has been in strategic contact with the BBSRC, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, for expenditure worth £4.5 million a year in Aberystwyth, on a strategic basis, to support IBERS’s work. If it should happen that there’s a change in the priority of the research councils, because there is a restriction on the funding available and because there is a change of priorities because Ministers in the UK intervene in those priorities, then we will be losing significant funding for Aberystwyth. I’m not content to see that happening without there being certainty that there is an allocation and ring-fencing of the research funding that we already have. That’s not part of the agreement that lies behind this LCM, nor is there certainty that there will be representation from Wales on the board that makes these decisions. And, of course, as we deal with Brexit, the exit from the European Union, the work that is done in IBERS to look at pasture and to look at the kind of agriculture that is important in Wales—it’s important in the international context, but not in the UK context—then I’m concerned that it will receive less priority in that context. So, I know that the Cabinet Secretary has been forewarned of the concerns that a number of us have who represent Ceredigion and Aberystwyth about these specific problems. We want certainty and assurance that the research funding will continue, and we want certainty that there will be representation on this body; without that certainty, we can’t support the LCM today.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to reply to the debate. Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I regret that Plaid Cymru do not feel in a position to support this LCM today, because, actually, what we’re trying to do is secure important safeguards for Welsh higher education institutions in being able to accrue these powers for Welsh Ministers with regard to the future of TEF as well as our ability to be able to continue to provide student support in a way that will be necessary and we need to move forward on because of the changes across the border in England, and to actually make some progress as well on alternative student finance, where we know from evidence there are certain members of our community who are put off from applying for student loans because of the nature of the student loans system that we have at the moment. We have a certain group of students who don’t avail themselves of that support, and I believe that to be discriminatory—that we’re not allowing all Welsh citizens to be able to apply for student support systems, to be able to do that, and this is the most timely and effective way of being able to address what I believe to be the discriminatory system that we have at the moment.

With regard to the operation of the UKRI, the Minister for Skills and Science and I met with Jo Johnson, the Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation in England with regard to the new research funding architecture, and I’ve had a number of bilateral meetings with my counterparts in Scotland and a quadrilateral meeting, where all four administrations were represented, to talk about this. Whilst it is welcome that there has been an amendment at the Commons Report Stage that says that there is to be due regard, I do not believe that it goes far enough. I do believe that there should be full Welsh representation on the UKRI. I share the Member’s concerns about the consequences that this may mean for the flow of research funding and we continue to try and push that case. With regard to joint working with HEFCW, I can assure the Member that the Bill allows the relevant authorities to work together if it appears to them to be more effective or if it would allow the authorities to exercise their functions more effectively. So, the effect will allow HEFCW to work jointly with UKRI, insofar as its Research England functions are concerned, and will also allow HEFCW to work jointly with the Office for Students, the Scottish Funding Council and the relevant Northern Ireland departments. This does not alter the scope of the existing arrangements for joint working with the Scottish Funding Council. I regret that Plaid Cymru have decided not to support the LCM, but I think it is, on balance, an important step forward, Presiding Officer.

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

The next item is the debate on tidal lagoons and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs to move the motion. Lesley Griffiths.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I very much welcome the opportunity for us to debate the potential for tidal lagoons in the UK following the recent publication of the Hendry report. Whilst we support the principle of tidal lagoons in Wales, we are very mindful, of course, to the key considerations and approvals that must be given to any proposed project, including full environmental considerations through the marine licensing process and also obtaining a lease from the Crown Estate. Therefore, Members, I’m sure, will understand that I am limited in what I can say about particular projects or proposals, including the proposed tidal lagoon for Swansea bay, given my statutory role under the marine licensing regime and other statutory processes.

As indicated by the First Minister during his questions on 31 January, we welcome the recently published Hendry report, which supports the case for developing a tidal lagoon energy industry in the UK, and the specific recognition it gives to the Welsh projects already under development around the Welsh coast. Together with the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, who will be closing this debate, I had a positive meeting on 25 January with Charles Hendry, in which we discussed the findings of his report, including issues such as financing structure, the proposal for a pathfinder project, the links with other energy developments and decommissioning.

On 6 December I outlined my priorities in relation to energy, one of which is to drive the low-carbon energy transition to deliver maximum benefits for Wales. Tidal lagoons provide a clear opportunity to contribute towards this goal. Wales is well placed to take advantage of tidal energy opportunities, with a high tidal range and much of our 1,200 km of coastline potentially suitable to support tidal energy developments. This means we can grow a vibrant Welsh industry that delivers prosperity while supporting our decarbonisation objectives. We are taking a cross-Government approach to the opportunities offered by tidal lagoons, such as supply chains, skills infrastructure and statutory requirements. We are already developing our skills base and providing practical and financial support for energy opportunities that accelerate the low-carbon transition in these areas.

I will be consulting on a draft national marine plan for Wales this summer. The plan will highlight the strategic significance of our tidal resources and provide an integrated framework for the sustainable development of our seas. This approach enables us to ensure projects around the UK can bring maximum economic benefit to Wales through the development of expertise and supply chains to give us a firm foundation on which to engage with industry and the UK Government.

The UK Government, which is now considering the report findings, needs to fully engage with us in its development of tidal lagoon policy and implementation. Indeed, we have developed an extensive knowledge base to support the industry, which is recognised by Hendry in his report. I hope the publication of the Hendry report will provide the UK Government with sufficient assurance to provide the support this industry requires. We look forward to discussing how the UK Government intends to take the report forward. Officials are working across Government to consider the report’s recommendations and I will provide Members with a further update once I know the direction the UK Government intends to take.

So, to conclude, we have consistently stated our commitment in principle to supporting the development of a sustainable tidal lagoon industry in Wales. We’ve highlighted our support to industries in Wales, and how Wales is ideal for such developments, provided benefits from the developments are retained within Wales. This commitment is set out in our programme for government, ‘Taking Wales Forward’, and I now very much look forward to hearing the views of other Members on the principle of tidal lagoons and the motion under debate today.

I’m very pleased that the Assembly has come together, hopefully, to express its support for the concept of tidal lagoon energy. I do fully understand why the Government is not in a position to give direct support to a single project, but I would like to place on record that Plaid Cymru is content to do so—and is in a different position, of course—and can state that we are in favour of the Swansea bay tidal lagoon as a pathfinder, as explained in the Hendry report.

Like some hundreds of local people, I have invested in the tidal lagoon and, to that end, I do have an interest in that as one the community shareholders. There are hundreds like me, and I very much hope that in due time the Government will also invest in the tidal lagoon, and we’ll turn to that a little later in the debate.

First of all, let’s see what the Hendry review stated. I haven’t read a review into difficult issues in Westminster that has been so clear in its conclusions for some years, I must say. It states very clearly that after years of debate, the evidence clearly demonstrates that tidal lagoons are cost-effective as part of the energy mix of the UK; it make that point very clearly. It also says clearly that the UK Government faces a strategic decision as much as an economic one, and it also states clearly that moving forward with the tidal lagoon in Swansea bay as the first one, as a pathfinder project, as it is described, is a policy that could not be regretted—it’s a no-brainer, in other words. And I think in that context we now want to see a positive response, possibly as soon as the budget in March, from the Westminster Government.

We see this as something that is a game changer for the energy industry in Wales, and prepares the way for the future in Wales. For the first time since the early days of wind energy, it gives Wales an opportunity to be in the vanguard in terms of new technology, and of course as the Cabinet Secretary’s just outlined, it gives us an opportunity to see similar developments across the Bristol channel and also in north Wales. But it’s also true to say that Hendry is looking at this project as something that could be used a template to see the impact on the environment and on fisheries, to see whether we can actually get the energy in the way that we would want, and whether it’s true that the turbines work effectively and efficiently in that context.

In that context, there is general support—there are questions, of course, but there is general support—which has been expressed by a number of environmental organisations from Friends of the Earth to the RSPB, who are all eager in this context, where we’re already burning fossil fuels along the Bristol channel, which pollute the environment, to see something more positive and cleaner being introduced. So, as a catalyst for the development of the rest of the sector, and to put Wales in the vanguard of this new technology, and also as something that will be in and of itself a huge boost to the Swansea bay area, I very much hope that the Assembly today will support the motion, and send a clear message to the Westminster Government to respond positively to the concept of a tidal lagoon.

It will create over 2,000 jobs during its construction, and will also generate over £300 million in GVA in the Swansea bay area. The Welsh Government, of course, have to respond to this challenge. They will need a skills strategy in order to ensure that we take full advantage of these opportunities. The company behind the lagoon have pledged that at least half of the funding will be spent in Wales, and that’s out of a capital spend of over £1.3 billion. And the tidal lagoon, once completed, will produce enough energy for 90 per cent of homes in the Swansea bay area for over a century. So for me, and for Plaid Cymru, this is something we should support.

Rwy'n meddwl bod yna un pwynt olaf yr hoffwn ei wneud, sef y gallai hwn fod yn gyfle enfawr i ni ddefnyddio fframwaith y DU er ein budd ni yma yng Nghymru. Mae dadansoddiad diweddar yr ydym wedi edrych arno ar y fframwaith rheoli ardollau, sydd ar hyn o bryd yn golygu bod Cymru yn elwa ychydig mwy na'n cyfran o’r boblogaeth oherwydd y ffaith bod gennym dariffau bwydo i mewn ac ynni adnewyddadwy ac yn y blaen, yn dangos y byddwn, o fewn 10 mlynedd, wedi lleihau ein cyfran o’r fframwaith rheoli ardollau hwnnw i lai nag 1 y cant o’r gwariant a ragwelir. Mae hynny oherwydd bod y fframwaith rheoli ardollau hefyd yn cynnwys tân glo, a bydd hwnnw wedi mynd erbyn 2025, ac wrth gwrs, nid oes gennym unrhyw ddatblygiadau mawr newydd o ran gwynt ar y tir yn dod yn weithredol yn y cyfamser. Felly, gallwn ddefnyddio hynny er mwyn i Gymru elwa.

Pe byddai, er enghraifft, Llywodraeth Cymru yn cymryd cyfran ecwiti o fewn y morlyn llanw ym mae Abertawe, byddem wedyn yn cael y ffi honno’n ôl o werthiant y trydan dros lawer o flynyddoedd, sy'n rhywbeth y mae Llywodraeth y DU yn cytuno ag ef ac yn ei gefnogi. Felly, unwaith eto, mae'n benderfyniad hawdd i gefnogi hyn o ran newid yn yr hinsawdd, o ran cynhyrchu ynni, o ran buddsoddi ym mae Abertawe, ond mae hefyd yn benderfyniad hawdd inni i gyd i fod yn rhan o hyn a bod yn rhan o ddyfodol ynni.

I’m delighted to speak in favour of this motion, which has been laid in the name of Paul Davies and others. I’m very pleased to see cross-party support. Can I commend the self-discipline of the Cabinet Secretary, who obviously has to protect the role that she will play in a statutory function when dealing with certain aspects of the regulations that are likely to be generated under this matter? But I think the rest of us are not so encumbered, and we can speak with great enthusiasm.

Certainly, the Welsh Conservative Party fully supports its £1.3 billion potential project. We submitted evidence to the Hendry review, we also took part in the meeting that Charles Hendry had here in the Assembly when politicians from across the Assembly were here, and I think we made a very powerful impression on him, just because of the strength of the consensus and the enthusiasm we have for this transformative project. It really does offer Wales the opportunity to be a world leader in energy again, and I think that sort of opportunity does not occur very, very often.

I’ll just turn to the Hendry review, which, like Simon—. Occasionally in life, you await a review, you know it’s important, and then it sort of reads as if you or your mother wrote it—it just has everything in it that you wish to hear—and that was pretty much how it turned out. I think the evidence was really quite overwhelming, and the message to the UK Government was very, very clear and not hedged at all, but it saw the ambition and described it. In terms of what the report emphasises, that here, the UK, with Wales in the lead, could be a world leader in this technology—we’ll be there like the Danes and the Germans were for wind technology in the 1960s—it could deliver a security of supply as obviously the tides, as long as the moon remains, are going to be there; deliver on our decarbonisation commitments in a very helpful way; and have substantial opportunities for the local supply chains. So, I think all those are really important factors—. I’ll give way to Darren Millar.

I’m very grateful to the Member for giving way. One of the other benefits, of course, that these sorts of schemes can deliver is a flood protection benefit. Of course, on the coast in north Wales there’s an opportunity to develop a tidal lagoon to protect Colwyn Bay, Conwy and parts of the coastline of Denbighshire. Do you agree with me that that sort of opportunity, because it’s going to deliver potential flood protection benefits, does mean that the Welsh Government could potentially get financially involved with delivering this project in order to make it happen?

Yes. I think the Member may have already seen Natural Resources Wales’s report, and it does emphasise the flood protection benefits that tidal lagoon projects could bring, and that’s going to be really, really important. The Hendry review observes that tidal lagoons can play a cost-effective part in the UK energy mix, and I think that was a real breakthrough, because there was some questioning about the cost-effectiveness of this technology—it’s a long-term one, but viewed in the long term, it is clearly seen to be cost-effective. The case for this as a pathfinder project is described in the review as ‘very strong’, and then likely to lead to cost-competitive larger lagoons in other areas, such as north Wales, but potentially also Cardiff and Newport, as well as in other sites around the UK. So, this is really, really important.

The thoroughness of the Hendry review goes into calls for the UK Government to adopt a clear strategic approach to tidal energy, similar to offshore wind. So, I think we need to see that. He also calls for a new body, a tidal power authority, that would act as an arm’s-length agency, so that the maximum advantage could be taken of this technology. So, we see the extent, really, of what is before us.

Can I just turn, finally, to the advantages for Wales? I won’t talk specifically—I think other Members will talk about the Swansea project. But if other projects follow in the most likely sites, we could see a £20 billion level of investment from the private sector, over 33,000 jobs, potentially, in construction and manufacturing for Wales, and an annual benefit in our GVA, if these projects go ahead, of £1.4 billion. It is remarkable. Wales was once the Kuwait of coal; we could now be the world leader in tidal energy. Let’s grasp the challenge.

We thank the Welsh Government for bringing this debate forward and welcome the opportunity to contribute to the discussion. The Swansea tidal lagoon presents a huge opportunity for the UK and Wales to be at the forefront of this groundbreaking technology. Although the Swansea lagoon is just a pilot project for this industry, we understand that Cardiff is a front-runner in the plans for the development of a full-sized installation, and, of course, we heard earlier about the possibilities in north Wales, and we should, of course, include the possibilities in Newport as well.

It is hard to overestimate the potential for Welsh industry in the construction and technology phase of this development. There are companies in Wales and the Swansea region that already have the technical ability to provide much of the infrastructure for this project, but it will also provide these and many others with the opportunity to develop the capability to provide full tidal lagoon technological and infrastructural expertise. In addition, there is huge potential for companies in the down-the-line supply chain to engage in this project.

The Hendry review of tidal lagoons emphasises the advantages of security of supply and the carbon-negative impact of such developments, which, of course, impact positively on the Welsh Assembly’s aim for zero-carbon energy supply. It should also be noted that this industry not only has great potential in the UK, but there are many locations worldwide where tidal lagoons are viable options in electrical production. It is vital that the UK Government act decisively to move this project forward so that Wales and the UK will be at the cutting edge of this exciting new technology and be in a position to tender for such developments, wherever they are located. There is full cross-party consensus on this development, so let us continue to pressurise the UK Government to act on the recommendations in the Hendry review and note that we in the Welsh Assembly will not tolerate unacceptable delays in proceeding with this vital project.

I’d like to touch on three topics: fish, ambition, and St David. We’ve talked about the merits of this project being a commercial project, fully reliant on private finance, as one of its many merits, but, of course, we have a regulatory environment that risks making many of these projects non-starters. We may well want patient investors, but there aren’t many irrational investors. There are no time limits in force and, in such an environment, there’s a real risk that the Swansea project could collapse and future marine projects may be put off. Now, I’m all for arm’s-length regulation, but we can barely see the NRW from across the horizon, and I do question the way that the legislation has been set out and the way the NRW has been set up. They can take as long as they like. Ministers have no powers—they can’t set a deadline for a decision, they can’t call it in, nor can they appeal. We may find ourselves in the absurd position of having all the consents we need from Whitehall, but, because of lack of expertise in NRW, the project may well fall into the sea—

Will the Member give way?

I will.

Is he aware of article 11 of the Natural Resources Body for Wales (Establishment) Order 2012 that gives Welsh Ministers a general power to direct Natural Resources Wales as to the exercise of its powers?

It may surprise Mark Reckless to know that I was not aware of that particular sub-clause, but I’m grateful to him for bringing it to attention.

It is not acknowledged that many of the private investors here have been incredibly generous in their patience, and, without them, this project would be dead in the water. David and Heather Stevens, in particular, do not seek the limelight, but, without their willingness to back this project, all our talk of sustainable development would be rather academic.

I want to touch on ambition, secondly. It seems that, for too long, we’ve been too nervous to be fully committing to these projects. I think, some time ago, I remember seeing protesters outside of this Assembly, with some of my fellow Assembly Members here now standing alongside them, against windfarms in mid Wales. It’s possible that that spooked many people. Senior officials, I fear, are so committed to nuclear that they appear to see renewables as, at best, a distraction, and, at worst, a threat. We can set—we have set—a climate change target. We have set an ambition to frame public policy in a way that serves the well-being of future generations. Reducing and then eliminating the use of fossil fuels does both those things. The Swansea bay tidal lagoon sends an important signal that we want to harness the power of the sea and stimulate green jobs in the process, but we can’t be ambivalent about it. We must be full-throated. We shouldn’t be quietly supportive in the background; we must buy a stake in the holding company and benefit from Wales being the first in a global wave of developments.

Finally, I come to Saint David and his call for us to do the little things. We want to see—well, I certainly want to see—100 per cent of our energy generated from renewable sources. Indeed, I’d like to see more, so that we can sell our energy and generate wealth for Wales, and let our natural resources, once again, become a hallmark of our economic base. The lagoon is an important part of that, but we can’t just rely on a couple of big projects to deliver our ambitions. We need to do more. We need to do the little things—hundreds of little things simultaneously. We need to plan for every home to be a mini power station that generates more energy than it needs and use fully energy conservation and reduce the amount of energy we need—often the bit that is neglected in these debates. This is part of the foundational economy focus that we want to see: marrying this embrace of emerging technologies with a focus on the economy of the everyday. Local energy production has got huge potential to generate local economic spin-offs, local supply chains, local skills, and, crucially, to reconnect people’s behaviour with their energy consumption. When people are able to see the energy that they are creating, they’re producing, that’s far more likely to impact on their habits and their attitudes and their own behaviour. So, we do require leadership. We require a permissive regulatory environment and we require money. And, if Saint David isn’t to your tastes, perhaps we should think about Max Boyce, who told us we need an incredible plan, because, as he said, where there’s a will there’s a way. Thank you.

Well, Members, I think we’re standing on the threshold of something really rather significant. I think it takes a certain level of courage to face global political shifts and then to determine to bring good from them. Sometimes, drawing out that good can be seismic in itself, and that’s an adoption of new thinking.

Now, with some of my colleagues, I’ve just come back from CERN in Geneva—an exceptional institution that brings unique opportunity to that part of the world. It began in 1954 when scientists from 12 countries left behind the first half of the twentieth century and embarked on the first step in breaking through the limits of engineering, computing, and physics. In a tunnel 100m down and 27 km long, built for an earlier, costly project, the £2.8 billion Large Hadron Collider today is just part of a phenomenal but also expensive story that attracts investment from twice as many countries as it did 60 years ago.

I bet many Governments have questioned the cost of their contributions over the years, but do we now wonder: could there have been a cheaper way to discover the God particle? Might the development of the worldwide web have been achieved for less? Now, neither of these particular revolutions would have been foreseen in 1954. What those Governments invested in, decade after decade, was the moving frontier—the acknowledgement that looking forward, thinking forward, spending forward, is the only hope of being ready for those genuinely global challenges. We’re already doing it to a degree with climate change, for example, or global water and food resources, the global economy, even—all inter-related, of course, but requiring a new outlook. This is why I say we are on the threshold of something significant, although it may seem small, because tidal lagoons are, in part, a new answer to the question of future energy production.

Burning fossil fuels: that’s cheap, but cheap energy isn’t value for money when resources are finite, security of supply is uncertain, and the cost of pollution and poor health are taken into account. Wind energy: cheapish to produce, but often unpopular, unreliable, and needing expensive back-up—value for money? Nuclear: not especially expensive when the cost is set off over a lifetime. It’s reliable, but very high risk in terms of cost of security breach. Is that value for money? And lagoons: not especially expensive when the cost is set off over a lifetime, reliable technology, but not tested—is that value for money?

Would the Member give way?

Very briefly. It’s quite a long speech, sorry, Simon.

Just to reiterate that I hope she’s able to see in the Hendry report that he compared nuclear with the tidal lagoon and said, over a similar lifetime cost analysis, the tidal lagoon was actually cheaper than nuclear.

Well, that’s what I am coming to, because, in terms of value for money, I’m asking: why on earth don’t we just find out? Tidal lagoons are new thinking. Like CERN, this is a world first. This is a new industry, a global industry, with global implications, and it’s ours for the taking here in the UK. It’s not a question of ‘could’, David Melding; it’s a question of ‘should’. The Hendry report is convincing on the part that tidal energy could play in meeting our needs, but that is just part of a much bigger story. It is convincing on the immediate local economic benefits that a no-regrets pathfinder lagoon would bring to my region: it’s transformative for Swansea as a city, he says. But it’s true for other parts of the UK as well. It’s convincing on the economic effect of other lagoons in the south east and north of Wales, and the fit with the UK industrial strategy. But the real value for money comes from being the first—the UK being the undisputed global centre for lagoon expertise and manufacturing. How often does an opportunity like this come along? For 30p on our bills, we can make all this talk of a knowledge economy mean something, by growing manufacturing for the world here in the UK.

It’s not just about the development phase. We could be leading the world in research and development, not just in a more efficient design but in materials, giving our steelworks new life and direction, in energy storage, in transmission methods, in flood protection. If we want a USP for our new trade deals, well here it is. Looking forward, thinking forward, spending forward—not on a lagoon, but on a new industrial future for Britain.

When CERN was set up, it didn’t foresee that its work would save lives through proton beam therapy, and that it would revolutionise data transfer. Its partners just knew that they were the first, and being first means driving change. Four hundred years ago—a little bit more recently than St David, I’m afraid—Hans Lippershey invented the Dutch perspective glass, a device for seeing things far away as if they were nearby. He took some existing technology, a glass lens, and did something moderately interesting with it. He didn’t treat it as a first; he didn’t see the potential of what he had. Galileo, on the other hand, wasn’t content to see things far away as if they were nearby. He took his version of the Dutch perspective glass and showed the Venetian Senate that his telescope gave them something unique: access to the stars. It made him a rich man and made all of us richer, as the Hubble telescope, just like CERN, has helped us understand our universe. We shouldn’t look at tidal lagoons as things far away as if they were nearby. We also need to look up and see the global opportunity for Wales and for Britain.

I want to put the tidal lagoon in the broader context of Wales’s blue economy, but, before I do that, I think it’s worth noting that Charles Hendry’s backing for the lagoon in Swansea bay has not only been widely welcomed in this Chamber but also, speaking personally, by my constituents and also by businesses across the supply chain and potential supply chain of the region. I believe that the lagoon has captured the imagination because, as David Melding was alluding to earlier, modern Wales was built on energy, and clean tidal energy technology could be Wales's next big industry. And let's not underestimate, either, the effect of a 100-year economic commitment on the regional economy of Swansea bay. This could be a catalyst for major economic development in sectors that could support lagoon technology and construction.

Wales is a tidal nation, and one of our major assets is our long coastline and a high tidal reach that few other countries can match. So, it makes good sense for us to focus on developing sectors of our economy where we can offer something that most other countries can't, and sectors that don't depend on our ongoing membership of the European Union, and making sustainable—and I emphasise ‘sustainable’—use of our natural resources make sense. Indeed, it gives us a competitive advantage. Countries that don't have our coast and don't have our tides can't develop that advantage. But let's not rest on our laurels. There are certainly enough other countries with similar natural assets to pose a competitive threat, and our competitors are not going to hang around while Wales develops the upper hand in this sector. So, we need fast action from the UK Government, and we also need swift action from Natural Resources Wales, to grant marine licences and to avoid further delays. If these steps are not taken promptly, we will lose our first-mover advantage to some other location, and a golden opportunity may be lost, and that would be unforgivable.

Like other Members, I've had representations from local anglers with genuine concerns, with which I sympathise, about the effects on fish stocks, though the actual detail is disputed, as we know. But, what's not disputed—

Will you give way?

I'll take the intervention.

I thank the Member for giving way. I, too, have had representations from the anglers, the Afan anglers in particular, and I think it's important that we now quickly get a resolution between NRW and Tidal Lagoon Power so that we can ensure the disparity between the two, which is quite huge at the moment, actually becomes more realistic, because I understand that both are, admittedly, at the extremes of their calculations and there needs to be a fairer balance in the middle somewhere, and we need to get that done quickly.

I would echo that; I think that we need fast progress on that. But what isn’t disputed is that climate change is one of the biggest threats to marine biodiversity in any event. So, I think that's the broader context for that discussion.

But the lagoon is a manifestation of a much broader opportunity, which is to turn Wales’s most abundant natural resource into an economic asset and to grow our blue economy. The Welsh Government will be consulting, as the Cabinet Secretary said, on a new marine plan this year, and I would like to see that plan signal a full commitment to this sector, in all its guises—we’re talking about marine today, but there's also sport, aquaculture and other opportunities, £2.1 billion-worth of economic value and tens of thousands of jobs before we start making any real headway in the area of renewables. But we need to grasp this chance.

I would like to see an ambitious marketing strategy showcasing this sector to the world, and we could start by hosting an international summit of potential purchasers of lagoon technology in the Swansea bay area. I would like to see stretching but deliverable targets from energy from offshore and marine renewables over a realistic time frame. I'd like to see the new national infrastructure commission being tasked with an early assessment of the infrastructure needs of the blue economy. And to echo the point that Lee Waters was making, we need a fast, transparent and fit-for-purpose consenting regime. There is evidence, which came through the consultation the Welsh Government conducted at the end of last year into the fees and charges, that there are concerns around timescales being a major, potential cause of competitive disadvantage. So, certainty and transparency in this area are vital.

I also want to see the Welsh Government pressing the UK Government to make good on any shortfall in EU funding for the marine sector as a result of leaving the EU, and to make sure that the Brexit process does not involve any reversal of the Welsh Government’s devolved competences in marine policy. The tidal lagoon—indeed, the blue economy—is a major opportunity for Wales. So, let's not miss the boat.

I was pleased to see today that there was a letter I think MPs at Westminster organised. Richard Graham, the MP for Gloucester, and 107 MPs signed that, and, I think most usefully, Jesse Norman, who’s the junior Minister responsible, has said there won’t be any foot dragging from the UK Government in responding to Charles Hendry’s report. Last summer, I was asked by Charles Hendry’s office whether I could arrange a meeting of AMs to discuss with him the work that he was doing. I was really struck by the number of people who came, the enthusiasm for his work, and then again when that report was published, just the welcome for how strong and unambiguous he was in his recommendation.

When I first thought some years ago about this project. it was, I think, an earlier stage, when it had been suggested that the cost of the energy would be £168 per MWh, and compared on the basis it was, which was a relatively short contract for difference, it appeared to be very expensive compared to other options, including nuclear and offshore wind. I’ve been convinced that it’s now been assessed on a fairer and more sensible basis over a longer time frame, and also lower long-term interest rates make the investment relatively more attractive. When you look at where it’s being funded from, to the extent that we have a levy control framework at a UK level—£9.8 billion equivalent by 2020 is the fixed envelope for that—it strikes me as sensible to spend more of that money on a diverse range of energy possibilities, some of which may work out and become very successful over the longer term. We’ve seen the very big decline in solar prices; we haven’t seen as large a decline in wind energy prices. I suspect that money could be better spent by at least funding an alternative technology option that may potentially deliver strong results over the longer term, and clearly has a significant option value in it given the uncertainties of all these things. Compared to nuclear and offshore wind, to the extent that it compares well now even on the projections in cost terms, I think it’s more attractive because of that greater variety and diversity for what’s clearly a non-polluting and reliable energy source.

Further, there’s just no doubt that this would be great for Wales. That levy control framework is on a UK basis, and I think that Simon Thomas spoke very rightly and I think generously drew attention to the fact that this would be Wales benefiting from the UK framework. I think to an extent this Assembly can come together and, I believe, with unanimity support this motion and this project, as well as the technical and option value descriptions I’ve given. Clearly, there would be an awful lot of money, whether from the UK taxpayer, or more generally from the UK electricity bill payer, that would be coming and being invested in Wales, and helping us at least potentially to develop this as an industry for the future. So, I’d very much welcome that.

Just to follow up on some of Lee Waters’s points earlier about Natural Resources Wales, I don’t think it’s fair for us to criticise NRW too strongly. They are doing what has been set out for them under legislation, and when we pass legislation that delegates authority to arm’s-length bodies, then we shouldn’t be surprised when they do what they’re asked under the statutes as we’ve set out. Welsh Ministers have delegated their powers under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 to NRW, and it’s for NRW to take a licence decision when we deposit any substance or object in the sea or on or under the sea bed. It’s for them to determine, and we’ve set out ways in which that should happen—the need to protect the environment, the need to protect human health, and the need to prevent interference with legitimate uses of the seas. It’s important they consider the things they’ve been asked to.

I think it’s unfortunate we don’t have the call-in process in Wales that’s available to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and also that it wasn’t possible to deem a licence as part of the planning DCA process. So, I would just ask, perhaps not immediately, but following a UK decision, and particularly if the report is approved, whether Welsh Ministers would give consideration to using the power I described earlier to Lee Waters to direct NRW, or perhaps to lay down a time frame in which they have to deal with some of these difficult issues about fish modelling, and actually come to a view in a way that wouldn’t delay the overall project. Then, if NRW did, for whatever reasons, or the narrow issues it might be looking at, if it weren’t to determine it favourably, then there would be the right of appeal to Welsh Ministers. I understand entirely why Welsh Ministers, in the terms of the motion and what they say to us in the Assembly today, will not want to say anything that could potentially lead to an adverse judicial review in future. But I’d like to add my own support to what I think is a very broad support in the Assembly for the Hendry review and for this as a future energy of great potential benefit to Wales.

We take electricity for granted. We switch our computer, our television, our lights or other electrical devices on and we expect them to work. The electricity has to be generated and available when we need it. Traditionally, electricity has been generated by burning fossil fuels. All fossil fuels are carbon based. When carbon burns, it forms carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. This causes global warming.

The Paris agreement is driving the international decarbonisation agenda with some rapid developments in renewables and demand reduction. Alternatives to the burning of coal, gas, oil and wood are needed. This leaves nuclear power, onshore and offshore wind, solar power, river flow, geothermal and tidal power. The advantage of tidal power is that it is reliable. Tides can be predicted for centuries into the future. We know that the Bristol channel is ideally suited to generate tidal power. The Hendry review has been unambiguous in its support for a tidal lagoon in Swansea bay.

The first question to ask is: does the science work? We know that unidirectional turbines work—they’re on rivers. In Dinorwig in north Wales, unidirectional turbines driven by water are used. Water is stored at high altitude in Marchlyn Mawr reservoir and discharged into Llyn Peris to move the turbine during times of peak electricity demand. It is pumped back from Llyn Peris to Marchlyn Mawr during off peak. It uses more electricity to pump the water up than it generates on the way down. Pumping is done at periods of low demand.

The only difference with a tidal lagoon is that the turbines are bidirectional on a tidal lagoon, which means we get it four times a day. Once when the tide comes in, once when the tide goes out, once when the tide comes in again, once when the tide goes out again. We know that’s going to happen and it doesn’t cost us any energy. It’s not like pumping it up a hill and then it coming down again. It’s not cutting edge, it can be created, it can be predicted, and it is reliable over long periods of time.

Whilst fossil fuel plants and nuclear power stations need decommissioning and removing, as Darren Millar said earlier, all a tidal lagoon does is leave you with a sea defence. So, even if you don’t like it, and it comes to an end, it gives you a sea defence. With global warming, we expect sea levels to rise. So, it’s a win-win situation.

The only questions still to be resolved are how will we ensure the safe passage of fish either through the turbines or around them and gain a marine license from Natural Resources Wales? In December 2016, Natural Resources Wales revealed, on its best evidence, the proposed tidal lagoon in Swansea bay could have a major added effect on migratory fish due to injury as they pass through the turbines. After a lengthy consultation, NRW estimated that up to 21 per cent of salmon and 25 per cent of sea trout, which are fish of a national importance, could be killed every year as they migrate to and from local rivers, mainly the Tawe, the Neath and the Afan. The estimates are far higher than the numbers provided by Tidal Lagoon (Swansea Bay) plc, which comes up with a number roughly a tenth of that.

Tidal Lagoon (Swansea Bay) has consistently stated that the impact on fisheries would be minor. We know we’ve got turbines on rivers. How does it work on rivers? You’ve got fish in rivers. In the Mississippi, you’ve got 129 different fish species in it. You’ve got a renewable energy developer, the Free Flow Power Corporation, which successfully operates the first full-scale hydrokinetic turbine generator in the Mississippi river, and has been doing so since 2011. We know the Mississippi is not fish free. So, how has it been achieved without severely depleting fish numbers?

What we need is a tidal lagoon with a means of safe movement for the fish that will lead us to creating sustainable energy, allowing Swansea—[Interruption.] Certainly.

Thank you for giving way, but do you recognise that actually there are many dams and other buildings that have fish passes within them to actually allow the safe movement of fish up and down in ways like that? This is slightly different because these are turbines that attract fish in through the wave and tidal movements. So, it’s not quite the same picture.

I think it is actually on rivers because the fish are moving up and down the river and, to get up and down the river, they have to go through the area where the turbines are. Whether they’ve got a fish pass or whatever they’ve got for it—. I think that, if we need fish passes, they need to get fish passes built into the tidal lagoon. But, technically, I don’t think that it is very different. I don’t think it’s very different moving up and down a river, compared to moving up and down a lagoon.

I end with a quote from the Hendry review:

‘We can either stand back and watch other countries take the lead(or watch a resource left permanently unused) or we can decide that we should do what the UK has done so well in the past—spotting an opportunity, developing the technology and creating an industry. As Britain moves into a post-Brexit world, we need to ask if we want to be leaders or followers.’

We, in UKIP, are in favour of tidal lagoons and recognise that the technology has the potential to supply a lot of the UK’s energy needs, reduce our carbon emissions and, most importantly, provide energy security and diversification. I did, however, have many questions about how the schemes would be funded and how local communities and the local economy would benefit from the construction and operation of these lagoons. The work undertaken by Charles Hendry and his team has reassured me that we can achieve a strike price that is not only fair to bill payers and taxpayers, but also represents a good deal for the UK and the developers. The Hendry review has highlighted the potential of the UK to become a world leader in this technology and develop a UK supply chain for future tidal lagoons. It is imperative that the UK and Welsh Governments, together with Tidal Lagoon Power, ensure that that happens. But I believe we should go further: Swansea and my region are to be the pathfinders for this technology and should therefore enjoy the most benefit from the initial scheme.

According to Tidal Lagoon Power’s own documentation, the Swansea lagoon’s construction will require 100,000 tonnes of steel. They state that the majority will be sourced from the UK; however they have appointed Andritz Hydro as their major development partner. Andritz Hydro is part of the Andritz group, which includes Andritz Metals who manufacture steel products in France, Germany and the Netherlands. We need to have a cast-iron guarantee, if you’ll excuse the pun, that the majority of the steel for the Swansea project will be sourced from Port Talbot. We have a steelworks right on the doorstep of the project, so why should the steel be shipped in from elsewhere in the UK or Europe? Tidal Lagoon Power also state that 5 million tonnes of rock will be needed for the project. They state that one of their major shareholders has purchased a quarry in Cornwall, so yet again Wales is not benefiting. South Wales West has been supplying energy to the rest of the UK since the industrial revolution in the form of coal, then wind power and now tidal energy. We should be one of the richest regions in the UK, as opposed to one of the poorest. Is it too much to ask that my region enjoys the biggest benefit from this tidal revolution? I hope the Welsh Government can get assurances from the UK Government and Tidal Lagoon plc that Swansea, South Wales West and Wales as a whole will be the largest beneficiaries from these tidal lagoons.

There also remain serious questions about the impact on fisheries in and around the Swansea bay region. In its most recent update, Tidal Lagoon Power have stated that it has not yet been possible to reach agreement on the scale of likely fish impacts at Swansea bay. This needs to be resolved as soon as possible and I urge the Welsh Government to work with angling and fishing groups in Swansea bay to ensure their livelihoods are not affected by the tidal lagoon. Provided we can ensure that my region benefits from a tidal lagoon and we can guarantee no major environmental impacts from the construction and operation of the lagoon, I am happy to support it, along with my party, and we will be supporting this motion before us today. Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd.

I want to focus most of my remarks on the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, but can I begin by congratulating Charles Hendry on his report? Too often, reviews of this type lose themselves in fudges and faffing, coming to no clear conclusions and adding to the fog and to the delay, but not this one. This is the very model of what a decent review should do. It’s carefully considered, it’s delivered with due deliberation but without undue delay, and with conclusions and recommendations that are straight and to the point: the Swansea tidal lagoon should definitely and promptly be supported by the UK Government as a pathfinder—as the pathfinder—to examine the potential and the challenges of a wider roll-out of tidal lagoons. It is, in Charles’s words, ‘a no-regrets policy’ for the Government, or as I and many others have said in more colloquial terms, it’s a no-brainer. But let me say right at the outset: there is no case for overriding the environmental considerations, come what may. They must be worked through to a satisfactory resolution. We cannot treat lightly the issues highlighted by those, including myself, who rightly put the utmost importance on the special and often unique habitats and species, the ecology and the hydrology of the local area of the Severn and of the Bristol channel itself.

If there is to be, as Charles has pointed out, a wider national programme of tidal lagoon development, it makes absolute sense that it should be accompanied by a proper strategic spatial and evidence-based approach to planning and assessment, or in the Cabinet Secretary’s words, a marine plan. And a national policy approach, of course—it’s sensible, it’s desirable, it’s even essential to go forward in that wider roll-out. And, of course, we need to look at how we deal with the protections of the highest order in the habitats directives as well as the water framework directive, and whether derogations are necessary, desirable or even possible. Much more needs to be examined on that wider roll-out.

But we also look at the other aspects: the flood risks, the flood protections, the habitat change and the displacement, the loss of intertidal habitat and the impacts on valued migratory species, on water quality and fisheries issues, and hydrodynamic and morphodynamic changes to the physical environment, and so much more in the wider roll-out. For a wider programme and a wider roll-out, all of this has got to be considered, and I’m keen to play my part in scrutinising such a roll-out.

But for the Swansea lagoon, described in the Hendry review as the pathfinder, there are just three remaining locks. And I hope that with goodwill, as well as due diligence on all sides, these three locks can be unpicked simultaneously and satisfactorily, and soon. The first two are the marine licence and the development consent order, which are two separate processes in Wales, unlike England, but that can be done in tandem. So, I would ask the Cabinet Secretary for assurances that this will be the case, and we do not have to wait for sequential stages that will add to the delay. And the outstanding issue for the marine licence is that of the impact on fish, and the inability of the company, yet, to satisfy the NRW permitting service. So, after much work, we do understand from NRW in their briefing that—and I quote—‘a more detailed submission to the permitting service will be made by the applicant in due course, and to support the development of a submission, CEFAS and NRW’s technical experts have agreed to provide additional advice. This work is ongoing and once this work is concluded, a submission must then be made by TLSB, the lagoon, to the permitting service for the review.’ They go on: ‘A subsequent consultation must then take place to inform the technical assessments that the permitting service is legally required to undertake. Only once all the legislative requirements are satisfied can a decision on the marine licence be made.’ Meanwhile: ‘We also understand the development consent order has 42 requirements for the conditions of the permit, which will need to be discharged by the local planning authorities—LPAs—before construction works could commence. Of these, NRW is a statutory consultee on 15.’

Now, these matters have to be carried out assiduously and properly, but we can also do this with due diligence and without due delay. I strongly urge both Cabinet Secretaries to work together on this matter—and with their officials; bring them together, bring NRW together—and to encourage and cajole and demand that NRW and LPAs and all involved make the rapid resolution of these issues a top priority.

Assuming that the Crown Estate will want to see the pathfinder proceed, it leaves us with the third and final lock, the keys to which are held by the UK Government in the form of financial support through the contract for difference, or what is commonly called the strike price. A cross-party show of unified support here today, added to the wider support from the business community, the higher education community, the sustainable energy sector and others, including that letter of over 100 cross-party MPs today, may just oil the lock and allow the key to turn a little easier and a lot sooner.

I very much welcome the opportunity to speak in support of this motion today. Tidal lagoons offer us the opportunity to develop a clean, modern, long-term energy policy that is safe and sustainable, with projected life spans of at least 120 years. That’s 120 years of clean and green energy generation, with the calculation that a network of tidal lagoons around the coast could produce enough electricity to meet a projected 8 per cent of the UK’s energy needs. Importantly, the development of tidal lagoons allows us to develop a new industry here in the UK, which will bring with it the prospect for wider economic regeneration, and here in Wales we can take a real global lead.

I know that the Industrial Communities Alliance have endorsed the plans from this perspective, and it is clear to see why when the potential scale of the benefits is considered. If the plans are to be fully realised, we could be looking at a network of six tidal lagoons, estimated to involve a £40 billion investment, creating nearly 6,500 long-term jobs and annually generating nearly £3 billion of GVA. But the economic benefits would not end there. Additional work and economic opportunities would be created during the construction of the tidal lagoons, with the supply chain, as other speakers have alluded to today, across the four proposed lagoons in Wales being estimated to involve many thousands of jobs, including tens of thousands in construction and manufacturing.

And this is where constituencies such as my own, in the former south Wales Valleys, can really stand to benefit. Plans for tidal lagoons in Swansea and eventually in Cardiff and Newport could create new work opportunities within easy commuting distance, but within the supply chain there are also opportunities for new and existing businesses in areas such as Cynon Valley. I would hope that sharing out these wider economic benefits is a key consideration within any future plan, and also that they form part of a new, refreshed strategy for sustaining and creating good quality employment opportunities in the manufacturing sector.

Again, there are specific opportunities for Wales here: 11.6 per cent of Welsh people are employed in manufacturing, the joint second highest level in the UK. As evidence from 2015 that was given to the cross-party group on industrial communities shows, these jobs are largely located in the Valleys, with my constituency having two and a half times the UK average of jobs in manufacturing. As the motion states, we should look to extract the maximum economic benefit from the proposed Swansea bay tidal lagoon and its associated technologies, but I would hope this benefit is equitably shared across Wales and is used as a lever to improve economic performance in areas such as mine.

For my final point, though, I will sound a note of caution. Three months ago here in this Chamber we discussed the most recent ‘State of Nature’ report from the RSPB. The report told us that 34 per cent of marine vertebrate and 38 per cent of marine plant species have declined according to long-term data trends. For marine invertebrates, the long-term decline was even more worrying, with three out of four species affected. This evidence highlights the fragility of our marine ecosystems, and means that we must be sensitive in how we approach this issue.

I welcome the Welsh Government’s approach, wanting to marry all aspects of its marine policy in a national marine plan that balances the economic potential of Welsh waters with our duty to safeguard and protect them, and I look forward to seeing the detail of this when it’s published in due course.

The proposal from the Hendry review, with its call for the development of the Swansea bay tidal lagoon as a pathfinder project, will allow us to evaluate the technology and cost-effectiveness of the project. Importantly, such an approach would also allow us to study the impact of a tidal lagoon on its natural habitat and on the species living within it, going some way to meet the valid concerns of environmental groups.

The tidal lagoon project has the opportunity to change the way we generate energy. It has the opportunity to transform, energise and re-balance our economy, and with the opportunity presented by using the Swansea bay tidal lagoon as a pathfinder, we have the chance to get this right. I hope the Welsh consensus behind this debate today provides the catalyst so that the UK Government can now move the project forward. Thank you.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure to reply to the debate—Ken Skates.

Diolch, Lywydd. Can I begin by thanking Members for their very constructive contributions to this important debate today? It’s rare that we have agreement right across the Chamber over the principles of many energy projects, given the contentious nature of onshore wind and nuclear energy, but I think on this issue there has been strong cross-party agreement. As my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs said during her opening of this debate, the Welsh Government very much welcomes the Hendry report, and I share the sentiments of others who see this as an exemplary inquiry and report. The process has been conducted in the greatest possible fashion by Charles Hendry.

From an economic perspective, I see the huge potential ahead of us. I recognise how marine energy projects could be a catalyst to securing long-lasting legacy benefits for the economy, and I understand how they could provide the opportunity for jobs and investment in local and regional economies across Wales—those economies that many Members have touched on and represent. I also see how they could help our transition to a low-carbon economy. And I think it's vitally important to place Wales at the forefront of this exciting sector, to put Wales at the vanguard of new tidal technologies, subject, of course, to those projects receiving the necessary approvals.

Now, we are already supporting businesses to help Wales seize the opportunity to become a leader in tidal lagoon project development, to secure an enduring legacy in developing a sustainable industry for Wales for future generations. Now, an area of activity specifically identified in Charles Hendry's report concerns the Welsh projects already in progress, particularly the pathfinder project, and we agree with the approach set out in the report for a small-scale pathfinder project as soon as is reasonably possible, to understand the impacts of such developments. And we very much welcome Charles Hendry's observation of the very strong case for the proposed Swansea bay tidal lagoon to be that small-scale pathfinder project, as it’s currently the only project in an advanced state of preparation that is necessary to become a pathfinder in the near future. But it's clear that, before that project can proceed, a number of approvals and consents need to be secured. Those have been outlined by Members today and include the strike price, a marine licence, and also a sea bed lease from the Crown Estate. There is also the issue of end-of-life decommissioning, which is yet to be agreed between the company and the UK Government. My officials have been meeting with Tidal Lagoon Power Ltd on its proposed Swansea project for a number of years across a range of areas to ensure that Wales and Welsh businesses and the economies that we represent can gain maximum benefit from the project. Ultimately, the company estimates that its proposed fleet of tidal lagoons will contribute £27 billion to UK GDP, and £3 billion per annum once operational, and it will meet to up to 8 per cent of UK electricity demand.

Another area specifically highlighted in the Hendry report is a recognition of the integrated approach that we have taken on skills and supply chain development in support of this important sector. For example, we've invested in the skills demand and supply reports for the proposed Swansea bay lagoon development. We facilitated early engagement with key stakeholders, including, crucially, the skills partnerships and provided them with early access to labour market intelligence reports, which have allowed them to be aware of the skills needs of the project.

I want to make very clear that the Welsh Government's intention is to do everything that it can to capitalise on the opportunity ahead of us. Wales, as many Members have observed today, is a tidal country, and next year, we’ve designated it the Year of the Sea. We want Wales to be celebrated for its incredible coast, but also to be the global leader in marine energy projects. Whilst the UK Government considers the findings of the Hendry report, officials will continue regularly to engage with Tidal Lagoon Power and, indeed, other potential tidal lagoon developers to ensure that, should the project receive the necessary approvals and consents, Welsh businesses, and specifically the local economies of Wales, gain the maximum benefit for our country.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No? Therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We move on to the final debate this afternoon, which is a debate on the police settlement for 2017-18, and I call on Jane Hutt to move the motion—Jane.

Deputy Presiding Officer, on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, I’m today presenting the Assembly for its approval details of the Welsh Government’s contribution to the core revenue funding for four police and crime commissioners—the PCCs in Wales—for 2017-18. Members will be aware that the core funding for the police in Wales is delivered through a three-way arrangement, involving the Home Office, the Welsh Government and council tax. As policing policy and operational matters are non-devolved, the overall funding picture is determined and driven by the Home Office. The established approach to setting and distributing the Welsh Government component has therefore been based on a principle of ensuring consistency and fairness across England and Wales. As outlined in the final police settlement announcement on 1 February, the total unhypothecated revenue support for the police service in Wales for 2017-18 amounts to £350 million. The Welsh Government’s contribution to this amount, through the revenue support grant and redistributed non-domestic rates, is £139 million and it is this funding that you’re being asked to approve today.

As in previous years, the Home Office has decided to overlay its needs-based formula with a floor mechanism. This means that for 2017-18, police and crime commissioners across England and Wales will all receive the same percentage reduction of 1.4 per cent in their core revenue funding, when compared with 2016-17. The Home Office will also provide a top-up grant, totalling £5.9 million, to ensure that both Dyfed-Powys and North Wales police meet the floor level.

Members may recall that, as part of the 2015 spending review, the UK Government committed to provide for the duration of the spending review period cash-backed funding overall for each PCC, compared to 2015-16. The settlement for 2017-18 maintains the planned level of funding, but assumes that PCCs increase their council tax precept by 2 per cent in 2016-17 and would do so again in 2017-18.

Council tax is a devolved matter and it’s the responsibly of PCCs to set their precepts. Police and crime commissioners in Wales have the freedom to make their own decisions about council tax increases and are not subject to the limits that apply in England. Inserting their element of council tax, the Welsh Government expects each PCC to act in a reasonable manner and to take account of the pressures on hard-pressed households.

We appreciate that difficult decisions are necessary in developing plans for the coming years. The Welsh Government is committed to working with PCCs and chief constables to ensure funding reductions are managed in ways that minimise the impact on community safety in Wales. As part of this, the Welsh Government has made provision for a further year of funding for 500 additional community support officers, recruited under the previous programme for government commitment. A sum of £16.8 million is earmarked in the budget for next year for the continued delivery of this commitment. The full complement of officers has been deployed since October 2013 and they’re making a positive contribution to public safety across Wales. A vital part of their role is actively engaging with partners and community organisations to address antisocial behaviour and related criminal activity, but they make a most important contribution to preventative spend, working in partnership with communities and local authorities. The Welsh Government, working in partnership with the four Welsh police forces and British Transport Police, have also introduced this additional resource and are helping to make a real difference to the lives of people in Wales.

Looking ahead to future funding arrangements, the Home Office has recently restarted a review of the police funding formula, following its suspension in 2015, after the discovery of statistical errors in the consultation material. The Welsh Government is engaged in this process and is working closely with Welsh PCCs to ensure that the review takes full account of the perspectives of the Welsh Government and the arrangements of funding policy and policing in Wales.

Deputy Presiding Officer, returning to the purpose of today’s debate, the motion is to agree the local government finance report for police and crime commissioners, which has been laid before the Assembly. If approved, this will allow the commissioners to confirm their budgets for the next financial year. I therefore ask Assembly Members to support this motion today.

The reduction of funding in the police settlement 2017-18 by 1.4 per cent across all forces in Wales and England comes after year upon year of cuts since 2010. We’ve seen real-term reductions of 26 per cent in funding for police forces in Wales. Police forces in Wales have shrunk. In my area, Gwent Police’s workforce has dropped by 14 per cent since 2010. The fractional devolution of policing in which the Welsh Government is responsible for contributing a small proportion of funding to forces in Wales, but does not have the power to set priorities or strategy, is an unsatisfactory compromise. Westminster continues to hold the main levers that determine policy. And it’s disappointing that we’ve seen yet another Wales Bill come and go without the full devolution of powers over policing to this country—still the last country in these islands not to have control over policing. Not only would this finally give Welsh Government the ability to design policy that is responsive to the unique needs of Welsh communities, and also to co-ordinate among other devolved functions, it would also enable better collaboration across sectors.

The devolution of policing would also leave Welsh police forces better off. The UK Government delayed the introduction of a new funding formula for police after a statistical error was discovered that would have left Wales £32 million worse off. A new formula that better reflected Welsh population trends would result in an additional £25 million for Welsh forces. So, the devolution of policing is not just a point of principle or policy pragmatism, but also of financial pragmatism too. That devolution of policing would also protect Welsh police forces from a continuing programme of Westminster cuts, and give Welsh Government the power to set policing priorities that are tailor-made for the needs of Wales.

With the Home Office continuing to overlay its needs-based formula with a floor mechanism, we heard that all police forces in Wales and England will receive the same 1.4 per cent reduction in 2017-18. We note that the three-way police funding settlement in Wales, involving the Home Office, Welsh Government and council tax, follows consultation with the four Welsh police forces, with £349.9 million being allocated to police and crime commissioners in Wales. With the South Wales Police Federation stating last year that the council tax precept gap with the other Welsh forces had now been closed, this will deliver increases in the amount paid towards police services by council taxpayers of 3.79 per cent in North Wales, 3.99 per cent in Gwent, 4 per cent in South Wales, but 6.9 per cent in Dyfed-Powys.

It is reported that this latter figure reflects the preceding funding freeze in Dyfed-Powys, where the outgoing police and crime commissioner stated that he had delivered more officers on rural beats for more time, for less money. Both the Dyfed-Powys Police and Carmarthenshire County Council websites note that the level of crime in Dyfed-Powys is low compared to other force areas, which makes it the safest place in England and Wales. However, the council do add, ‘We must not become complacent’. Although we therefore recognise concern at the size of their precept increase, we therefore also recognise the need to protect the level of services.

Under Labour, our police were bogged down in paperwork. This UK Government has cut red tape and given police just one simple target—to cut crime. As I said last year, crime had fallen by more than 30 per cent since 2010 according to the independent crime survey for England and Wales. Although total police-recorded crime across Wales, excluding fraud, was up 6 per cent in the year ending September 2016, an assessment by the UK Statistics Authority found that police-recorded crime data did not meet the required standard, and are not currently considered a reliable measure. In contrast, it was confirmed in December 2016 that data from the crime survey for England and Wales had retained its national statistics badge. These data showed an estimated 6.2 million incidences of crime in the year ending September 2016, a 6 per cent reduction on the previous year.

In north Wales, 17 extra police officers and an additional six members of staff will be recruited. At a North Wales Police briefing last month, we heard that although they had to deliver further planned savings of £7.3 million up to 2020, the implementation of their efficiency review recommendations would deliver evidence-based resource allocations, improve quality of service and invest £1.2 million in growth pressures. They also highlighted crime survey findings of reduced risk of personal and household crime in the region and increased numbers of special constables, police special volunteers and volunteer police cadets.

The Home Office is reviewing the police funding formula after revised proposals in 2015 were suspended. These would have seen the share of the amount distributed by the formula to the four Welsh police forces falling by 9 per cent, with north Wales receiving 0.88 per cent of the amount distributed to the 43 forces across England and Wales. They now receive 1.03 per cent, with the amount received per head ranked twenty-third out of 43 when the council tax legacy grant is taken into account.

Thanks to Welsh Government policy, over £0.5 billion pounds in council tax legacy grants being provided to police forces in England in 2017-18 will not be available for forces in Wales. I have written to the Home Office emphasising that the police funding formula is too reliant on a small number of measures to reflect the relative needs of the 43 forces and that rural deprivation and adversity must not be ignored.

Although North Wales Police have told us that forces in Wales, as in England, should be able to access the apprenticeship levy through its new digital account, which can then contribute to the College of Policing, the Welsh Government has refused this. The north Wales police and crime commissioner told me this month that this would cost Welsh forces over £2 million annually.

When I challenged the skills Minister over this in committee last week, we were told that the Welsh Government would instead strike up a grant or contract arrangement, but that the commissioners don’t probably know the exact detail of it. That is not good government. North Wales Police also detailed their collaboration with the Merseyside and Cheshire forces, recognising operational reality and reinforcing why police devolution would be bad for Wales.

Thanks, Minister, for the proposed settlement that you’ve brought to the Chamber today. In general, we in UKIP share the general public’s desire to maintain police officer numbers, particularly officers on the beat. This is because we acknowledge that public perception of crime and crime prevention is an important factor in keeping public trust and retaining cohesive communities. So, we welcome visible officer numbers and welcome the commitment to keep an additional 500 PCSOs on the street in Wales. What we need to try to achieve, as far as we can, is to release officers from administration and allow them to be involved in crime prevention and detection.

In the Gwent Police area, there has been a welcome development recently with the creation of a single emergency services station, housing police, fire and ambulance services together in Abertillery. This centre serves the whole of the Blaenau Gwent area. We have discussed co-location in the health service and this may be a good example of co-location in the emergency services. So, in general, we want less spent on administration and more on front-line services. I appreciate that policing is not a devolved matter, so we are limited in how far we can influence these things, as Steffan Lewis outlined earlier, but I do feel that the debate on the devolved policing issue is for another day. In the meantime, we do support today’s police settlement.

Thank you very much and I call on Jane Hutt to reply to the debate. Jane.

Thank you very much. As we’ve outlined in our ‘Taking Wales Forward’ programme for government, community safety is a top priority for this Government. Yes, the settlement is another challenging one for the police and a tougher one than PCCs were expecting. We’re committed to working with PCCs and chief constables to ensure that those reductions are managed in ways that limit the impact on community safety and front-line policing in Wales.

I thank Steffan Lewis for his comments. As police funding isn’t wholly devolved, the overall spending plans for the police in England and Wales are determined and driven by the Home Office. We’ve made clear our support for policing to be devolved and it’s important to put that on record today, because policing is the only emergency service that’s not devolved. If we remedied this, it would enable stronger joint working with the other emergency services in Wales. Gareth Bennett mentioned—[Interruption.]

Could you confirm if that’s the Labour Party’s policy in London as well—the devolution of policing?

What I was going to go on to say is that it was also a recommendation of the Silk commission, which included the Welsh Conservatives as well as all the other parties. But I think it’s important that we do see this from a practical perspective in terms of collaboration. Devolution, of course, of policing would also enable further future legislation affecting police and community safety to be properly tailored to Welsh circumstances, which is the point that Steffan Lewis was making.

I recognise that both Steffan Lewis and Mark Isherwood referred to the funding formula review, and it’s vitally important that the Welsh Government is engaged in this. The Home Office is responsible for the police core grant distribution formula and the implication for distribution that that formula might have and what might arise from that. So, Welsh Government is now represented in the process. In fact, the Cabinet Secretary wrote to the Minister of State for Policing and the Fire Service to underline the importance, because of the restarting or review of that formula, and so we’re liaising closely on this.

Mark Isherwood also drew attention to the existing funding arrangements in terms of the flexibility that police and crime commissioners have had and that is given in terms of their role and function. But if you look at the situation in Dyfed-Powys, which you drew attention to, the proposed increase in Dyfed-Powys for 2017 follows a reduction and a freeze in the previous two years. So, the new Police and Crime Commissioner for Dyfed-Powys, who was elected last May, is now able to deliver the services for which he is responsible.

I think I would like to thank Gareth Bennett for welcoming the fact that we continue to deploy successfully—and I think, probably, this must be agreed across this Chamber—500 community support officers in Wales, as a result of us, again, as a Welsh Labour Government, deciding that this is a priority, listening to the people on the ground who work with those community support officers, and recognising the part that they play. Back to partnership, again—working together at a local level. And on that basis, and in terms of the role and the power that we have got, limited though it may be, I am glad to commend this settlement to the Assembly.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object? Okay, thank you. We will defer that item until voting time. Voting time is now at the end of the session, and unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to the vote. Okay, thank you very much.

We’ll vote first on the LCM on the Higher Education and Research Bill. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 43, against eight, no abstentions. Therefore, the motion is passed.

We now move to vote on the police settlement debate, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 43, nobody against, nine abstentions. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

That brings today’s proceedings to a close. Thank you very much.