National Assembly for Wales

I call Members to order. 

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

I share the concerns of others in the public sector that the proposed changes to public sector pension schemes risk diverting further funding from front-line services. The UK Government is responsible for these changes and we have made it clear that they must fund the increase in pension contributions.

Can I thank the First Minister for that answer? The cost of funding the increase in the employer teacher pension contributions follows the decision of Westminster to implement cost capping, and this will fall mainly on school budgets. Unless money comes from Westminster—and there may be money from Westminster—will the First Minister commit that any money that comes as a consequential of the additional money for schools in England to cover the pensions will actually be given to schools in Wales?

Well, we have already made it clear that local authorities are first in the queue, although there is a queue in terms of funding, but that depends on whether we do get consequentials. What is not fair, nor is it right, is a situation to arise where the UK Government imposes extra costs on local authorities that the Welsh Government is then expected to fund. That clearly can't be right. So, where costs are imposed by Government, we have an agreement with local authorities where we say that any new costs will be funded. The UK Government needs to do the same. 

Well, of course, local authorities complain all the time that they're asked to make spending decisions based on decisions made here that aren't followed up by money. And if the Welsh Local Government Association is right on this one, we'll have far fewer teachers building up pensions rights anyway as a result of the cash cuts to both local government and the education budgets in the recent budget announcement.

Last week, we heard from the leader of Bridgend council about the cuts he was planning on making to services following the Welsh Government draft budget, and this week we have Swansea council's leader—both of these Labour, of course—saying that he's going to be making cuts to his schools budget due to the settlement from Welsh Government. The Chancellor's budget allocates three years' worth of funding. So, in your final weeks as First Minister, will you use some of that additional money to give local authority leaders in Wales the money they need to fund schools and staff?

The Chancellor's funding decision does not give us three years of funding, nor is it anything like the figure that he suggested of £555 million. In fact, we estimate it's around about £50 million or £60 million of revenue in this year, and £2.6 million in capital. So, a great deal of spin has gone into that announcement. What I can say is, having spoken to the leader of Bridgend, and spoken to the leader of Swansea, is, yes, they face difficult decisions and we're looking to help them, but they are absolutely clear that those decisions they face are as a result of the austerity imposed by a Tory Government in London. 

It’s clear that the uncertainty around these pension payments is creating great problems at a grass-roots level, and it’s not clear at all what the mechanism will be for providing the additional funding. What discussions are you having, therefore, with the Treasury, with your Members of Parliament in Westminster and, indeed, with the teaching unions about this problem?

We, along with Scotland, have written to call for changes in teachers’ pensions, and that should be funded from the UK Government. It’s they who have created this situation, and the same is true in Scotland, as I understand it, and so we have written jointly to say, ‘You have insisted on imposing this additional cost on local authorities, therefore you should fund it’.

It is the responsibility of the Valuation Office Agency, independently of the Welsh Government, to determine whether each property in Wales is liable for council tax or for non-domestic rates, and these decisions are made according to criteria set out in law.

The impact of the second-homes market and holiday homes is well known, in terms of young people’s ability to get on the property ladder locally. It pushes prices up and pushes people out of the housing market. We know the gravity of the problem—36 homes sold in Anglesey in 2017-18 were second homes or buy-to-lets. The figures are even higher in Gwynedd, and that’s very concerning indeed. I’m very supportive of measures such as charging more council tax on second homes as a way of making people think twice or to bring more funds into local authority coffers. But there is a pattern emerging now, where more and more people, rather than paying council tax on their homes, are registering them as business properties so that they would then have to pay business rates. But, as small businesses, they receive full business rate relief, and that is expensive for local authorities. Does the First Minister agree with me that this is a loophole that needs to be closed, and what is the Government considering doing in order to close that loophole?

I don’t think there’s a loophole, but the law is very clear—it’s stronger than in England. It is a matter, of course, for the Valuation Office Agency, but if somebody wants to change their status, where they change from paying the council tax to paying business non-domestic rates, they have to show evidence that that is correct. They can’t just state that; they have to provide evidence. If that evidence is weak, or the evidence isn’t sufficient, the Valuation Office Agency can reconsider what they’ve done, and then, of course, they can give them a bill that could go back years regarding paying the council tax. So, ensuring that the law is considered is the point here, and I think the law is clear enough, but it's up to the Valuation Office Agency to police the situation.

Well, you refer to the criteria that the Valuation Office Agency must adjudicate, where, in Wales, property is judged to be a business property and not liable for business rates if it's available for letting commercially as self-catering accommodation for 140 or more days in the following 12 months, has been in the previous 12 months, and has actually been commercially let for at least 70 days during that period. What assurance can you therefore provide the many providers, from Flintshire to Anglesey, who have contacted me, who run legitimate self-catering business, many of whom are farms that have diversified, that their genuine and legitimate businesses will not be compromised by any changes that might come?

Well, genuine businesses need not fear, of course. What I can say is that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance is evaluating the impact of the introduction of council tax premiums. That does include a survey of local authorities, to assess how many properties have switched from council tax to non-domestic rates. Once that survey is complete, we can then see what the scale of the problem is, and whether there is a need to do more to ensure that people pay properly, according to the status of the property that they own.

Will the Welsh Government legislate to ensure that all properties built or adapted for housing have to pay council tax based upon the band they're in and any second home premium charged by the local authority, or that the business rate relief for rented out properties is abolished? Because I think this is a loophole: it has to be available for 140 days; it is quite easy to make something available for 140 days, and get round it. It has to be let out for 70 days, whether renting out to family counts, which a lot of people do, in that you collect more rent, but they let family members use it, and therefore that builds up to the 70 days. So, will the Government look at taking either of those two actions, to ensure that local authorities get the money they deserve?

We've legislated to allow local authorities to charge council tax premiums on second homes. As I said in the answer earlier, it's the responsibility of the Valuation Office Agency—independently of the Government—to determine the status of each property in Wales. As I said, those second home owners who try to game the system could find themselves facing very large backdated bills for council tax. But, again, I refer to the answer I gave earlier, where a review is being conducted, to examine the scale of the problem in different parts of Wales.

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

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, why does your Government spend £678 less per pupil than in England?

That's a figure that's simply wrong. If he wishes to provide me with evidence for that figure, I'm willing to hear it.

First Minister, these are figures from the Welsh branch of the NASUWT union, and this is despite having a funding settlement that allows £120 to be spent per person in Wales for every £100 spent in England. But it's not just your decision to underfund schools that has led to a decline in standards, it is the failure of your Government to set a clear direction for education here in Wales. Let's take the Programme for International Student Assessment targets, for example—a clear measure of managed decline in school standards. In 2011, your colleague, and the then education Minister, Leighton Andrews—Leighton Andrews: remember him? Yes; perhaps you don't want to remember him—set the ambitious target that, by 2015, Wales would be ranked in the top 20 countries for PISA results. The reality, First Minister, is that we are currently ranking thirty-ninth out of 71, and now there's no target at all. There is no ambition, no drive and no desire at the heart of your administration to develop an internationally competitive education system, which speaks volumes from a tired and unambitious Welsh Labour Government. So, do you agree with your previous colleague Leighton Andrews that Wales's education system continues to be complacent, falling short of being consistently good and not delivering the outcomes that our learners deserve? Would you agree that Wales's education system is currently in a weaker place now than when you became First Minister?

Not at all. The reality is, of course, that to say that somehow the system is indifferent or that the system is in managed decline is a serious attack on our teachers who work very, very hard, day in, day out, to educate our children. The reality is that it is impossible to compare school funding between England and Wales. In England, they fund schools directly; in Wales, it doesn't happen. We give the money to local authorities and they are responsible for school funding.

He says that somehow there's a decline. Well, let me just give him some figures here: we have improved performance at the highest grades—A* to A from 17 per cent to 18 per cent in GCSEs; we see a 50 per cent increase in pupils studying science, with more getting A* to C and getting top grades for biology, chemistry and physics; we see, of course, A-level pass rates improving; we see, for example, 63 per cent of 16-year-olds getting A* to C at English language; we see mathematics numeracy is up at 60 per cent; we see improvements year after year in GCSE performance; and we see improvements year after year in A-level performance.

Our heads are not marching in the streets saying that their schools are underfunded, unlike the situation that exists under his party in England. I suggest to him, 'Go and see'. I was in his constituency a few weeks ago on a political visit—go and see the new schools that have been built or promised around Wales, and go and see how many are being built or promised in England. We want to make sure that our youngsters carry on with being able to have the facilities they require to learn, to have the support from Government that they need to learn, to have the finance from Government that they need to learn, rather than having the situation in England, where they teach young people and children in crumbling buildings while the heads are marching on the streets.

First Minister, you said yourself that you took your eye off the ball on education. Clearly, your party has been asleep at the wheel for the last decade. And let me give you some figures: under your party's stewardship, we've seen the worst GCSE results in a decade; the lowest ranking PISA scores in the UK, with educational attainment ranking behind countries like Vietnam and Slovakia; an 8 per cent real-terms cut to funding for education, with schools braced to experience more cuts; and the leader of your own council in your own constituency has warned that the £57 million funding gap in education created by your Government could see the loss of 1,300 teachers or 2,400 teaching assistants across Wales.

It's completely unacceptable that our pupils' and Wales's future are shouldering the burden of your Government's incompetence in this area. Our children are worth more than what you give them, First Minister. When you took office in 2009, was this the type of reform you set out to achieve? And, are you proud of your record on education?

Yes and yes. But let me say two things to him: his party went into the 2011 Assembly election with a vow to cut education spending by 20 per cent—20 per cent. His own leader at the time, Nick Bourne, said it—[Interruption.]—I know you don't like it, but he said it live on a BBC Wales interview. We saw the alternative budget that his party provided, and if he has any complaint, then surely it's the fact that we haven't cut education spending enough as far as he is concerned.

Secondly, I've no doubt that we will sit here over the course of the next half an hour or so, and, indeed, in the weeks to come, while he will demand that we spend more money on everything—health, education, local government, everything—and we would like to do that. We would like to do that, but the reality is we have £4 billion less as a result of his party's policies than otherwise we would have if spending had kept up with economic development. He cannot have it both ways; he can't stand up here every week and demand money for each and every part of the Government every single week without being responsible and saying where that money is coming from. He won't do that because that's just too difficult.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, are you content that the RAF are training Saudi Arabian pilots at RAF Valley on Ynys Môn, teaching the techniques that can be used in the conflict in Yemen?

These are matters, of course, that are not devolved, but I certainly join with him in wishing to see a peaceful solution to the conflict in Yemen. The current situation is unsustainable—innocent lives are being lost—and I know the UK Government's position is also that a peace settlement needs to be reached, and soon.

You say that it's a non-devolved matter, but are ethics non-devolved? Is morality non-devolved? Where does it say in the Government of Wales Act 2006 that matters of conscience are reserved to Westminster? Thousands of people have died in the Yemeni conflict, many of them civilians, and among them children. The leader of the Labour Party has called upon the UK Government to end arms exports to Saudi Arabia, which, as he has pointed out, stands accused of war crimes by the United Nations.

Now, on Sunday, at a solemn ceremony at the Cenotaph to commemorate the victims of war, you and I both pledged, and I quote, 'To strive for all that makes peace.' So, in honour of that pledge, are you prepared to promise that no Welsh Government money will go to a company that is directly supplying weapons to Saudi Arabia while this bloody conflict continues?

I am not aware of any company that's received money in that sense. We certainly haven't had contracts with the Saudi Government, and we share the UK Government's concern, not just in terms of what's happened in Yemen, but of course the well-publicised murder of the journalist, Khashoggi, in Turkey. There are questions for Saudi Arabia to answer, and I agree with him that we should be very careful indeed, as things stand at the moment, with those two situations in terms of the way in which we engage with the Saudi Government.

Well, I can tell the First Minister that the Welsh Government has given over £1 million to the US defence firm Raytheon. According to CNN, Raytheon's weapons have been used in the targeted bombing of civilians in Yemen. Information from the US Department of Defense confirms that Raytheon's Welsh operations are directly and substantially involved in delivering hundreds more air-to-ground missiles to the Saudi Arabian military. That $300 million deal, incidentally, was signed a week after the chief executive officer of Raytheon flew to Riyadh to lobby Mohammed bin Salman on whose instruction Jamal Khashoggi, whom the First Minister just referred to, was reportedly murdered. So, can I ask you, First Minister, to honour your pledge and commit that not a single penny more of public money from Wales will go to a company involved in the supply of weapons to this murderous and barbaric regime?

Well, the leader of Plaid Cymru has raised an important issue there in terms of Raytheon. It's not clear what the involvement of the Raytheon plant in Deeside is with regard to Saudi Arabia. I will, however, find out, and I will write to him once I've established what the connection is. Upon seeing the results of that investigation, I will then of course respond fully to the points that he's raised.

Leader of the UKIP group, Gareth Bennett.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, one of the early policies enacted by the Welsh Government was to introduce a new educational qualification, the Welsh baccalaureate, or 'Welsh bac', as it is known. The Welsh bac has come under criticism, so do you still believe it has been a worthwhile addition to the national curriculum in Wales?

Yes.

Yes, I thought you would probably endorse it, so thank you for the answer. I have to say that you didn't tell us why you think that, but perhaps that will become—[Interruption.] I didn't ask. That may perhaps become clearer as we progress. I have to say—[Interruption.] I have to say, the majority of students doing the A-level version of the Welsh bac probably don't agree with your assessment of it—not as far as I can see. One of the issues is that A-level students trying to get into the UK's top universities have enough on their plate as it is with three A-levels to cope with. Then, your Government goes and handicaps them in Wales by forcing them to study an extra subject, the Welsh bac, which most of the top UK universities don't even recognise, and which doesn't count towards their grades for getting onto the top courses. Would you accept that your—[Interruption.] Would you accept that your Welsh bac is simply making life more difficult for Welsh A-level students?

This is not American politics. We like to see questions that are asked on the basis of evidence—any evidence, actually. He said that most A-level students probably wouldn't agree with me. He offers no evidence for that. He suggests that most universities see the Welsh bac as some kind of imposition or don't recognise it. There's no evidence for that at all. He believes that the Welsh bac itself is somehow handicapping our students. There's no evidence for that at all. Because what I can tell him is—I have a child, he's 16 years old, he's studying GCSEs this year, and the Welsh bac is immensely useful, because it teaches students how to operate in life and in work beyond academic subjects. They'll research topics and find out about areas like community work, they look at entrepreneurship—all the things that aren't taught in traditional subjects. So, I think what the bac does is prepare our young people in the broadest way possible not just for academic qualifications, but for the world of work. I know that many employers that I've spoken to—so that I'm not accused of making things up—have said to me that they find that those who've gone through the Welsh bac and have that qualification are better prepared to start in the world of work.

Yes, you say it prepares them better, but it also hinders them from getting onto the top courses. Now, you wanted—[Interruption.] You wanted evidence, so listen to some evidence. We know from freedom of information requests that in 2017 Oxford and Cambridge universities made 153 conditional offers to Welsh-domiciled students, none of which included the Welsh bac. Imperial College London said that it is not standard practice to make offers that include the Welsh bac. Indeed, out of 19 Russell Group universities, 14 of them made more conditional offers that did not include the Welsh bac to Welsh-based students than those that did. Therefore, would you agree that, based on the evidence before us, the Welsh bac does nothing to help Welsh students into top universities and everything, in fact, to hinder them? And would you agree with me that your Government should now seriously consider abolishing the Welsh bac altogether?

No. He doesn't like it because it's Welsh. Let's be honest. He doesn't like anything Welsh, that's the reason why he doesn't like the Welsh bac.

Again, he offers no evidence. All he says is that some universities—and Cambridge is supportive of the Welsh bac; we know that, they've said it—are making offers where they rely on traditional A-level grades. They're not saying the Welsh bac is a handicap. And the Welsh bac is not just a qualification in academic terms. It is a qualification that prepares, as I've said, young people for the world of work. Universities are interested in academic grades, employers are interested in academic grades, yes, but also the readiness and preparedness of a young person to enter the world of work. It's something now that of course is being copied in England. I suppose if it's adopted there he'll be all in favour of the Welsh bac at that point, as long as it's called something else, that's not Welsh. 

No, I think we have done well in preparing our young people for the future. We have grafted the Welsh bac onto the traditional curriculum, and I can say from my own personal experience looking at it with my son, it does an immense amount of good in broadening the horizons of so many youngsters, which they need in order to make themselves even more employable in the future. 

It is a central ambition of the Government that everyone in Wales has a fair opportunity to live a healthy life, irrespective of their background or where they live. We continue to tackle the root causes of health inequalities through national and local action, and across Government.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. In spite of the significant investment in health services in my constituency, we can see that there still remains an alarming health trend amongst the local population. You'll be aware that in 2016 the annual report of the Chief Medical Officer for Wales highlighted the social inequities that affect areas like Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney. Now, clearly adequate funding of local health and care services in order to overcome these inequalities must remain as the core of the Welsh Government's work in the years ahead, but given that these inequalities stubbornly persist, what more can the Welsh Government do to ensure that income and social class do not continue to be barriers to good health?

Tackling social inequality is a cross-Government priority, as demonstrated by the fact it's a central ambition of 'Prosperity for All'. To give examples of Government programmes that are tackling the root cause of health inequalities, they include employment programmes, quality housing and access to childcare. They're combined with programmes to address healthy behaviour and improved access to healthcare, because we know that will reduce barriers to good health as well. And, of course, the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 provides new impetus in tackling the persistent underlying causes of health inequalities through working differently with partners, intervening earlier and promoting better integration between services.

First Minister, Merthyr Tydfil has the highest level of childhood obesity in Wales. Seventeen and a half per cent of children in Merthyr Tydfil are obese, more than double the figure of the Vale of Glamorgan. In the view of the fact that diabetes is the fastest growing health crisis in Wales, what action is the Welsh Government taking to target areas of high childhood obesity, such as Merthyr Tydfil, to reduce future pressures on the NHS in Wales, please? 

Well, there's consistent evidence to suggest that an investment in the early years significantly improves health, social and economic outcomes. So, our Healthy Child Wales programme has been developed with a standard universal NHS offer for all families with children aged nought to seven. That offers a consistent range of preventative and early intervention measures and, importantly, guidance to support parenting and healthy lifestyle choices. It also identifies families in need of additional support. So, that's one example, that programme, of what we are doing in order to ensure that the issue of obesity is tackled early on in a child's life, before difficult habits start to form.

Lifting the housing revenue account borrowing cap is significant. It's welcome in Wales. It's a u-turn, but, nevertheless, we do welcome what has been done. It will help local authorities to deliver on their council house building strategies. And we're working closely with those authorities to fully understand the benefits.  

I also welcome the fact that this cap has been lifted. It will also allow local authorities to work effectively with other organisations, especially housing associations. I note the interesting partnership model that exists in Warrington council, where they have increased the total loans to housing associations by hundreds of millions of pounds. That sort of imagination we could see in Wales, with potential for local authorities to commission housing association development teams or to partner on modern methods of construction to achieve the scale that we need in this regard. And, as you, I think, also referred to, the 20,000 home target that we have in this Assembly term for social homes is another key area. But we need to go way beyond and ensure the new borrowing powers are used very, very effectively. 

Yes, that's true. One thing I can say is that the Minister has commissioned an independent review of the affordable housing supply. That's looking at a range of policies and processes to ensure we maximise the number of homes we get from our considerable investment. And, of course, the lifting of the borrowing cap will form part of the panel's consideration, and we expect recommendations from that panel in April of next year.

I think it's fair to say that it's fairly vague at the moment, and fairly incoherent in terms of how it might operate or how much money might be available. I raised it, certainly, last week with David Lidington. It's not clear how it would work, how much money would be available and, of course, how it would work in terms of meshing with the devolved settlement. We simply have to wait and see.

I thank the First Minister for that response, and I'm aware that there have been pre-consultation meetings taking place in Wales, and the most recent one, I think, was last Friday, with representatives of the third sector. So, I don't know if the First Minister has got any feedback from those meetings, but doesn't he agree that it is absolutely crucial that the future of regional policy lies in the hands of the Welsh Government, and that the focus should be on tackling inequality as a means of improving prosperity and productivity?

Absolutely, because that is a devolved responsibility. It would be wholly inappropriate for a shared prosperity fund to be administered entirely from Whitehall, bypassing the Government and the Assembly completely. That would cut across what the UK Government has said about devolved responsibilities in a very serious way.

There was indeed a stakeholder event in Cardiff that took place on Thursday and Friday last week regarding the shared prosperity fund. In fairness, our officials were invited the day before. So, we didn't get much notice of that event taking place, but it does give you an example of the incoherent approach that's being taken where the Wales Office arranges something, doesn't tell anybody, appears to cut across devolved responsibility even though it has no powers of its own, and then all that does is confuse businesses. Well, I think it would be far better if the UK Government were clearer and followed the approach that we've suggested, where in effect you have a fund that closely mirrors the operation of the current European funds, and, of course, with maximum—a common set of rules, of course, but maximum flexibility for the devolved Governments. 

First Minister, the Member for Cardiff North makes a very good point when she says that future regional policy should be controlled by the Welsh Government, by this Assembly—a point that you've echoed yourself. Whilst I appreciate that there are still details, a large number of details, about the shared prosperity fund to be effectively ironed out, it's important that when the current European funding ends and the shared prosperity fund, whatever final form that takes, kicks in—it's important at that point that the Welsh Government is best placed to access that funding. What are you doing to make sure that Welsh Government departments across portfolios are fit for purpose and are ready to be at the front of the queue to access that shared prosperity funding as soon as we do leave the EU? Because it's important that there isn't a gap in funding.

Well, the structure is there, of course. We've had years of dealing with European funds. The Wales European Funding Office and other departments are well used to dealing with this kind of funding structure. The shared prosperity fund is not of itself a bad idea. It's how much money will be available and how it is administered that we are troubled by. It's hugely important, as the Member himself, in fairness, has said, that this in effect replaces European funds in terms of the actual quantum available but that the responsibilities and rights of this Chamber and the Government are protected as the shared prosperity fund is developed. We'd prefer to be part of that conversation to make sure that the fund operates not just as far as Wales is concerned but works properly across the whole of the UK.

Of course, we still have questions about the existing arrangements before moving to the so-called shared prosperity fund. The First Minister will be aware of the audit office report on the impact of a 'no deal' separation on structural and regional funding as they stand. At the time of the report's publication in August, it noted that WEFO had exceeded its spending targets in three out of four of its operational programmes and underspent in one, which was west Wales and the Valleys. In the first instance, is the First Minister able to reassure us that overspends will be covered by the UK Government in the event of a 'no deal' separation, and can he update the Assembly further on whether all spending targets in all operational programmes are now being met or exceeded?

It's very unusual for spending programmes to spend 100 per cent of the money in any financial year, because some projects are kept over to the other financial year. I can't offer him comfort in terms of how overspends might be dealt with; the UK Government have given us no comfort on that or any other issue regarding European funding post 2022. There's no doubt that a 'no deal' Brexit would be hugely costly. We can try to mitigate against it but the reality is we can't prevent the economic disaster that would occur if there was a 'no deal' Brexit, which is why I hope that there is a satisfactory deal on the table. We wait to see. I hope that those who at the moment see a 'no deal' Brexit as no problem will come to their senses when that deal is considered in the UK Parliament. 

I think the work they've done is very useful and it's a very useful addition to our existing knowledge in this area. We will, of course, consider the recommendations carefully in light of our current initiatives to support town centres.

Thank you, First Minister. I agree with you: I think the work they've commissioned gives a solid evidence base, which is the kind of deep work that can of course lead to positive changes in Government policy and action. Let's remember that over 1 million people live in Wales's towns. We hear lots about city deals, but how do you feel a potential mid Wales growth deal can empower those who live in the towns of mid Wales to identify and promote their towns? The report that was commissioned also talks about ideas coming from the grass roots upwards. So, how do you believe that a potential mid Wales growth deal can support that aim?

I think that's important. If we look at the bids process of business improvement districts, they have been led by businesses in respective towns. Any growth deal must be targeted specifically to the needs and requirements of the area in which that growth deal is based. So, certainly, as a growth deal is developed, it's hugely important to have the maximum amount of engagement with retail businesses in town centres and all those in the rural economy.

First Minister, you'll be aware that the report shows clearly—and, of course, we already knew this—that empty shops detract from the overall performance of town centres and deter new businesses from locating themselves there. You will probably know that the Plaid Cymru-led Carmarthenshire County Council has made a big investment in Llanelli, buying shops, breaking them into smaller units that people can then afford to rent, and turning the upper levels of the shops into residential properties that also bring people in to live in the town centre. What further support can the Welsh Government provide to local authorities to enable them to continue to respond creatively to the crisis that is faced by many of our town centres?

I think we have to accept that we are not likely to see the same number of retail units in towns in the future. If I look at my own home town of Bridgend, there are many, many units that are empty and will probably never be filled. Some of them have been empty for many, many years. So, what then should happen? Well, a lot of them may be turned into residential units, to ensure there's a better mix in town centres. In my home town, it's been happening for 30 years or more. 

How do we then create more vibrant towns that are mixed in terms of their provision—some of it residential, some of it business, some of it will be retail, some of it will be restaurants, bars—to create that buzz in the town, not just in the day but in the evening as well? I think also it's important that consideration is given to when shops open in town centres, because, of course, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. doesn't suit most people any more, and, unless you have a very big footfall in a town centre because there are offices there, then you will lose out.

But, in terms of what the Government is doing, we have our targeted regeneration investment programme. That means capital funding of £100 million across Wales over three years to support regionally prioritised regeneration projects in town centres. We have the European-funded Building for the Future programme, which is providing £54 million to acquire, refurbish or redevelop unused buildings and land within or close to town or city centres across west Wales and the Valleys. And, of course, our town centre loan scheme has provided £27.5 million since 2014 to bring empty, underused sites and premises in town centres back into use. 

First Minister, when I speak to residents up and down the Cynon Valley, there's great passion about wanting to see our town centres rejuvenated. But, at the same time, that's often set against a reluctance by local people to actually shop locally. And when I speak to them about the reasons for that, one of the things that's most often cited is the lack of diversity of businesses on our high streets. Now, clearly, that's quite a difficult interface between the public and private sectors, but what is the Welsh Government doing to try and encourage local entrepreneurs to create that more diverse offer on our high streets?

I think part of the solution to this lies in retailers working together and, as the Member has said, creating a reason for people to go into town centres. Town centres are shut, often, by 5.30pm. If people are not working in those town centres, in reality they're shut all week. So thought needs to be given to opening hours, I believe, in order to make those town centres more accessible in the future. 

She mentioned her own constituency. I know that underused sites and premises in town centres are being brought back into use, and Aberdare is one of those areas that's been identified for that support. Aberdare, of course, is also one of the 10 additional BIDs that are being developed as a result of our recently announced further funding of £262,000. But, of course, what's important here is the money is made available for local businesses to decide how best to promote themselves. That's the key to it. We don't know how to do it. They will have ideas on the ground. That's why we wanted to make sure that they were fully engaged and have been from the start.

Equity and inclusion are at the heart of our national mission for education. We are committed to ensuring all learners can access a high standard of education and reach their full potential. And implementation, of course, of the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018 is expected to begin in September 2020.

Thank you. Well, we know that children, pupils, young people with additional learning needs have seen their short-term exclusion rates in school go up, against the overall trend. Only two weeks ago, I was contacted by another parent, in this case in Conwy, where their autistic son had been excluded for 43 days after an autistic meltdown in school—the 43 days coincidentally taking him to the end of his term at the end of primary school. He then got, the parents told me, no support for transition into secondary school—because their son was 'such a naughty boy'. How, therefore, will you as a Welsh Government be ensuring that the education sector across Wales understands the court ruling in August, where the National Autistic Society intervened on behalf of some parents, and the court ruled for the first time that all schools must make sure that they have made appropriate adjustments for autistic children or those with other disabilities before they can resort to exclusion. 

Clearly, schools will have to take note of the court ruling. I can say that work has already started to support the new statutory system; it's not simply a question of waiting until September 2020 for everything to start. We are upskilling the workforce so that they're able to meet the needs of learners with ALN. That includes developing a professional learning offer for teachers, and funding to train educational psychologists and specialist teachers of the sensory impaired. So, yes, it's important that the law is in place and is ready to begin its course in September 2020, but we are investing to make sure that practitioners will be ready for when the changes come in September 2020.

First Minister, one of the biggest challenges for children with additional learning needs in education is actually getting the additional learning needs recognised. I've had many families who are facing tireless fights just to get that recognition for their child so that they can go through the processes. Now, I appreciate that the additional learning needs Act will actually give them opportunities, and the other measures that you've taken with CAMHS and extra funding in CAMHS. But families need to ensure that that's there. Councils are facing difficult times ahead of them, with austerity and the measures. Will you monitor the funding for additional learning needs very carefully, and ensure that, as that comes in, local authorities will not have to fund additional funding to make sure that that works? Because I'm sure the demand will go up once they realise it's working.  

I can assure the Member that £20 million has been made available for this Assembly term to support implementation of the Act and delivery of the wider ALN transformation programme. And, of course, we will work with local authorities to ensure that they're able to meet their legal obligations from 2020 onwards. 

The hope, of course, is that the additional learning needs Act will truly transform education for these children and young people, but, as we’ve heard, sufficient resources are crucial, but also the appropriate skills. There is a question as to whether those skills are available across the board at the moment. How confident are you, therefore, that the high expectations that pupils, parents and teachers have in light of this new legislation—how confident can you be that these expectations will be delivered, given the cuts that we’re facing, especially?

I’m confident. As I said earlier, we have been developing a structure of professional learning for teachers, and we’ve also ensured that funding is available to promote educational psychologists and specialist teachers. We’ve also implemented a wide package of training in order to help everybody who’s part of the system to support learners with ALN so that they understand and prepare for the new system that’s going to be in place in 2020. So, we’re confident that the system, because of the fact that there will have been quite a long time before this new legislation comes into force—that the new system will be ready to begin properly when the Act comes into force. 

The Government’s priorities are set out in 'Prosperity for All'. Of course, it is for authorities to determine how they spend their funding allocation through the revenue support grant, together with their other income from specific grants, council tax and other sources.

Thank you, First Minister. I know you like to accuse this side of the Chamber of calling for funding increases in all areas of Government; I'm sure in an ideal world we would all like to see that. But it's not just this side of the Chamber—[Interruption.] Or, indeed, your Minister emeritus. It's not just this side of the Chamber that has concerns about local government funding; the Welsh Local Government Association have also spoken about the way that local services are being threatened, and that the system is creaking under some of the funding problems they've had. Welsh Government is set to receive a significant uplift from the UK Government as a result of the recent UK Government budget. Can you reassure local authorities in Wales that they will at least receive a fair share of this new cake that is coming as a result of that UK Government budget, so that local authorities can at least be a little reassured in the short to medium term that local services can be protected?  

Well, just to reiterate what I said before, local authorities are at the front of the queue. We are looking to see what kind of further financial package might be made available to local authorities, and that is something we will be considering over the course of the next week or two. We do understand, of course, the fact that austerity has imposed such a squeeze on local authority finances, and I believe that, when we state to the Assembly how we plan to deal with the not anything like as much amount as was announced by the Chancellor, but nevertheless some consequential that we have received in Wales, the package that we have for local government will be fair given the circumstances we've found ourselves in. 

Finally, question 9—Andrew R. T. Davies. 

Yes. Our longer term plan for health and social care confirms we will significantly increase investment in both our IT infrastructure and the skills needed to accelerate digital change across the NHS, and that will include £50 million of revenue and capital in the coming year to support transformational change.

First Minister, you'll be aware of the Public Accounts Committee report that came out last week looking at IT provision within the Welsh NHS, and a damning report, to say the least, it was. I appreciate you won't comment specifically on that report because I will get the line that the Government is considering the report, but IT is a huge component of the delivery of healthcare within the whole of Wales. One element of that report identified the cancer computer network that was, in 2014, delisted from Microsoft support and has had outages on a regular basis. This greatly impacts the delivery of services for cancer patients, as identified by the charity Macmillan. This cannot be tolerated, surely, First Minister. What action is the Welsh Government taking on the broader narrative of improving IT services within Wales in the NHS, but specifically around cancer services that have such a demoralising effect, as the committee report identified, on staff who work in cancer services at Velindre hospital within my region? 

I can't give a response to the recommendations that the committee has tabled, but I will say this: clearly the report makes troublesome reading, clearly there is a need for action, and there will be action. There will be action in terms of funding, but clearly there needs to be action in terms of acceptance of new ways of working. We can't carry on with the old ways of working simply because people are used to them. So, the Government's response to the committee's report will encompass all features of what a robust response has to be and a constructive response has to be, looking at all factors including, of course, the financial.  

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item, therefore, is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the leader of the house to make the statement—Julie James. 

Diolch, Llywydd. There's one change to today's agenda—to amend the title of the statement on valuing our teachers—investing in their excellence. Additionally, Business Committee has agreed to reduce the time allocated to questions to the Assembly Commission tomorrow. Finally, no topic has been tabled for tomorrow's short debate. Draft business for the next few weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically. 

Leader of the house, can I call for an oral statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services on the Welsh Government's recent decision to provide abortions in Wales for women who are normally resident in Northern Ireland? The decision, as you will be aware, was announced on Friday. Just this morning, I received an e-mail from over 60 women living in Northern Ireland asking me to raise this issue as a matter of urgency. These women have said that they are appalled that one part of the UK that enjoys devolution should act to undermine the devolved arrangements in another part of the UK, and they are very concerned, frankly, that the decision to provide abortions has been made in spite of the significant opposition that women from Northern Ireland have expressed during the public consultation that the Welsh Government held on the matter.

Now, I understand from reading the summary of responses that there were 802 consultation responses in all, 788 of which—over 98 per cent—opposed the Welsh Government's plans, and the consultation report says that a significant proportion of those were from women in Northern Ireland. There were just 14 submissions that were in support of the Government's plans, none of which came from a single woman in Northern Ireland. This is an unusual consultation, of course, because it is uniquely and exclusively looking at the impact on women living in another devolved jurisdiction, and I think it's very important that when these sorts of consultations—these unusual ones—happen, the views of women living in that jurisdiction should be taken into account. What is the point in holding public consultations if the outcome of those public consultations is to be ignored? I think that this Assembly deserves an explanation from the Cabinet Secretary as to why he's ignored the views of women in Northern Ireland and why he feels it is appropriate to undermine the devolved arrangements in another part of the UK. 

The Cabinet Secretary's already issued a statement on this issue, and I'm sure the Member is well aware of that. I can arrange for the statement to be forwarded to him if it's slipped his attention.

Leader of the house, you may remember that, earlier this year, I raised concerns with regard to the fact that over £36 million of public money had been spent on developing a 106-acre strategic business park at Felindre to the north of Swansea, yet, despite being in public ownership for 20 years, the business park was still empty. The Parc Felindre strategic business park has been promoted by the Welsh Government and Swansea council as having, and I quote:

'the potential to become a centre for networking and knowledge exchange in South Wales for emerging industries and specialist sectors such as R&D, life sciences, advanced engineering and ICT'.

The current Parc Felindre website currently states that Parc Felindre has planning permission for B1 and B2 uses, i.e., for emerging industries such as high-tech manufacturing and high-level services. Last week, as you will no doubt be aware, Swansea council leader Rob Stewart announced that the first potential tenant for the site, however, instead of a high-tech manufacturing firm, instead of emerging sectors such as research and development, life sciences, advanced engineering and ICT—the firm in fact was DPD, which wants to build a parcel delivery depot on part of the site. The firm, of course, already has a base in the Llansamlet area of the city. Now, whilst any jobs are to be welcomed, I'm sure that you'd agree that this announcement fails to meet the expectations that the Welsh Government and Swansea council set for themselves. Given that this site has been promoted as a potential jewel in the crown, will the Cabinet Secretary for the economy bring forward a statement on how he sees the site developing over the next few months and years and, following £36 million of public investment, will he state how he believes that the Welsh Government and Swansea council will deliver against the development brief of attracting top-end high-skilled jobs to the site?

Well, Dai Lloyd, thank you for those points. I, for one, welcome the creation of jobs in the Swansea area in the constituency of my colleague Mike Hedges. I think Swansea council and the Welsh Assembly Government have actually worked very hard indeed to get inward investment into that site. I'm very much in favour of the jobs that are coming there, and I think that Swansea council is to be congratulated on its efforts in this regard.

I'm sure that the leader of the house is aware of the research findings issued today by the Welsh Governance Centre on self-harm and violence at the young offender institutions in England and Wales. There were some rather alarming statistics about Parc young offenders' institution in that research. Children aged 15 to 17 recorded the highest rate of self-harm out of the five comparable institutions in Wales and England and also the highest rate of assaults, which is concerning. So, I wondered if it would be possible for, maybe, the Cabinet Secretary responsible for justice to make a statement to the Assembly about why, apparently, these figures appear to be so concerning.

I share your concern entirely. YOI Parc houses some of the most vulnerable people from our communities, and it's extremely important that they receive both the care and support they need to see them safely through to adulthood. Obviously, I completely agree with you that every effort should be made to keep children who are in custody for one reason or another safe and in appropriate placements. It's very much our view that placing a child in a young offender institution within the curtilage of a male adult prison is not conducive to the rehabilitative process that we would obviously like to see for all children. I'm certainly happy to discuss it with my colleague the Cabinet Secretary. We are due to have a discussion about the prison estate in general, and I'll certainly be including it in that and I'll report back to the Member on how those discussions have gone.

Leader of the house, could I seek two statements, if possible, please? The first is from the health Secretary, in relation to maternity services in Wales. When he made a statement in relation to the incident at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital and staffing at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital, he gave an assurance that his officials were working with health boards across Wales to satisfy himself that staffing numbers were up to the quota that was required in those maternity units the length and breadth of Wales. He did indicate he'd bring that assurance back to the Chamber, or certainly write to Members. I'm unaware—and I'm sure it's not a deliberate oversight, but I'm unaware that that has happened to date, but I think it would be reassuring if we could have that information, either via a statement, or certainly in a letter written to Members, that he can give that assurance that maternity units across the length and breadth of Wales are up to quota on the number of midwives and other staff that are associated with those units.

And the second statement or assurance from the Government or assurance from the Government I'd like to seek, if possible, please, is in light of the announcement this morning from the High Court that the Sargeant family do have the ability to take their case forward for consideration by the High Court. I note that the family's solicitors indicated that it is now within the gift of the Welsh Government to come forward with proposals that would allow the inquiry to resume its work, and I would hope that the Welsh Government would, in light of, obviously, the judgment this morning, come forward with proposals, as the solicitors indicated, that would facilitate the recommencement of the inquiry. Can the Government give that assurance that it will be in a position to do that, or is it committed to making sure this case goes all the way through the courts?

Well, taking that one first, obviously, we'll be taking advice on the best way to deal with the judicial review and, of course, we want the best outcome for the Sargeant family. So, I'm sure that the First Minister and his legal advisers will be taking that into account, and, as soon as we're aware of what's going on, we will make sure that the Chamber is aware of that as well. Obviously, I can't comment on any of the merits of the case or anything else as it's clearly in a legal process.

In terms of the maternity services point that you raise, the health Secretary did indeed say that he would come back to us, and I will explore with him the best method of doing that and the timescale that he had in mind.

Leader of the house, would you consider asking the Cabinet Secretary for the environment to make an oral statement with regard to best practice as to how local authorities should consult with communities about proposed major planning applications, particularly when the local authority itself is the applicant? I met this weekend with residents of Abermule, a village in Powys, who are very concerned about the proposed major recycling centre that's planned for their village. I'm not in any way suggesting that, through the consultation, the county council has done anything improper, but it is clear that the residents of the village—and if I tell you that it's a village of 700 households, and over 500 people are signed up to the protest group, that shows the level of concern—don't feel that they were fully informed, nor do they feel they were listened to. So, I would be grateful to hear from the Cabinet Secretary what further guidance the Welsh Government might be able to provide to local authorities to avoid communities finding themselves in this situation in the future.

Well, obviously we can't comment on individual applications of that sort. I know that 'Planning Policy Wales' is under review by the Cabinet Secretary, and I'm sure she'll take—

[Inaudible.]

So, there'll be something coming forward before the end of term on the review of 'Planning Policy Wales' in its strategic form, but, obviously, we can't comment on the individual circumstances.

Can I ask for two statements? Leader of the house, I, again, return to an issue that affects your constituency and mine as well as those of several of our colleagues, namely the closure of the Virgin Media call centre in Swansea. Can I ask for a statement on the support being given by the Welsh Government taskforce to those seeking alternative employment?

And can I also ask for a statement on economic development in the Swansea area, outlining the success of the development in Swansea vale, outlining the success of the SA1 development, and how the Felindre development, which is the next major site on the development plan, will fit into that?

In terms of the ongoing engagement with Virgin Media, the taskforce continues to be engaged with all of the staff and with the company itself. I will ask the Cabinet Secretary, at an appropriate point in the engagement of the taskforce, to update Members by way of letter as to exactly where we are, how many people have gone through the process and so on. There is a normal situation with taskforces, and this one is—as Mike Hedges knows—very much ongoing at the moment. I just remind the Chamber that the company has given an assurance that employees who stay all the way till the end date will not be disadvantaged and, conversely, employees leaving early because they've secured alternative employment will also not be disadvantaged. That's an important concession by the company, it's worth reiterating.

And in terms of the development in the Swansea area, I will certainly speak with the Cabinet Secretary about making available to Members the statistics on the successful economic development arrangements that have been in place in Swansea vale, in his constituency, and the surrounding area for some time.

Leader of the house, may I ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for health on the complaints procedure in the NHS in Wales? Last year, a record number of complaints about health services were made to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. Complaints made about Nye Bevan health board increased by 24 per cent. In response, the ombudsman said that evidence suggests

'there is a cultural problem when it comes to dealing with complaints in the Welsh NHS.'

Can we have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary with his response to the ombudsman's concerns and outlining what plans he has to review the complaints procedures in the NHS in Wales?

Yes. We take complaints right across Government public services very seriously indeed, and we view them very much as a learning opportunity to ensure that services can be the very best they can be and that lessons are learnt from complaints. A rise in complaints is not always a bad thing. Sometimes it indicates a particular confidence in the system, and that people's complaints will, in fact, be answered. So, I'm not aware of the particular circumstances the Member talks about. I will discuss with the Cabinet Secretary for health whether there are any general points that can be derived that would be of use to the Chamber in terms of the overarching points that he raises on the ombudsman's findings. 

I’ve very aware of the concerns of parents, teachers and education leaders in north Wales as a result of GCSE English exam results. It appears that children in north Wales who sat the exams in the summer of 2018 have been let down. Up to 700 children could have been impacted by this—children who would have had grade C or above if they’d been treated equally with children who sat the exams in 2017. This affects their career options for the future, which is clearly unfair.

There is a further claim—a very serious one—that teachers in north Wales have lost confidence in two bodies: Qualifications Wales and WJEC. Will you ensure that these concerns are taken seriously? Will you ask the Cabinet Secretary for Education to conduct a short inquiry to see what has gone wrong? Qualifications Wales has conducted an inquiry—I’m aware of that—but perhaps there is a need for a further inquiry and an independent one.

Qualifications Wales is independent of the Government. That's its role, and it has conducted that inquiry and it has been very clear that it doesn't think that there is an issue as the Member sets out. I'd just remind the Chamber that Qualifications Wales was set up with that independent remit in the first place in order to be distant from the Cabinet Secretary on these decisions. 

Leader of the house, earlier this year, I raised the issue of pollution emanating from Tata with you and, basically, the pollution being a nuisance—'dust' as it's known. It does cause great problems for many of my constituents. Following the issue that I raised, I was informed that the Minister for Environment might be meeting with Tata, and I know that she's attended the air quality unit in the university bay campus as well. Could we have a statement from the Minister outlining the issues that she identified as a consequence of that, so that we can talk about how we address the pollution issues in my constituency and how Tata are working towards improving the well-being of the individuals living close by?

At the same time, could I also have a statement from the economy Secretary in relation to Tata, as to what the Welsh Government is doing to discuss with Tata the investment in modern equipment to ensure that the modernisation of the plant also works towards diminishing the pollution?

Yes, I'll ensure that the Minister writes to the Member and copies it to all other Assembly Members. I think there are a number of us with an interest in that, and that can encompass the issues that arise in the Cabinet Secretary's portfolio as well. 

I call for two statements, firstly on something often referred to, which is the reduction of single-use plastic, but in the context of reusable bottles. I've been asked by water company Hafren Dyfrdwy Limited, Severn Dee, to join them in promoting their Refill in Wrexham initiative, which is launching, I believe, tomorrow, working collaboratively with the Welsh Government and foundling not-for-profit organisation City to Sea, where a national tap water campaign will encourage businesses, cafes, museums and restaurants to provide free refills, with businesses simply displaying a blue refill sticker in their windows, and a supporting smartphone app showing the locations of all water refill stations. 

Secondly, can I call for a statement on myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome—ME/CFS—in Wales, after I hosted three weeks ago the showing of Unrest in the Senedd and the discussion on behalf of ME support in Glamorgan and WAMES, the Welsh Association of ME and CFS Support in Wales? We heard that the cost to the UK economy of these conditions is £3.5 billion per annum. We heard that WAMES is calling on the Cabinet Secretary to address as a matter of urgency the continuing need for improved access to timely diagnosis, for GPs to fully understand the symptoms of the condition, and for the development of clinical expertise in Wales, with a standardised training and awareness programme. Also, we saw a copy of the ME Trust 2018-21 strategy, the 'Vision into Action' paper, saying that parts of the UK, such as Wales, have no specialist services. And, finally in this context, I'd like to consider the evidence we received from Dr Nina Muirhead, not only an NHS doctor but also an academic who's currently working with Cardiff University in implementing a pilot trial, introducing ME/CFS into the medical school curriculum here, uniquely so far in the UK. She says that she's very concerned that NICE guidelines say that graded exercise therapy, GET, and cognitive behavioural therapy, CBT, are the recommended treatments in NICE guidelines, when she says that these are causing harm, potentially, to patients and should be removed, as they have in America by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Well, the Member has done his usual very good job at highlighting the issues he wants raised all by himself, so I don't think there's any need for a supporting statement. And I know the Minister is very pleased with her refill policy, and no doubt will be bringing something back to the Chamber in the course of it to tell us how well it's doing.

Leader of the house, there’s been quite some expectation of a statement and a vote on the future of plans for the M4 in the south-east over the next few weeks. We expect something—or we did expect something—at the beginning of December. Could you explain to the Assembly what the likelihood is at the moment that there could be some delay in the timing of that debate and give us an explanation of some of the factors that will influence that timetable?

Yes, certainly. When I was stepping in for the First Minister during First Minister's questions, I set out for the Assembly the legal process in which we are involved as a result of the inquiry and its findings, and the quite specific and very legalistic process that that follows. We haven't scheduled that debate so far because we're in the process of that. We have kept some space available on the Plenary timetable, should it be possible to schedule it in the time frame that was originally envisaged. We still hope that that might be the case, but, if not, then I'll certainly provide an explanation of exactly where we are and what the timescale has become.

Leader of the house, today is World Kindness Day. It's a day to celebrate and promote kindness in all its forms, from small acts of kindness, to fighting for a new, kinder politics, which is something that I've been calling for since arriving in this place, with support from Members from across the Chamber, including Darren Millar, Bethan Sayed and Julie Morgan, just to name a small few. The little conversations you have each day are all the experience you need to actually help save a life, and it's why I'm really pleased to be supporting the Samaritans' Small Talk Saves Lives campaign, and I hope Members, and the Welsh Government themselves, will support that with me as well. In a recent speech, I said that there are some, including the powerful in our economy and in political life, who cannot imagine that kindness works as a political strategy, and, once again, I do not agree with that. So, I was absolutely delighted to read the recent report from the Carnegie UK Trust, 'Kindness, Emotions and Human Relationships: the Blind Spot in Public Policy', and, as it rightly highlights, there is now a growing recognition of the importance of kindness and relationships for societal well-being in public policy making. So, with that in mind, leader of the house, what collective steps is the Welsh Government taking to make sure this becomes a reality?

I completely support Jack Sargeant in his campaign for this. I had no idea it was World Kindness Day, but I'm very happy to be told that and to say that that's a very good idea. I'm certainly very supportive of the Small Talk Saves Lives campaign from the Samaritans, and their excellent work. I had the privilege at lunchtime today to be sponsoring the multifaith forum and its community walk, and the real privilege of talking to people about how much each individual contribution to the way that we conduct ourselves in our society matters and builds up into a whole of which we can be proud, whereas everything that we do that we might not be so proud of also builds up into something, and that individual lives, and individual actions, very much matter. So, I entirely endorse his remarks. I have not read the Carnegie UK Trust report, but I will make sure that I do so. I'm sure it says something very similar. And I was very proud today to be standing with a forum of people who agree that, here in Wales, we can build a better future for Wales, based on acceptance, embracement of everyone here and of kindness and neighbourliness in all of its forms.

Leader of the house, are you able to inform Members when you expect to be able to make a statement on lot 2 of phase 2 of the Superfast Cymru programme? I see you smiling as I ask the question. And, secondly, can I request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport on when he'll be providing Members with a copy of the remit letter and business plan for Transport for Wales that he's already committed to doing? A remit letter for Transport for Wales, I'd suggest, should have really already been made available to Members by now.

On that second one, I'll certainly discuss that with my Cabinet colleague and make sure that it's circulated as soon as possible. The reason I was smiling, Russell George, is because I'm answering oral Assembly questions tomorrow, and a large number of them are tabled on the issue that you raised. So, if there is a need for a further statement after that, I will certainly make sure that it happens.

Thank you, leader of the house.

The next item, therefore, is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education on valuing our teachers—investing in their excellence. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to make the statement—Kirsty Williams.

Diolch, Llywydd. As we move closer towards the realisation of our new curriculum for Wales, we are accelerating the pace in developing the professional learning culture and infrastructure to ensure that curriculum reform becomes a reality. Recognising and promoting teaching excellence is one of the priorities in my agreement with the First Minister. It is a key objective of 'Our national mission', our shared action plan for education reform, and it is crucial to translating the new curriculum into practice. Although we have already made significant inroads in supporting practitioners, our journey is far from complete. To support us in this endeavour, a robust approach to professional learning is vital. The world’s highest performing education systems have vibrant, engaged educators and support staff who are committed to continuous learning. Our new curriculum cannot be delivered without a high-quality education workforce. That is why I am committed to developing a national approach to career-long professional learning that builds capacity from initial teacher education and is embedded in evidence-based research and effective collaboration. 

Through early engagement with the draft curriculum, pioneer schools have considered immediate professional learning implications, and it is clear that a national approach is needed as we rapidly move towards publication of the draft curriculum. The approach is centred on the learner and embodies the four purposes of the new curriculum. It is designed to be responsive to school, local and national priorities, and encompasses the individual learning journey of all practitioners. The new professional learning curriculum is based on the professional learning standards and exploits the benefits of a blend of approaches. The approach has been developed through a process of consultation and co-construction involving the OECD, the unions, universities, regional consortia, local authorities, school leaders, pioneer schools and many others. A range of research projects have been undertaken to provide an evidence base for the components of the approach and ensure overall coherence. I would also like to take this opportunity to recognise the work of the Children, Young People and Education Committee and their constructive challenge on professional learning in supporting the delivery of the curriculum. Last year’s committee report helped bring together valuable input and advice.

When the draft curriculum is launched in April 2019, we will further develop our understanding of the professional learning challenges associated with implementation in schools.  The investment that I'm announcing today gives us and the system the tools to do this successfully. Our own made-in-Wales approach to professional learning is a key point in our reform journey. It pulls together our new professional standards, the schools-as-learning-organisations approach and the professional learning model to create a vision fit for our evolving system.

The new approach will also include a focus on supporting teachers to better understand and improve mental health and well-being. We have listened carefully to the profession on this, and the work that was undertaken by the CYPE committee. In this spirit, I'm committed to making available significant additional funding and resources to support professional learning. In this financial year, we will make an additional £9 million available, and in the next financial year this will increase to £15 million. This means that, in total over the coming 18 months, we will provide an additional £24 million to support the implementation of the national approach. This is the single biggest investment in support for teachers in Wales since devolution. The money will go to the front line and will be targeted to create and release capacity at school and cluster level for structured, managed and resourced engagement with the professional learning needs of the new curriculum. We are expecting a profound transformation in the way our practitioners and leaders think about their professional learning in light of the new curriculum, and we need to provide support to schools to enable them to make this step change. 

This investment will enable teachers, leaders and others in school to take the time that they need to make changes and refine their practice. There will be flexibility as part of the funding, allowing schools to work together in ways that suit their own circumstances. It will support teachers to develop the skills needed for the new curriculum design and delivery, in line with the fundamental shift in approach required in the new curriculum. And it will support dedicated school and cluster-level professional learning coaches and leaders—a key recommendation from university and international research in this area.

Presiding Officer, our national approach to professional learning is fundamental to how we value our teachers and invest in their excellence. We are moving forward in our reform journey with clarity and confidence, giving our teachers the support and investment they need to ensure that they keep on raising standards across our education system. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement today. We're very happy to support quite a lot of what you're saying on this, because we recognise, of course, that Donaldson will require some major reskilling of our teachers and other support staff, hopefully, as well, with the freedom to respond more directly to the different learning styles of pupils, rather than Estyn's more prescriptive take on teaching, shall we say? Thank you also for your comments on the Children, Young People and Education Committee. I think it's a point worth making that constructive criticism is about helping this place do a good job, it's not just a 'Let's get the Government' moment, tempting though that is occasionally. I imagine that you will, of course, be looking forward to our next inquiry, which is on school funding, which, I think, actually, does speak to this statement to some degree as well.

You say that the approach to this new funding on supporting teacher development has been co-constructed with a number of interested parties, including local authorities. Were they aware of your intention to earmark this very welcome new funding for this purpose in the way that you have? And are you confident that this is what it'll be used for as soon as it gets to councils? I appreciate what you say, that this is for the front line, and, obviously, as Welsh Conservatives, we support any direct funding to schools, but I'm quite curious about how you'll monitor the use of this money when you—well, obviously, you know where local authorities are on this at the moment, and there is some public sympathy for the position that they're putting forward.

With regard to the specific amount of money, how did you conclude that succeeding in developing this new professional learning, to the level needed to be successful, was going to cost £24 million? Did you argue with the finance Cabinet Secretary that, actually, to get this absolutely right, you might need more, but this was all he was prepared to give you? Either way, actually, if the local authority is able—and, obviously, this is what I was after in my first question—to use some of this money slightly differently from the purpose for which you intended it, would that actually then diminish the availability of actual funds to provide the training that you think is needed in order to get the job done? I think one of the things we'd all be worried about is that, as a policy objective, this could become fragile and maybe even fail if the money that you've identified as being absolutely necessary doesn't get there.

My next question is: 'What's absolutely necessary?' The £24 million—obviously, the finance Cabinet Secretary said that for next year we're talking about £15 million. Another £9 million has appeared from somewhere, so I'd like you to tell us from where that £9 million has come. I'm not saying it's unwelcome, but with just five months to go before the end of the financial year, how do you expect that £9 million to be spent meaningfully, when any national approach is only anticipated as being rolled out, really, from next year? And moreover, the development of the professional learning offer—only £5.8 million was anticipated as being necessary to develop that. So, that's already developed, effectively, so where does that £9 million fit in? Is it for roll-out? And how would you do that in five months' time?

I heard from your statement that there are a range of research projects ongoing. Well, presumably, they're not going to be ready to inform how that £9 million is to be spent. Or is there something you really, really could bring forward into this year? Because if there is—and there may well be—that's obviously going to release £9 million at the other end of next year's budget. What do you anticipate spending that on? Who are the professional learning coaches and leaders that you're anticipating? I mean, are they available now, or is the anticipation that they would be stepping up and helping us roll out this good plan next year? Are the schools clear about who they would want to release, if you're able to bring a lot of this forward?

I just want to make it plain, really, that I'm asking these questions not to challenge your policy objective, but bearing in mind that local authorities have been clamouring for extra money, not least for their schools budget, how was the decision made that this £9 million, which has come from somewhere, goes for this very creditable and worthy objective at the same time when schools are saying, 'Actually, we can't afford to run our schools.' So, if you could help us and explain that, I would be very grateful. Certainly, the money is welcome, it's just the immediacy of the use of it that I'm curious to know more about.

Thank you very much to Suzy Davies for those observations and questions. I think it is important to recognise the role of the committee in this regard. When the committee looked at the curriculum, this was the committee's No. 1 recommendation: that we needed, as a Government, to address the professional learning needs of the staff, if the objectives of the curriculum were to be developed. I hope that the members of the committee who worked on that report are pleased that we have taken their views into consideration when doing this.

Let me be absolutely clear about how the money will get to the front line. So, in this financial year, the money will be allocated to the regional consortia, who have been involved in the development of this programme and are confident that we can get those resources out to the front line. We're not starting from scratch. There is much evidence base already that has been undertaken, and our pioneer schools that are involved in professional learning have already been trying out some of these techniques. So, this is not a standing start. This is informed by practice that has already been undertaken in schools, and there are some wonderful examples that I can point to. For instance, King Henry VIII school in Abergavenny: a relatively new professional development pioneer, but working really, really hard, not only within their own school, but actually with surrounding cluster schools, to really look at what are the professional learning opportunities and needs if we're to get ready for the curriculum—very proactive in that. Romilly Primary School: again, another example where, already, the mapping has been done for individuals to identify what they feel they need to get ready to be ready for the new curriculum. But, clearly, some of this will have to be developed further when the details of the AoLEs are released in the spring of next year. That will shape our ongoing discussions about what's needed.

The money for next year will be a hypothecated grant to local authorities, which has to be spent on these purposes. Both with regard to money to consortia and to schools, we will be looking to ensure transparency in the method of allocation of the resources and also the monitoring of the funding. Now, there is always, is there not, a balancing act to be struck between creating huge amounts of bureaucracy, especially for individual schools, to account for money, and making sure the money is used for what it is intended for? Therefore, we will be working with regional consortia, who will be required to publish their spending plans for the money, and we will be monitoring the uptake of professional learning opportunities by professional group and by individual school. So, we will be expecting the collection of that data so that we can satisfy ourselves as to what use is being made of the money, but it's a balancing act between creating a bureaucratic nightmare for people and allowing the money to be used for the purposes that it's intended to be used for.

I don't have rows with my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Finance. It's not in my interest to have rows. I think you used the word 'arguments' with him. But he is aware that, if our curriculum is to be a success, then we have to invest in our teachers to enable them to do that. All the work that we have done on the curriculum will come to naught if our teachers are not in a position to implement that successfully on behalf of their students. The examples of sorts of things that schools will need to explore—we'll be looking at the implications of the new content, new approaches for planning and realising learning, new approaches to assessment of children's progress, developing the skills for school-level curriculum design—something that perhaps schools have not been quite so used to doing—developing collaborative arrangements for school-level curriculum from four to 19, so actually getting schools to work together in both the primary and the secondary phases to ensure that there is the pathway for individual learners. Implications of the AoLEs, for instance—we will have a new AoLE of health and well-being. That, in some ways, will be a challenge to the sector in this particular area, and that's why we need to make sure that our teachers are confident that they can make the most of the opportunity of having that new AoLE.

What do we expect the money to be used for? Well, we are confident that schools are in a position to map the learning needs of their teachers. We will expect them to use the money for releasing and covering staff time to be involved in collaborative work. Often that's really difficult. I think we had this conversation just the other week in committee about when budgets are tight, the ability to release staff for training disappears, and this now means that there will be dedicate resource to allow that to happen.

I'm very alive to and alert to the significant pressures on local government. You will have heard the First Minister's answers today about the Government continuing to look to see what more we can do to alleviate those pressures. I'm sure that, if the Government is in a position to do that, local authorities will want to prioritise spending on schools and to ensure that children in their local area get the best possible opportunities. But having done that, we need to make sure that those teachers in those classrooms have the skills and the training that they need. In responding to the committee's report, we're also responding to consistent calls from the unions to have this money in place, and I was delighted yesterday to see the very warm welcome the teaching unions gave to this announcement.

Raising standards and raising the status of the profession is something that Plaid Cymru has been calling for for many years, of course. If the workforce isn't given—

I'm ever so sorry, but I don't have the translation, Presiding Officer. I'm very sorry.

Okay. Do you want me to try again? Is it working now?

Sorry—

Okay. Is this a problem with everybody's?

I'm so sorry—

No, it's okay. It's not your fault; it happens.

No, it's my fault, sorry. It's working on this one—I'll borrow Lesley's.

Okay. Lean over.

I'll have to clean it for her later.

Too much information, Cabinet Secretary. [Laughter.]

Siân Gwenllian to carry on.

Okay. I hope you can hear me now, and I hope the interpretation is clear too.

Perfect.

Excellent. I will start again, therefore.

Raising standards and raising the status of the profession is something that Plaid Cymru has been calling for for many years. If the workforce isn’t given quality training throughout their career, from the initial teacher training up to retirement from the sector, then standards won’t improve in our classrooms.

Before turning to one issue that's been discussed here on a number of occasions, namely supply teachers and their part in the process, I also want to touch on the issue Suzy raised on the £15 million, and whether it would have been better for that funding to go straight into the core budget, rather than being a specific grant.

Now, I sympathise with you, because I’ve just said that I do think that we need to invest in professional learning. But, of course, it is an exceptionally difficult period for our local authorities, and the WLGA have said that they would very much prefer to see that £15 million being spent on retaining posts—either 350 experienced teachers or over 600 teaching assistants—as would have been the case if this funding had been included within the core budget.
I do recognise your dilemma: you want to spend the money in the right place, but, on the other hand, it is a period of crisis and our schools need every penny to retain their experienced teachers. So, I would just ask you to consider and to dwell on that a little.

To turn specifically now to supply teachers, there are four times more private agencies for supply teachers now than there were just a few years ago, and there are concerns about pay and conditions and professional development for these teachers, with very many schools increasingly reliant on supply teachers to cover teacher absences. It’s crucial, therefore, that those supply teachers also get training and that their information about curriculum developments is up to date.

In a statement by you recently on the Government website, it was stated that professional learning will be available to all practitioners in schools, not just teachers, so I would like to know whether there will be provision for supply teachers too and how you’re going to ensure that that works.

The statement also says that funding will ensure that the changes are made in a way that will prioritise the welfare of teachers and will have as little a disruptive effect on pupil learning as possible, and that the funding will help to ensure that staff are released for professional learning too. So, can you expand on how that is going to happen? Is that inevitably going to lead to more reliance on supply teachers? So, on those specific points and your comments on the core budget against the grant. Thank you.

Diolch yn fawr, Siân, and I'm so sorry for the disruption in making you start again. My Welsh is improving, but it's a blwyddyn 2 or blwyddyn 3 standard, and not good enough for the Chamber.

I think what I absolutely welcome is your understanding that without excellence in the teaching workforce, we cannot realise, I believe, a shared endeavour across this Chamber to provide first-class education. That's why the committee stressed so much the importance of finding these resources. If we look to past Estyn reports, it has highlighted the need to invest in the quality of our teaching as a priority, and that's why it's absolutely right to find this money.

We can have a debate about the mechanisms by which this money will find its way to the frontline, but, as you've recognised yourselves, often the first thing to go is investment in staff and training. And, therefore, if we are to invest in our staff, I have made the decision that the only way that we can be absolutely sure that that will happen is via a hypothecated grant. I don't think it should be a binary choice either—that this is either about money for the RSG or money for professional learning. We need to do better than that, and I would also reiterate that the Government continues to look at what more it can do to support the RSG going forward.

But, Presiding Officer, Siân Gwenllian used the word 'crisis'. What I believe will be a crisis is if our new curriculum is introduced on a statutory basis in 2022 and our teachers are not in a position to deliver it. Now that, indeed, would be a crisis. And unless we prioritise this expenditure on support and professional learning, the new curriculum will not do what it needs to do. I think that indeed would be a crisis that we would find ourselves in. That's why I have made this decision to prioritise and make these resources specifically available to invest in our staff. As I said, it's been done in conjunction with our teaching union colleagues and they have welcomed this resource. 

You're also absolutely right to recognise that both teaching assistants and supply teachers have an equal right to access professional learning opportunities. They are much valued and valuable members of our education workforce and have a significant role in developing and delivering on education, on our national mission. Therefore, we will be, as part of the monitoring process, looking to consortia to report on the amount of training that is taken up and made available both to supply teachers, but also looking and giving schools flexibility on their ability to use their resources to support their teachers but also their teaching assistant staff. Some schools already do that; some schools say they're not in a position to do that. So, there will be flexibility for individual schools and clusters to make arrangements for both teaching staff and teaching assistant staff and we will be monitoring issues around supply.

I know issues around supply continue to be of concern to Members across this Chamber; they are of concern to me. That's why we continue with our work to look to enshrine better terms and conditions via our national procurement of these services and look to ensure access to professional training as a prerequisite to agencies working in this area. As I said, I'm under no illusions about the challenges facing the RSG, but, if we're serious about getting the profession ready for the new curriculum, and we are serious about the curriculum being successful, then we have to invest in our workforce and we have to do that now, at this point. It'll be too late if we wait for a couple of years' time, if and when the financial system may or may not be—the financial sector, financial atmosphere, may or may not be better. We have to take this opportunity right now. 

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary, although I note that, once again, you press-released your key announcement before announcing it to us. Since you're able to issue a press release on the matter, you're clearly in a position to issue the statement to AMs, but you didn't. I do find it rather disappointing that you released it to the press first before making the announcement here. 

But, turning to your statement, I'm sure teachers and schools will be deeply, deeply grateful for the funds that you're announcing today—or rather that you pre-announced. I just wonder: is this an admission that you're seeking to change too much too quickly? Have you had to pledge this amount of funding because of the cost of supply teachers because you haven't sorted out an alternative to using agencies, which charge a fortune to schools? Was it always the plan to spend the huge sum of £24 million in this way? If so, why haven't you said so before—that is, when you announced the new curriculum?

You say it's to ensure that changes are made in a way that will prioritise the well-being of teachers and minimise disruption to pupils' learning. I don't object in principle to the allocation of the money. I think I've always said that, any measure that you introduce, whether it's the additional learning needs Bill or whatever, unless the resources are there to enable those changes to take place, it's not worth the paper it's written on. I'm just questioning why this is now coming up and why it hasn't been considered before, because surely you should have considered this when you first announced your plans to introduce all these curriculum changes, and surely you should have done an impact assessment on how much these changes were likely to cost the teaching profession to implement them.

In the Government written press release, you're quoted as saying that the money shows how highly we value teachers and professional learning, yet earlier it says it's to make the transition to the new curriculum as smooth as possible. But which is it? It seemed a little bit contradictory there. Is this a new opportunity for professional learning, as your quote suggests, or is it a response to panic that teachers will need hitherto unforeseen help in adapting to all the changes, as the rest of the article suggests? Is this new money, or is this money that will have to be found from the existing dwindling education budget that the Labour Government you're propping up has cut in real terms? If it's not new money, do you feel embarrassed that your changes are requiring money to be taken from other parts of the education system in order to help smooth the transition to the new curriculum because you're trying to make too many changes too quickly? Twenty-four million pounds is a lot of new teachers, a lot of new books—a few rural schools and local schools could avoid closure. So, I think we and the taxpayers deserve to know what is having less spent money—sorry, I'll start again—what is having less money spent on it in order to fund your latest announcement. And can you give us an itemised list of what will be getting less funding than anticipated as a result of this and what assessments you and the rest of the members of the Cabinet have made of the implications of those reductions? Thank you.

Presiding Officer, sorry, I must have been mistaken, because I thought that the Children, Young People and Education Committee that made their No. 1 commitment around resulting professional development for the curriculum was a unanimous report that was signed off by all members of the committee and the last I remember Michelle Brown was a member of that committee, so she was well aware of the discussions surrounding that.

I have never, ever, ever said that we would not need to invest in the professional learning development of our teaching staff. I have never said that. I know better than anyone that, if we are to have the education system that I want for my children and, indeed, every child in Wales, it is a quality education workforce that will deliver it. Now, the Member says 'Why now?', and that is a legitimate question to ask. We're making this announcement now because the research has been done, the work has been done, to identify what professional learning opportunities and requirements are arising out of our curriculum changes. That's why it's important to make this announcement now, because we have the research—we've done the research with our universities, we have consulted with our teaching profession, we have looked at the impact of curriculum changes in other nations and what they have done to make sure that their curriculum reforms have been successful. That work is now completed, our pioneer schools have fed back, and we're in a position to ensure that that national approach is taken forward.

Now, Michelle Brown says, 'Do the public really want us to spend this money?' Well, I would argue— I would argue—[Interruption.] I would argue that the public do expect this Government to invest in the teachers up and down this country who stand in front of their children day in, day out, delivering not only the current curriculum but the future curriculum—a curriculum that, with the exception of UKIP, it has been acknowledged that we need here in Wales. And to give it its best chance of success and not to set our teachers up for failure, we need to invest in them. The Member says, 'Which is it? Is it an investment in our teaching staff or is it an investment in our curriculum?' Well, you can't have one without the other. This is about valuing our teaching profession; it is about saying that we will prioritise their learning and development. We will not just talk about it, we will fund it, and we will give them the very best chance of making the exciting new curriculum for Wales a reality for them, but, more importantly, a reality for our learners.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for your statement? I very much welcome it and the additional funding. As you've highlighted, this was an area of great concern for the committee and I, for one, am really pleased that the Government has been able to respond so positively.

As you've highlighted, it is about the new curriculum, but it is also about investing in our workforce, who are our greatest asset. And I know that local government have been quite vocal about this funding, but I wonder if you'd take this opportunity to reiterate to me now that, although we desperately need more funding for local government, and I hope that will come, it is absolutely crucial that we have this protected resource to invest in our skilled teachers, especially as Estyn has consistently told us that teaching is the weakest aspect of the system. 

I had one further question, which was around what you've said about the funding contributing towards helping teachers with emotional and mental health. That also responds to the committee's 'Mind over matter' report, and I wondered if you could say just a little bit more about how you would anticipate that part of the money being spent.  

Thank you, Lynne, and I'm glad that we've been able to use the committee's report and the evidence that was taken to help inform and shape Government policy. As Suzy Davies said earlier, that's one of the strengths of our system, I believe. I'm a great believer in, also, the principle that Government and civil servants don't have all the answers, and it is important to use the recommendations of the committees, and the time and effort they put into those reports, to help guide policy. 

It has been necessary for me to hypothecate this funding to ensure that it is spent for these purposes. Without such hypothecation, I think there is a very real danger that this money would not be available for professional learning opportunities. I guess the WLGA press release confirms that—that they would not have prioritised that; they would have spent it not on less important things, but they would have spent it on different things. I will always continue in the Cabinet to look to maximise the resources going to the front line in education. As I said earlier, the Government continues to look to see what more can be done to support local authorities through the RSG, but it is absolutely crucial, if our education reforms are to be successful, that we invest in our teaching profession. 

Now, the Member will be aware that 'Successful Futures'—'Donaldson', as it is known—highlights, and I would quote, that

'Children and young people need to experience social, emotional and physical well-being to thrive and engage successfully with their education.'

And one of the four purposes of the new curriculum will be to support children and young people to become healthy, confident individuals, and those four purposes are, of course, at the heart of our new curriculum. So, we need to be in a position to ensure that teachers have that training to allow them to realise one of those purposes.

One of the 'what matters' of the health and well-being area of learning and experience will focus on mental and emotional health, and, as I said in answer to questions earlier, one of the things that schools will need to address as they prepare for the new curriculum is how they will be able to interact with the AoLEs, and how they will be able to have confidence that their staff are in a position to deliver that. Given that that is such a fundamental part of that area of learning and experience, we would expect that schools—perhaps in the past, in some schools, they haven't had a great deal of attention on this area—would want to utilise some of this resource to be able to put themselves in a position to deliver on that AoLE, and on that 'what matters' statement. 

Of course, there will be greater clarity for everybody regarding the AoLEs when they are published in the spring of next year, and then that will help us guide our next set of professional learning opportunities. 

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary. 

Item 4 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services: reform of fire and rescue authorities' governance and finance arrangements, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services—Alun Davies. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, we are all rightly proud of our fire and rescue services. They respond swiftly, effectively and selflessly to serious threats to our safety. More than that, their prevention work has helped reduce the number of fires and fire casualties by more than half since responsibility was devolved to Wales in 2005. That is a huge success, but it is also a challenge. As the number of fires falls, the role of the service will become broader. Firefighters have the skills, training, capabilities and values to deal with a wide range of other incidents, such as floods, medical emergencies and terrorist attacks. Taking on this broader role is not only beneficial, I believe it is essential to the service’s future. 

We already have several fire stations in Wales that typically deal with less than one emergency call-out to a fire every month, and many that see only a few dozen a year. We understand that this is not sustainable and it makes recruiting, motivating and retaining firefighters very difficult indeed. But nor should such stations be closed, as that would leave large parts of the country with no fire service at all. 

So, the future depends on realising the potential to do more in collaboration with other agencies. To achieve that and secure a future that is viable, the service needs to be governed and funded in a modern, accountable and sustainable way. At present it is not.

There are other growing challenges too. People are living longer and staying independently in their homes, which is exactly what we want to see. However, older people are at greater risk of fires in their homes. At the same time, the lessons of the Grenfell Tower tragedy still have to be fully learned and applied. Climate change will increase the risks of flooding and wildfires, and public finances are extremely constrained—a situation that is only likely to worsen in the aftermath of Brexit. Again, this calls for the highest standards of leadership and transparency, ensuring the service has the resources it needs, but also placing that in a wider context of other public services.

The current governance and funding arrangements are not fit for this new purpose. They mean the service is run by what are, in effect, large committees at arm’s length from all other local services and without any kind of direct democratic mandate. There isn’t any real public debate or accountability about what the service does or ought to do, and insufficient engagement tools to respond to changing local needs. Yet such debate and such accountability have never been more important.

Fire and rescue authorities’ funding arrangements have similar flaws. They involve the authorities levying contributions from local authorities, at a level that the fire and rescue authority alone determines. There is no external control or approval at all at either the local or the national level. At a time of continuing, severe austerity across all public services, that is difficult to justify. There needs to be a sustainable source of funding for the growing range of non-fire responsibilities that I have already described this afternoon. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, the current arrangements date from the mid-1990s. Whilst they may well have been adequate at that time, the service and the demands placed upon it have changed significantly since. No-one should see this as any kind of criticism of the current fire and rescue authority members, managers or staff. We know that they have done their best within the flawed system, but that system itself now needs to change.

The White Paper I am publishing today sets out our preferred approach to reform. This is grounded firmly in the need to enhance local control of the service, and to generate effective leadership and real accountability at that local level. That will mean fire and rescue authority membership becoming more streamlined and more transparent, with greater capacity and capability to provide strategic and political leadership and to build connections with other services and agencies. I also want to see effective challenge at that level from non-executive members.

Fire and rescue authorities' budgets also need proper scrutiny and approval. That role should rest with local authorities, which provide the great majority of fire and rescue authority funds. We appreciate emergency services can neither manage nor predict demand, so that must be reflected in their resourcing. If there were any threat to that or the service standards we enjoy, the Welsh Government would not hesitate to step in.   

Most of these changes can happen relatively soon, without the need for primary legislation. In the longer term, I am keen to explore a more radical reform that would fully support the changing role of the service and would enable proper professional leadership of it, with appointed members remaining in an oversight role. I also want to explore options for sustainable and transparent funding for the range of responsibilities we expect the service to discharge.

We must focus on the outcomes of reform than merely on the means. I would, therefore, also be happy to consider other options for reform through the consultation process that would clearly meet the criteria that the White Paper demands. 

However, let me be very clear that under no circumstances am I prepared to transfer control of the service to police and crime commissioners, as is happening in England. I do not either intend to alter the current pattern of three fire and rescue authorities or amend their existing boundaries. As we have seen across the border, those approaches create more problems than they would resolve. 

I also want to reassure our firefighters that reform is concerned solely with how the fire and rescue authorities operate at the corporate level, and not with front-line delivery. I want to provide the service with clearer, more accountable leadership and fairer, more sustainable funding. There is nothing here that will affect the numbers of firefighters, the training regimes, appliances, fire stations or other operational matters. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, change is all too often a response to failure and creates even more burdens on an organisation in difficulty. That is not the case here. I want to build on the successes that we have seen and to sustain the successes that the service has enjoyed to ensure that we do have in the future a service on which we can all continue to rely. 

Well, as you say, we are rightly proud of our fire and rescue services. You state in your opening paragraph that they've worked to help reduce the number of fires and fire casualties. In fact, since 2001-02, a little bit further back than you look, they've reduced by 69 per cent. However, how do you respond to concern that the number of fires attended by Welsh fire and rescue authorities in 2017-18 actually increased by 3 per cent, reversing that trend, with the number of secondary fires rising by 13 per cent, and grassland, woodland and crop fires by 22 per cent, and 15 casualties from fires in Wales, which is actually 50 per cent higher than when 10 fire casualties in Wales were used as an argument in favour of what became the fire sprinkler legislation?

You refer to older people being at greater risk of fire in their homes and the lessons of the Grenfell tragedy. What consideration are you giving or have you given to the Building Research Establishment report commissioned by the Deputy Prime Minister in the UK in 2002 and the follow-up report by the Welsh Government itself at the tail end of the fire sprinkler legislation, which recommended fire sprinklers in high-rise towers? It was less enthusiastic about new-build residential properties. But it appeared that no response to that was taken until after the Grenfell tragedy.

In a letter to me on 20 June, you said that you don't agree that older people are at particular risk of electrical fires, whether in terms of the source of fire or the cause. I believe you might have since met Electrical Safety First. I think you had a meeting scheduled with them for July. They produced figures showing that, of 1,485 reported domestic fires last year—I presume that's UK—71 per cent of those were electrical fires and 63 per cent in the kitchen. And, in that context, what is the Welsh Government doing to raise awareness of fires caused by electricity in Wales?

My final questions relate to your proposed changes to governance and funding arrangements, which you say are simply not up to the job. You then ironically attribute the failings to

'large committees of backbench councillors, at arm’s length from all other local services and without any kind of direct democratic mandate.'

That's a model that, as I recall, you defended when the UK Government was proposing police and crime commissioners, using almost identical words at that time. You say that will mean fire and rescue authority membership becoming more streamlined and transparent, and budgets needing proper scrutiny and approval. Well, thankfully, the fire and rescue authorities are transparent with their meeting documentation, which is surely a valid point when considering their current governance and finance arrangements. The report from the chief fire officer in north Wales to their fire authority on 17 September referred to key issues set out in a letter to fire and rescue authority chairs in February by you for the meeting the three chairs had with you at the end of April, to your then engagement of Professor Catherine Farrell of the University of South Wales and Professor Rachel Ashworth at Cardiff University, to speak with representatives of the fire rescue authorities and the WLGA, and that their report was submitted to you. And the report from the deputy chief officer of South Wales Fire and Rescue Authority in September to his or her authority attached a summary feedback drawn from the meetings held with the fire and rescue authority chairs, chiefs and additional personnel and the WLGA. How, therefore, do you respond to the findings in that report that chiefs and chairs are not resistant to change, and provided many examples of how they embraced it, but they raised a series of concerns regarding the suggestion that fire and rescue governance in Wales might be reformed?

How do you respond to the statement that several queried the lack of clear evidence and rationale for reform, feeling that perceived problems with the current system had not been clearly identified, making it difficult for them to estimate the added value that might be gained through any change, to the statement in which some of them raised concern about changing a system that operates well and, quote, 'breaking a system which is not broken', giving the example that it was identified that accountability for fire was highly sufficient given the scale and budget for the service, relative to systems of accountability for other public services operating at a much larger scale, and to the statement that interviews emphasised the importance of the electoral link via local authorities and provided examples of how this was currently operationalised to deliver accountability, transparency, consultation and information? And, finally, how do you respond—I won't read them all because there are a lot of them—to the summary of suggestions for improvement in that report, which I'm sure you have engraved on your bedroom wall, but which included the need for consistency around member role specifications, the clarity around the scrutiny and challenge role, an indication of the level of member development and support, and the need for members with expertise from outside the service, from areas such as health and social care, to be co-opted onto the fire and rescue authority, or a new national issues committee scrutiny sub-committee? Thank you. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, I had a terrible fear halfway through that contribution that the Conservative Member was going to read out the notes of every meeting that I've had over the last year, and read out from the notes of every meeting the contribution of every member in that meeting. [Laughter.] It could have been a very, very long session. 

Let me say this: we have, as the Member has indicated, shall I say, had a very long conversation with both the current chairs and the chief officers as we've moved through this process. And I have, over the last year or so, sought to develop a debate, with the chairs particularly, over the need for reform and the shape that that reform will take. I introduced the academic element to that on the basis of an attempt to shape and to allow the development of their own thoughts on some of these issues. And let me say this: this is a White Paper, and it is a White Paper that seeks views on particular proposals, but it is not a White Paper that rules out alternatives. In fact, were the Member to take the time to read the White Paper in any detail, then he would see that, in the White Paper itself, we do take the time to say that if there are other proposals, other suggestions, other recommendations for reform, then we're very happy to take that forward and to consider those additional proposals. At no time in this process have I ruled in or ruled out any alternative measures or any alternative suggestions, with the exception of a national force, a national brigade, and also a transfer of responsibility to the police and crime commissioners. Those are the two options I've ruled out, but I've not ruled out other options. If the Conservative spokesperson does have any suggestions he wishes us to consider, then I'm more than happy to give due consideration to those issues. 

But in his contribution, he does, in many ways, make the case for reform. It might break his heart to learn this, but he does make the case for reform, because he outlines the changing nature of the threat from fire. He describes secondary fires, grassland and moorland fires, and he may wish to appreciate the expertise and specialisms that we now have in the fire services in Wales. He may be aware that the south Wales fire service spent a great deal of time working with others on Saddleworth moor, for example, dealing with the fires that took place in England, across the border, over the summer months. And that expertise—that knowledge, that specialism—is something that we want to enhance and invest in for the future. The abilities that the fire and rescue authorities and services now have is far beyond that which we would have potentially envisaged in the 1990s, when the current structures were put in place. And it is right and proper, therefore, that we meet an evolving and changing need with a debate and a discussion about how our structures are fit for purpose to meet that changing and evolving landscape.

So, I hope that he will perhaps lift his head a little, and give due consideration to these matters. And if he wishes to join the debate about the future, then I'm more than happy to have that conversation with him. The challenges that we will face in the future are great. We know, and we've debated already, the changes to a pattern of fire responses required. The Member asked a number of questions on Grenfell Tower and our response to that. I will say to him that our response has been led by the Minister in these matters, and she has, as he will be aware, made a number of statements to this Assembly on the evolving response of the Welsh Government to the absolute tragedy of Grenfell Tower. And we will be continuing, and she will be continuing, to lead that response.

But let me say this: as we move forward to respond—and, I believe, put in place a new structure to respond to Grenfell—it is right and proper that the fire and rescue authorities play a full and leading role in responding to that. That is why we need fire and rescue authorities that are fit for purpose, with the funding and the governance in place to enable them to do so.

Dai Lloyd.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Before I start, actually, it's entirely right that you are in the chair for this statement, DPO, being as you are the inspiration behind the fire sprinklers legislation, and it is right that we acknowledge that once again.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary also for his statement and welcome the production of this White Paper? It is right that we pay tribute to firefighters—we are rightly proud of them and all their rescue services. They rightly, as is always said, put their bodies on the line. And as is mentioned, there are other growing challenges too—people are living longer, as the Cabinet Secretary mentioned. And, yes, certainly in the community and primary care, we are keeping people at home now who we didn't use to keep at home. Routinely, we have very frail 80 and 90-year-old people living alone, and that is a particular challenge, and it's a challenge that, from time to time, I'm in conversation with fire colleagues as to how to address those challenges. So, certainly, the field is changing, with more emphasis on prevention work, as the number of fires, as we've heard, reduce. In fact, that's become obvious when you look at the Welsh cartoon involving that scion of the firefighting community, Sam Tân—firefighter Sam. Obviously, I'm watching these videos now with my grandson and they are entirely different videos to the ones I was watching a generation ago with my children, involving that accident-prone community of Pontypandy—far more emphasis on prevention these days, and the expanded role of the fire services generally, which is to be welcomed, naturally.

Now, in 1999, only one of the 999 services was devolved to this Assembly. By 2005, the second 999 service was devolved, and that was the fire service. We still await further devolution of 999 services like the police. So, I welcome the Cabinet Secretary's comments about not devolving any control of the fire services to the police, certainly, who remain not devolved at the moment. So, I do welcome those comments. But, in terms of consistency, would the Cabinet Secretary agree with me in terms of—? I realise you've put your proposals, but you also said it's a White Paper, so you're entertaining other opinions. In terms of co-working between the different 999 services, how do you feel that consistency of boundaries and consistency of the means of funding the different 999 services would this help co-working and co-location of emergency responses to all of the 999 emergency services? 

Talking about your White Paper, on the second page, you've set out some proposals here. Have you got a preliminary idea of what the response of the fire and rescue authorities is to your proposed reforms? Plainly, we still remember that you had a little local difficulty recently, with regard to reforming local authorities. Have you had any indication of how fire and rescue authorities view these plans, because, obviously, we wouldn't want any danger of a rerun of that debacle, would we? Thank you. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, we met, of course, at Southwark cathedral when we were both there to pay tribute to the work of the Fire Brigades Union and firefighters over the last century, and the Plaid Cymru spokesperson is absolutely right to pay tribute to you in the work that you have done in the time that you've served here, both through the legislation you pioneered, but also, I think, as being—how shall I put this gently and diplomatically—a loud and clear voice for the fire service, for firefighters and the place of the fire service in our national life. I think all of us would want to join together across the Chamber in paying tribute to you for that work over the years. 

You're not getting any more time—go on. Carry on. [Laughter.]

I'd be disappointed were you to show any leniency to me at all. [Laughter.]

But let me say this: clearly, the issues of prevention and awareness are issues that the fire services will be focusing upon in a way that perhaps they didn't in the past, and certainly not 20 or 30 years ago, and that is something that I hope we will continue to focus upon as we see a continued, I hope, decline in the overall amount of fires, particularly domestic fires.

I think it is right and proper—. And if the Member is able to take the time to read through the White Paper, he will see that we are seeking to be consistent in terms of the principles we follow in pursuing a reform programme. Those principles include localism. I want to see locally accountable, locally governed services. It is not my wish or my style to attempt to nationalise, if you like, the whole of our public services. I believe local accountability is important. I listened to an excellent lecture at lunchtime from the outgoing chief executive of the WLGA, and I was struck listening to him by the shared territory, where we share the ambitions, both himself and others, regarding the vision for the future of local government and local service delivery that we all want to see in the future. 

Clearly, we have given some consideration to the issue of boundaries and co-location of the blue light services. It is my strong view—it is a view of the Welsh Government—that policing should be devolved to this place, and we I think see the advantages of coherence in policy making and coherence in service delivery where we have a holistic way of managing and delivering absolutely core and key services. The points raised by the Member for Cardiff North during business questions of course refer to services where we do not have the same level of consistency and are unable to deliver a holistic approach to policy, and I think we see the consequences of that in its impact on people up and down our country.

Can I say, I have pursued, in my time here, the issues of co-location and co-working between the blue light services? I hope that the reforms we've put in place will be reforms that will enable that to continue, and I hope that we will see more co-location and more co-working in the future. In terms of the view that the fire and rescue authorities take to these matters, being a reforming Minister in this country can be a difficult task. Wales is a beautiful, wonderful country, full of conservative people for whom reform can sometimes be very, very difficult, and what I have to say to the Member is that this is a radical Government and we do seek radical reform. The Member can decide whether he sits as part of a reforming Assembly or not, and that is a matter for him to take forward, but I will say to you, in my experience of this place, when we are reforming, when we are looking towards putting in place structures that will serve us into the future, then we are delivering at our best for the people we seek to represent.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement here today. I've got a couple of questions for you. Firstly, will you join with me in congratulating the extrication team from the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service? Not only are they now five times UK national champions, but, for the third year in succession, they recently won the world rescue organisation challenge in Cape Town, firmly putting South Wales Fire and Rescue Service on the map.

With regard to the consultation document, I notice your comments about governance arrangements. I'm not convinced that Cabinet members are better placed to offer scrutiny than backbenchers, who may hold senior scrutiny roles. For example, there's no requirement for councillors sitting on police and crime panels or local health boards to be executive members, and I'm concerned that this could lead to a hollowing out, with a small executive doing more and more and scope for backbench councillors being reduced. I'd be interested in your response to this.

Thirdly, I note the comments around reducing the size of authorities. However, I know authorities are required by statute to have a variety of standing committees, and a larger fire authority, of course, means that these are more manageable. What consideration have you placed on how this would work in practice?

Finally, in terms of the funding model, I do see the benefits of moving to a precept model, and, when I've met with the south Wales service, I've always been impressed by all that they do. I'd welcome more information around ministerial intervention, though, about what could happen when authorities don't actually agree on the level of the precept. So, for example, if it was just one authority that disagreed and the others agreed on the level of the precept, what would happen in that case? Because I'm concerned that that could lead to some potential problems.

I'm grateful to the Member for her general welcome for the White Paper, and I'd certainly want to join her in congratulating the south Wales extrication team on the world rescue challenge that they have succeeded in winning again. It is one of the great pleasures of elected office that we all share the opportunity to meet people who perform such fantastic roles within our communities, and, certainly, I try to spend time talking to firefighters who are on the front line, as it were, delivering the services that we all need to see in our community. Can I say this? When I stood in the Rhondda talking to the firefighters who had just come back from Saddleworth and talking to firefighters who were dealing with the moorland fires across south Wales over the summer, I was struck by their professionalism, by their knowledge—sheer knowledge—and understanding of the threats that our communities were facing, but also their commitment to use that knowledge, to use that experience, in order to protect our people and our communities, and I think that's something that strikes me time and time again.

In terms of the role of backbench councillors, what we're seeking to do is to ensure that we have the levels of governance that are in place that can provide us with the assurance that we require in order to deliver both the local scrutiny and accountability—which we want to hold locally rather than create more national structures—but, at the same time, ensure that we do have the ability to link the work of the fire service into the work of other services being delivered by that authority. The points that were made by the Conservatives—by the Plaid Cymru spokesperson, I'm sorry—in this matter are quite important, because, in the same way as we want to see the devolution of policing to ensure that we have the coherence of ability to respond to and plan service interventions, we also want to have that same coherence between local authorities and the blue light services. And it is felt, and I feel, that by having an executive councillor or a cabinet member serving on the fire authority then we will have that link, and we will have more, and greater, coherence. Clearly, that is a debate that we will have over the coming months.

In terms of the funding models, I'm anxious that we are able to put in place a structure whereby local government and the fire and rescue authorities are able to jointly work and jointly agree a budget for the future. That is what I want. The Member quite rightly identifies areas where that can potentially not happen and where there are problems within that. Clearly, there would need to be backstop powers here to resolve that. What we're suggesting in this White Paper is that the backstop provides powers for Ministers, but powers only to intervene under certain circumstances and then to intervene to deliver a budget that is no higher than the fire and rescue authority proposes. So, those powers are delineated, if you like, or certainly have parameters beyond which a Minister could not intervene. But I see those as very much backstop powers that would enable an authority and a fire and rescue authority to reach agreement and to adjudicate if they're unable to do that. But I don't see those powers as being powers that would be available to a Minister unless the locally held powers, and unless the local authorities involved, were unable to reach agreement between themselves.

Thank you. And, finally, Mike Hedges.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I think I will start by saying we all owe a debt of gratitude to firefighters who enter buildings when the rest of us are leaving. A huge amount of work has been done on fire prevention, and credit has been paid to you and the sprinkler system, but the huge amount that's done by the fire service in going out and putting smoke alarms in houses have obviously saved many hundreds of lives.

I was hoping this statement would have involved the reconfiguration of fire and rescue services. I have long been of the view that a mid and west Wales fire and rescue service makes little operational sense. A major fire in Welshpool, for example, will want tenders from Wrexham; it won't want them from Swansea or Neath Port Talbot.

On governance, there is a substantial democratic deficit. This is not unique to the fire and rescue service; it covers all joint working. That's why people have some concerns over joint working. How will changing the current membership of fire and rescue authorities ensure that members are accountable to their electorate? Why not have a report from the fire and rescue to a scrutiny committee at each council, or, better still, have an annual report from the chief fire officer and the fire authority to a council meeting? How will appointing non-council members and reducing the number of councillors involved improve accountability?

On funding, can the Cabinet Secretary name another council service that would not like to change the fire and rescue authorities' ability to levy on the councils concerned? I think that both education and social services would leap at the chance to have this opportunity. So, we do need a better method of funding fire services because they are funded entirely differently. And it didn't matter when we had a growing amount of money in the public services; it does matter now. And I think that the Cabinet Secretary is right—we should not be afraid of change, but what we should always do is make sure change is for the better, not for the worse.

I always welcome a contribution from the Member for Swansea East to the debate on reconfiguration of local services, and the consistency he shows in his contributions is sometimes to be welcomed.

Can I say—? Can I say that I agree with the points that he's made? And can I say also that, in many ways, we have inherited systems and structures from the past and that it is our duty and responsibility to ensure that they are fit for the future? And it is our responsibility, therefore, to look at those processes and structures to ensure that, periodically, we do have the opportunity to give the sort of considered thinking that these matters demand of us. In terms of the suggestions he's made over reports to scrutiny committees of local authorities, I very much would welcome that. Do you know, one of the debates and discussions we have around the powers held in local government and elsewhere forgets that the power of a local authority isn't simply the powers that are provided to it by statute, but the power it has as an elected body to represent the interests of the people it serves? As such, it can demand those reports, it can demand that people appear to give evidence, it can create the structures of scrutiny, and it doesn't need statute to do that, and it certainly doesn't need a Minister's blessing in order to do that. That is a matter for local government and I would encourage all local authorities across the whole of the country to ensure that they take forward their scrutiny function with that creative approach, if you like, which isn't delineated simply by what they're able to do or compelled to do by law. So, I'd certainly welcome that. 

In terms of the points that he makes—and I will try to make good time, Deputy Presiding Officer—I have considered the issue of boundaries, and it was a point raised, of course, by the Plaid Cymru spokesperson as well. At the moment, I do not believe that the case has been made for a significant change to any of the boundaries or the numbers of the current fire and rescue authorities. But what I am not doing is closing the door to such change, were that case to be made. Now, it is clearly possible to point to communities either side of any border and to say that those communities should work together in order to deliver services. That's the easiest thing in the world to do, and I accept that, clearly, in the example quoted, those authorities would, I would anticipate, work together to deliver the services they require. What we're talking about here is a different matter; it's about governance, and I'm yet to be convinced that there is a case for change along the lines that have been described by the Member, but my mind is not closed to that, and if he's able to present the arguments for the change he suggests, then I'm very happy to give that due consideration in the future.

In terms—. This is my final point, Deputy Presiding Officer. In terms of the point he makes on the additional I think it's two or three members that would sit on reformed boards in order to provide accountability, scrutiny and challenge, we are looking to ensure that we have the right mix of locally elected, locally accountable members who are able to provide challenge to the management of the authorities, but also to ensure that we have the skills mix within the new boards of fire and rescue authorities to ensure that we have the people there who are able to provide challenge to that board as well. That is the role of a non-executive director in many businesses up and down the country. It is a role that I would want to see performed within these new boards, but, again, this is the beginning of a consultation, not the end of a consultation, so I'd be very happy to join the debate if Members wish to contribute further over the coming months.

Thank you very much.

The next item is a statement by the Minister for Children, Older People and Social Care: 'Improving Outcomes for Children: Reducing the Need for Children to Enter Care', and the Work of the Ministerial Advisory Group. I call on the Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm grateful for this opportunity to update Members on the collaborative approach we are taking to improve outcomes for looked-after children in Wales.

'Taking Wales Forward', Deputy Presiding Officer, sets out this Government’s commitment to

‘examine ways of ensuring looked after children enjoy the same life chances as other children and if necessary reform the way they are looked after’.

Our national strategy, 'Prosperity for All', also describes our priorities around supporting children and families at the edge of care and young people in care, particularly as they transition towards adulthood. Through my Improving Outcomes for Children programme, we are taking an ambitious cross-Government and cross-sector approach to help us achieve our priorities and fulfil our commitment. This programme, supported by my ministerial advisory group, chaired by our colleague David Melding Assembly Member, is covering a broad range of work, looking across the spectrum of care and support, but with a real focus on addressing the factors that can lead to children requiring local authority care.

The ministerial advisory group has representation from all senior leaders and organisations with an involvement in children’s services. The group has been instrumental in advising me on, and co-producing, the improving outcomes for children work programme, and I'm pleased our partners are actively involved in this work. In fact, I attended the last ministerial advisory group meeting, and I could see again that this collaborative way of working continues to be a real strength of the group.

So, what have we achieved? Well, you will remember last year we invested £9 million to support care-experienced children. I'd like to tell you some of the headline outcomes on how that money was used by local authorities. Over 1,900 care-experienced children across Wales have received funds via our £1 million St David's Day fund, to support their transition to adulthood and to independence. Our £5 million investment in local authority edge-of-care services meant that local authorities helped over 3,600 children to remain within the family unit, by working with more than 2,000 families. We now have edge-of-care services in all local authorities in Wales. Welsh Government funding has led to the establishment of regional Reflect services. During the past year, these services have supported 150 young parents whose children have been placed in the care system with a wide range of emotional and practical issues. This is a popular service, and we expect to see the number of referrals rise significantly in the coming years. We also provided £1 million to extend the provision of personal advisers, so that all care leavers up to the age of 25 are offered a personal adviser, regardless of circumstances. As a result, an additional 20 personal advisers have been recruited, and the extended offer has been taken up by more than 500 care leavers. And finally, care leavers have been helped to access opportunities in education, employment and training, with 70 young people now participating in a local authority work placement or a traineeship scheme. These are real, tangible outcomes that are having a direct and positive impact on the lives of children and young people.

We have progressed other areas of work. For example, in May this year, we published research on placement outcomes for children after a final care order. This important research showed that over three quarters of the children in the study experienced a high level of placement stability as well as identifying other positive experiences of care. We have also developed national standards for independent reviewing officers and for independent visitors to ensure there is quality and consistency of service. And we funded the first year of the implementation of the national fostering framework. I am very pleased that my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Finance last week published a consultation on exempting all care leavers from paying council tax so that we have a consistent approach right across Wales.

This is all good progress, but there is still more to do. Before the summer, I asked for the work programme to be accelerated and intensified, to expedite delivery against the key challenges, including those that were identified in 'Care Crisis Review'. As a result, the improving outcomes for children work programme has been refreshed. This third phase of the programme continues much of the important work that's already in train, but it places more emphasis on reducing the need for care by providing effective, preventative, early support to families, as well as ensuring therapeutic support to children and families is intrinsic throughout the programme. To inform this phase, my officials have carried out an appreciative inquiry across six local authorities. The inquiry highlighted good preventative social work and family support being delivered by local authorities. All of the local authorities demonstrated integrated care systems where multi-agency teams provided timely support to families so crises could be de-escalated or avoided, thereby helping families to stay safely together. To illustrate this, one example has been the use of family group meetings. This is a family-centered approach that enables children, young people, as well as wider family members, to participate and own solutions that will improve their circumstances. This is very much in keeping with our co-production approach, which is central to our Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. Investment in such preventative and early intervention approaches really does realise savings in the long term.

As part of the draft budget proposals announced by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance for 2019-20, an additional £30 million has been allocated to regional partnership boards to help strengthen these integration arrangements. Today, I'm pleased to announce that £15 million of this funding will be allocated to progress our shared ambition of reducing the need for children to be in care. This is an exciting opportunity to make a real difference to a whole-system change. 

I would like local authorities, third sector organisations and health boards to work together to use this fund flexibly and creatively across their regions. My expectation is that this money focuses on early intervention and preventative services for families in need of help and assistance, building on the approaches we already know help families avoid crisis situations. For those children and young people in care, I want to ensure we have in place the therapeutic services needed to help them successfully reunite with their families, where appropriate. 

Before I finish, I want to remind everyone that it is National Safeguarding Week. I'm really pleased that the Welsh Government is working with Stop It Now! Wales to launch a new campaign, which will help encourage the people of Wales to play their part in stopping child sexual abuse.  

I hope, therefore, that you will agree that we have made significant progress in terms of improving outcomes for children in Wales. I am looking forward to attending the improving outcomes for children national event on Thursday, where there will be an opportunity to share learning, to share innovative approaches and to recognise successes. But, most importantly, it'll be an opportunity to listen and learn from individuals who have first-hand experience of being in care. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I speak as chair of the ministerial advisory group, which makes my response from the Conservative benches slightly irregular. So, I'll have a judicious mix of both roles, I think. But it is a serious point here that I think work in this area, which is very challenging, but there's a lot of good practice and good outcomes out there as well, requires to the maximum extent a non-partisan approach, and I think this work throughout the life of the Assembly has achieved that level of consensus, and the need to ensure better outcomes for those children and young people that we look after.

I think, Minister, that you're right to emphasise that the ministerial advisory group is now entering a key period, and this has required the work programme to be updated. I just want to say a little bit about that in a moment. It reflects, really, I think, the five-year term of the work. The initial phase was very much filling in the data gaps, commissioning some really important studies—you've referred to one that demonstrated the good outcomes that were measured after a final care order, and something like 75 per cent of children felt that they'd benefitted. So it is a sector, often, that is portrayed by its problems, because sometimes events occur that are really devastating, and obviously quite properly very newsworthy, but there's an awful lot of good practice out there, and it is very much building on that.

As far as the new work programme and its additions and development go, can I think Phil Evans, the co-chair of the MAG group and the former director of social services in the Vale of Glamorgan, and also the officials in your department that have produced the work plan? It has required a huge amount of work. It's been shaped by MAG, but we still needed the engine room of the operation group, led by Phil Evans, to draw it all together. It's largely analysis of the existing work and what's been achieved, a reflection on the data and reports that I just mentioned, and extensive consultation. I must say the consultation efforts are greatly aided by the other co-chair, Dan Pitt, from Voices from Care, and indeed the whole collaborative working of the ministerial advisory group has really been possible because of the extensive involvement in the group of various Welsh Government departments that have a key role—housing and public health, for instance—local authorities' children's services, and also the cabinet leads and the non-governmental organisations—the third sector. I think it has really given the group a dynamism and an ability to speak to you with authority and really provide that high-level advice that you need.

The programme now reflects the importance of prevention and early support, and, in addition, things that it has decided to emphasise that were either in the work plan but not prominent enough, or have now been absorbed into the work plan, and I'm just mentioning the changes here. But the emphasis on therapeutic services, I think, in large part, was driven by Lynne Neagle's or the committee that Lynne chairs' 'Mind over matter' report, which had a big impact in the discussion that the MAG was having, and the importance of therapeutic services linked into emotional well-being, which is constantly referred to by looked-after children as something that they really, really need, and that's a level of support.

Another area that was fairly new to me, I have to say, but has perhaps been overlooked, and that's the level of kinship caring that goes on. And that's a resource—many countries absolutely have a policy to make that more of a resource. But, certainly, it is used, it is very appropriate in certain cases, and perhaps we've not been as advanced in our thinking in this area in how we can support kinship carers.

The well-being of future generations Act has also shaped the MAG's work very considerably, and I know that's an important feature for you as well.

The problem of homelessness for care leavers is a very great one, and how we support care leavers in their tenancies is clearly a crucial element of our role as corporate parents, one can say. And I'm glad that a piece of work has been commissioned from the Wales Public Policy Institute, and I think that will help very much. I think, for care leavers, the housing situation is as crucial as the education situation and educational attainment is for those in care when they're going through formal education.

And then adverse childhood experience frameworks have come to play a big part in tying together a lot of the various threads of the ministerial advisory group's work.

Can I also welcome the funding? The £9 million that launched the programme a couple of years ago has a huge, I think, impact on local authorities developing best practice, and I think it sends a very positive signal that there is another funding stream.

And can I just say, do you agree with me that what we are seeing emerge is a fuller concept of the corporate parenting role? Which means every public agency, but also in the political field—obviously, you have a leadership role there, but it's also your colleagues, it's also us as Members that scrutinise the Government, and it's key partners, politicians in the council—the cabinet leads and the committee chairs that are doing the scrutiny. And all councillors ought to, surely, or all councils ought to follow the decision that Cardiff council made to train all their councillors in looked-after children's issues. And they're making progress on that. Perhaps not as quickly as they would like, but that's the sort of leadership that we do need to see really emerge to give us a full corporate parenting picture. Thank you.

I did allow the Member there some licence, given that he chairs the ministerial working group—task group, but that same licence doesn't apply to the rest of the speakers, I'm afraid. Neither does it to the Minister for winding up as well.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'll keep my response very, very brief. It is, undoubtedly, a big strength of our approach that this is cross-Government, cross-sector, but also, it is non-partisan. This is an agenda that we all have a role to play in, and we all need to bring our experience and knowledge and understanding, including, by the way—and I welcome your words of tribute to both your co-chairs—the co-chair who himself is care experienced. I think that's vital within this. This is genuine co-production in line with the legal framework that we've set up. This is not Government doing to people, it's Government working with people to come up with the right solutions. I absolutely applaud the work that's been done already by the MAG and it is having an effect already. We are seeing that in the evidence that is coming forward, without a doubt. But the prominence now and the priority given to certain work streams, in addition to those around therapeutic services—we've got much more to do on that. I think there is exciting work that the MAG will do and that Government needs to bring forward on that as well, both therapeutic services generally but also therapeutic services as might apply to residential care particularly, kinship care and transition to independent living and the corollary of that, which is homelessness, if we do not get it right.

The funding will help, undoubtedly, but just to reply to the point made on corporate parenting and to pay tribute to David in particular, who's very much led the agenda around corporate parenting, we all have a role—every individual, every scrutineer, every local government official, senior leader, head of directorate. All of us have a role in stepping up to the mark now in order to improve the outcomes for care-experienced children and young people. And that is starting to happen and we're doing it because there is a shared agenda now and we need to keep this momentum going. It's not the funding per se that will transform this, it'll be the fact we focus on the important priority areas that are brought forward by the MAG and by others that say, 'This is what will make the difference.' The funding will help.

Can I begin by saying how much I welcome the statement? I'm really pleased to see how much progress is being made in this very important area of work. Of course, we would expect no less, particularly with my friend David Melding chairing the ministerial advisory group. I think we all know that his commitment to the well-being of children, particularly very vulnerable children and children in care, is absolutely second to none. I'd echo what David has said and what the Minister has said about the importance of a non-partisan approach on these issues. 

I'm also very pleased, Minister, to see that there's no complacency here, that you're recognising very clearly that there is more work to do. I'll actually raise a couple of questions in that context. I won't ask you to comment on a particular case, but we are aware that there are some local authorities that are doing better in this field than others. In my own region, I continue to have some concerns about Powys, and I hope that the Minister can reassure us today that, while working very strongly on this collaborative approach, there will be no prisoners taken if there are partners who are failing these most vulnerable children and young people. 

The statement itself makes no specific reference to taking a rights-based approach to developing policy in this field. It may very well be, Minister, that this is because you're taking this as read, but given how difficult we know it can be to mainstream a rights-based approach into work with children across the public sector, I would like to give you the opportunity to confirm that the rights-based approach is at the heart of your policy development and your expectations of others and of the work of the ministerial advisory group, and to commit perhaps to making this more explicit in future. Because whereas that may come naturally perhaps to some of us in this Chamber, there are many others providing services to children and young people who unfortunately remain to be convinced.

I welcome very much the work being done to enable children at risk of being taken into care to stay with their families where that's possible and where that's safe. However, I had some constituency casework brought to me and I'm concerned that there are times still when legal proceedings lead to a child bouncing between birth parents who can't, sadly, cope and foster parents, delaying adoption outcomes where this is best for the child. Can you tell us what discussions you've been having with the family court services with a view to minimising the number of occasions when this happens, given how very damaging that is for very vulnerable children, and very young children, very often?

I very much welcome the investment—the £15 million is very much to be welcomed, and I very much welcome the fact that we're looking at reducing the need for children to be taken into care. We'd all welcome that, but can you confirm, Minister, that your expectation is that this new funding will create sustainable services? Given the pressure that there is on local government funding, it is too often the case that good investment is put in to kick-start positive work but there then isn't the resources to carry on innovative programmes, for example, even when they're proved to work. So, can you reassure us today that this £15 million will not be a one-off and that those new services will be able to be sustained?

Minister, you'll be aware of the large number of private children's homes, particularly in rural Wales, accommodating very vulnerable young people out of county, very often from large cities in England. I've had constituents raise concerns with me about some of these, particularly when they're in very isolated rural locations. Can you confirm to us today that you are satisfied that the current inspection and regulation regime sufficiently protects the best interests of these looked-after children? They are maybe not always our looked-after children, but my view, and I'm sure your view, would be that, while they're in Wales, we have the same duty of care to them as we do for Welsh-domiciled children. And would you consider writing to Members to update us on arrangements for those inspections, so that I can reassure the constituents who've raised concerns with me?

And finally, you refer in the statement to listening and learning from those who've had first-hand experiences of being in care. I'm very glad to see that the ministerial group is jointly chaired by a person with care experience, but could you take this opportunity to tell the Assembly a little more about how care-experienced individuals, and particularly children and young people currently in care or at risk of care, have been involved in developing this policy and how that will continue to be central to the work?

Helen, thank you very much for those detailed comments. Let me begin where you began: our expectation is that all local authorities and those who provide support should rise to the level of the best. We know, as was remarked by the chair of the MAG earlier on, there is some really good practice out there; we've unearthed that ourselves. We expect that to be standard. 

In terms of the rights-based approach—in some ways, this may be a trailer for a later debate this afternoon as well, where I'll be going large on the rights-based approached, but a rights-based approach is at the heart of this programme as well. The children's commissioner, who is a member of the group, has made sure that it is so, and we would want it to be so. So, even though it wasn't mentioned explicitly in the statement, it's right at the core of the work that we're doing in Government and in the group itself. You can have that assurance. 

We have regular discussions, both at an official level but also with those directly involved in the family court service, and the family court service itself has, partly in response to the work of the ministerial advisory group, refreshed its approach to children experiencing care over recent years, and we expect it to keep on learning, not least, I have to say, from the 'Care Crisis Review' as well. The 'Care Crisis Review' was very helpful in that it said there is no one magic bullet—there are a range of things that you need to bring it up to the very best standard, not only in terms of support and provision at local authority level, but the way in which family courts also respond to cases appearing and not to have great regional disparity in the way that family courts respond to it. 

You mentioned the assurance of sustainable solutions and funding—absolutely. Now, this is partly to do with making sure that the money is going into the right place. And the reason why we have the announcement today on the £15 million into regional partnership boards is because they are set up directly to do that basis of saying, 'What are the needs in our region? How do we make this apply in the very best way?', jointly working together, so it's not any more to do with pots of money, it's to do with a focus on the outcomes of those care-experienced children. But there also need to be sustainable solutions as well as sustainable funding, and that requires some creative and innovative approaches to working jointly. And one of the things we're very keen to do is to embed those ways of working across different agencies—local authorities, health and others—to make sure that they bring forward solutions that are long-lasting because they are more preventative, more early in the way that they intervene and in a more timely way. That is part of the sustainability as well.

I'm very happy to write in response to your request to Members to update them on the way we are approaching the inspection and regulation regime, but you also raised the issue of children's residential care, and this frequently appears, and I know that it's one of the things that the ministerial advisory group is looking at: do we have the right not simply secure accommodation but actually, beyond that, therapeutic care accommodation settings in the right place in all different parts of Wales? We think there is a job of work to be done on that, so we are now currently working with stakeholders to develop new approaches to therapy and care for children with particularly complex needs and challenging behaviours that might not necessitate secure accommodation but actually need a different, bespoke model for them. So, we are exploring the scope for regional approaches to this type of provision so we avoid the impact that one child in one authority then has a massive impact, and they look around in desperation to say, 'Well, where can we place this child?', and often that means out of county or sometimes out of country. So, the work is being taken forward by a task and finish group on children's residential care, and we hope that will not only improve our understanding of the profile of residential care for children, but also bring forward ideas on improving the range of therapeutic models available to residential care providers. But I think regionality on this is going to be key. 

I think I might have dealt with all of the matters. 

It should be fine, thank you. Jenny Rathbone. 

Thank you. Corporate parenting is all our responsibility, so I completely share David Melding and Helen Mary's comments on this matter.

Last night, I attended a dinner organised by the faculty of sexual and reproductive healthcare, along with my colleagues Julie Morgan and Angela Burns. It was done on the Chatham House rule where everything remained in the room, but I was really shocked to hear that in one local authority in Wales nearly all of the care-experienced children come from 10 families, and that's because we've failed to provide the service that we need to to ensure that people don't go on simply having more children. So, I was very pleased to see that you're now going to have regional Reflect services, because that's what these services are about; it's not supporting families to get their child that's been removed back, but enabling them to reflect on the reasons why that child was taken into care in the first place.

I'm less impressed by your description of it as a 'popular' service. I want to know whether it's an effective service. I think that it very much depends on the quality of the outreach to ensure that those who most need such a service are actually getting it, rather than abandoning them to just going on having more and more children, with a vicious cycle.

I was interested to see the research that's been done on placements and the positive outcomes, but of 42 pupils in the school where I'm a governor, which I'm afraid is the highest in Wales, already three have had a change of placement, but, I'm glad to say, not a change of school. So, at least there is some continuity and stability in their lives that can be provided at the school.

I think that another thing that's been very important in terms of preventative and joined-up social work is that having a social worker located at the school has enabled them to access important information about the background of the young person in a timely fashion, without in any way breaching data protection rules. So, I think that we need to do a lot more of that sort of thing. I appreciate that you're going to allocate £15 million more to reduce the need for children to be in care, but we have to recognise that we are an outlier at the moment—95 per 10,000 pupils/children versus 62 to 10,000 in England—so, there's no room for complacency in this.    

I think that we simply have to—. The importance of the school, it seems to me, was reflected in Kirsty Williams's statement about the importance of well-being, just as much as academic achievement, and celebrating the work that's done by schools. So, I think that the national outcomes framework, as part of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, has only got one indicator in relation to care-experienced children, relating to the external qualifications they get when they're 16. I think there needs to be further indicators of the type of really specialist work that schools can do to really contribute to that.

Being in care is an adverse childhood experience; it couldn't possibly be otherwise. So, the numerically small numbers we have surely means we should be ensuring that all those young people are getting proper access to mental health services and counselling services to enable them to process the trauma that they have suffered. I absolutely think that we need to be ensuring in all local authorities that all these young people are getting those services they need, or they are going to end up being parents of care-experienced children themselves, and that is the vicious circle we've got to breach. Otherwise, it's going to cost local authorities money we simply don't have, because the investigation that was done by a national newspaper about the level of cost for very specialist care—£7,000 a week—and the real concerns about auctioning of vulnerable children—. Obviously, we have to put a stop to that and we need to get to the bottom of ensuring that we are reducing the numbers and that those who are care experienced are not themselves going to lose their own children. 

Thank you, Jenny. You rightly remind us that we actually need to look at the whole care experience here. It's those people, the children and young people, who are in care—we absolutely need to put the right priorities for them to improve their outcomes—those who are leaving care, but also to focus on, as is the No. 1 work stream now, how we reduce the numbers of children and young people in care. Because we know that if we can make the right early interventions—and that includes with some of our wider support that can identify issues early and apply that multi-agency approach earlier—then we save those costs further down that can be released to put towards children who are in care, and so on. But I'm glad that you are welcoming what we've done with the regional Reflect services and the way we anticipate that there will indeed be a significant uptake on this, because we're starting to see already evidence that it is effective and we expect to see more. It's the right way, I think, again, to work with the people directly to try and help turn around positive outcomes. 

Placement stability—absolutely critical. We know that, for those children who are in care, if we get stable placement it leads to positive outcomes, whether that's educationally, on health, on transition to adulthood—the stability of the placement is absolutely key. Some of the recent research that we did—we published research that we brought forward in May this year—it looked at the placement outcomes of children four to five years after a final care order was made. What was heartening from that was that three quarters of that whole cohort of children experienced a high level of placement stability, with either no placement move or only one placement move over the four-year period. Now, that's significant and it shows we're starting to join the dots up a little bit to make sure that they have that stability that gives them the basis then for growing and having the right outcomes as a young individual.

Now, you rightly reflected on the wider aspect of wider mental health and well-being and, again, this goes into the preventative and early intervention agenda. If we can identify and save the costs earlier, it's better for the individual but also better in terms of avoiding the rescue costs further down the line. Of course, the 'Mind over matter' report by the Children, Young People and Education Committee I think was very helpful within this. In September, the Cabinet Secretaries for health and education announced that they would convene a joint ministerial task and finish group—I'm avoiding looking to my right here at the moment, my immediate right—to consider but also to accelerate work to achieve a whole-school approach as part of a whole-system approach to children's mental well-being. The first meeting was on 17 October. We've committed now to move this agenda forward at pace and we'll be providing the CYPE committee with an update on activity and progress against the 'Mind over matter' report in the spring of 2019. And this will, by the way, link, as David will know, with the Improving Outcomes for Children work programme and the ministerial advisory group to ensure that school-based services are able to meet the distinct mental health needs of care-experienced or looked-after children. I think—. I'm looking at Dirprwy—. Sorry, Dirprwy Lywydd, I'd better stop there. [Laughter.]  

It would be helpful, because we have—. And, finally, Michelle Brown. And we are out of time, but—. Michelle. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you for your statement, Minister. I'd also like to thank the advisory group for their work so far. I'd also like to congratulate those involved in delivering the improvements in transition services and other positive steps that you've updated us on today, Minister.

In an ideal world, no child would have to go into the care system—I think that's a given, isn't it? But part of the reason we're justifiably keen to prevent children needing to go into care is because successive Governments have not got care provision right. Your statement relates to reducing the number of children going into care, suggesting that children and young people are being taken into care when alternatives may be available. You've given an example of how alternatives are being considered, but the prospect of children going into care when there's another choice is deeply concerning and I'd like you to clarify the extent of the problem and quantify it. How big a worry is this? How are you going to ensure that aiming to reduce the number of children in care doesn't have the consequence of down-prioritising improving the care system itself and discourage Government from making the care system better for those who really do need it and for whom there is no choice but to put them in care?

If fewer children and young people are in care, will that result in more funds being spent on each child still in care or will that result in a reduction in the amount of funding allocated to care provision? What conversations have you had with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance about directing the savings created by taking fewer children into care to those who have to be in care? Are you going to be looking at the threshold for placing children into care that's being used by the statutory agencies? If so, do you think that current threshold is too low, do you think it's about right—where do you think that threshold is right now? Is that the right threshold to have? I'd like to be reassured that, firstly, you won't be taking the money out of the care system in order to fund extra focus on preventing children needing the care system and, further, can you confirm that spending on the care system will increase in line with both need and inflation?

Not long ago, I also asked you a question about the adoption system. You didn't answer it. So, as part of the efforts to prevent children having to stay in the care system longer than is necessary, I'll ask it again: do you believe, as I do, that there's no reason why children shouldn't be adopted by parents of a different ethnicity from themselves? And what have you done to assess whether, and if so ensure that, adoption agencies and social workers are neither formally nor informally acting to discourage mixed-race adoptions? There are many ethnically mixed families in the UK, and that's to be celebrated as we enjoy a diverse society. We rightly also don't treat gay couples differently from other couples in the adoption process. So, do you agree with me that racial diversity in families is a good thing, as it is in our wider society, and that ethnic differences shouldn't be a factor in placing children for adoption? If you're serious about keeping as many children as possible out of the care system, or keeping their time in it to a minimum, I'm sure you'll agree, but I would like to hear you say it.

Finally, in this week of National Safeguarding Week, we've had many, many stories in the press and elsewhere over the last few years about grooming gangs and adults grooming children for sexual exploitation, so I would like the Minister to take this opportunity to actually give us an update on the measures that you're taking and the measures that social services are taking to safeguard children and to prevent groomers having—to prevent individual groomers and grooming gangs having—access to children in care, because one of the most vulnerable groups of children to these grooming gangs is obviously children in care. The state has a massive duty to make sure that those groomers don't have access to those children, so I would really, really like to know what you're actually doing to stop that. Thank you.

Minister, briefly. 

Yes. Thank you. I've mentioned already in my preceding answers a lot of the work that we're doing on increasing family support and therapeutic support in order, where we can, to safely and appropriately keep children within the family unit. I mentioned it in my opening remarks but also some of the work streams that the MAG is taking forward as well.

You majored in a couple of your points there on whether, if we make savings in one area, for example—and we haven't achieved this yet, I have to say—on reducing the numbers of children coming into care, would that be transferred across into another area. Look, we're not cutting and splicing this budget. We've just announced an additional £15 million today. Our intention is to sustain the funding that's going in there, and, as I said to Helen Mary's earlier point, also to find sustainable models in which we keep that going, and part of that is through regional partnership working but also local partnership working, I have to say as well. It's got to translate right down to the local level. But I think our commitment today and over the last few years has been clear that, whilst for some people this might be a slightly left field thing—it's not often a thing that attracts big media headlines—for us it's the most important thing if we genuinely believe that every single child has the right to have those outcomes regardless of the circumstances into which they are born or what life throws at them and their family situation.

On the safeguarding issue, I mentioned today that we are supporting—and encouraging others to support, I have to say—the Stop it Now! Wales campaign around sexual abuse of children, but, of course, in Wales, we are probably slightly more ahead of the game as well in terms of the work we are doing with our national safeguarding board, our regional safeguarding boards—. We are not complacent because I think the safeguarding boards themselves know that we've still got work to do. We see it when something hits the headlines. We look at what's happened, we look at what's gone wrong, we learn from it, and then we make sure those lessons are learned not just in the region but across Wales as well. So, I hope that gives you the reassurance.

And, finally—my apologies—the reason I didn't respond to you last time is that I couldn't—. It was my fault; I was slightly confused on what you're asking me, but I went back and had a look at the transcript. So, let me just make it clear here: on the day that we made the last statement, I went to actually visit a young couple not far from here in Cardiff, actually, who were part of the Adopting Together programme. I think you mentioned previously about this issue around ethnic minorities that they weren't specifically mentioned within that. Actually, they are, and I think we've written to you now to explain that, within the literature, it specifically refers, for example, to children from a black and minority ethnic background. So, I'm very happy to put on record that there should be nothing that disbars people from adoption—from becoming a loving, caring family—based on race or ethnicity or gender or sexuality or whatever. What matters is a caring, loving family that will give that child the very best start in life and the stability they have to live and thrive. That's what this is all about.

Thank you very much, Minister.

Item 6 on our agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Energy, Planning and Rural Affairs on the welfare of animals, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Lesley Griffiths. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to have this opportunity to update Members on work to continue to improve standards of animal welfare in Wales. Animal welfare remains high on my agenda as we move through this time of change and uncertainty. It is vital we maintain our standards and expectations, particularly considering the pressures faced as we leave the European Union. I'm very clear: the Welsh Government will not compromise on animal welfare. I'm determined we will continue to lead the way in raising standards, both now and after we leave the EU.

At this year’s Royal Welsh Show, I chaired a dry weather summit to engage with key stakeholders on the prolonged dry weather we experienced this summer, where animal welfare concerns were raised. I committed to helping the industry build its resilience to a whole range of issues, including fluctuating weather conditions. As a consequence of the summit, I am ensuring basic payment scheme payments, including loans for those eligible who have applied, are made on 3 December. I also announced a donation of £0.5 million to provide short-term support to those families most in need. Working with rural charities, we are on course to make funding available before the end of the year.

Working in partnership is key, as is engaging with enforcement agencies and the third sector. I've had the privilege of spending an afternoon shadowing an RSPCA Cymru inspector to witness how their vital services are delivered. I said in June I've asked RSPCA Cymru to consider the recommendation of the 2014 Wooler report for the RSPCA inspectorate to receive statutory status under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. RSPCA Cymru has now employed a member of staff to investigate this, my officials have received an outline programme, and we'll be meeting them soon to discuss this groundbreaking approach.

I've also spent time with the police rural crime team in north Wales to explore how we might reduce the number of livestock attacks. These are distressing for both the animals and the farmers involved and are costly in emotional and financial terms.

I regularly meet Julie Morgan AM, Councillor Dilwar Ali and David Joyce from the Communication Workers Union to discuss dangerous dogs and responsible ownership. There are harrowing incidents of dog attacks that result in life-changing injuries. Whilst much of the legislation surrounding dangerous dogs is non-devolved, the obvious lack of responsible ownership associated with these attacks is devolved. These are our citizens, our animals, our health impacts and our life-changing traumas. I'm corresponding with the UK Government and ensuring that we use the powers we have.

I've always been clear, animals should be slaughtered as close to the farm as possible. I will continue to ensure the welfare of animals during transport and at the time of killing continues to improve in Wales. The Welsh Government is investing in the small and medium slaughterhouse sector to ensure they are more resilient for the future. The food business investment scheme, which is currently open to expressions of interest, is weighted towards slaughterhouses planning improvements to the safeguarding of animal welfare, including the installation and upgrade of closed-circuit television systems. This grant can be used to reinforce the high animal welfare standards already achieved in Welsh slaughterhouses.

I've previously stated I will consider legislating to ensure CCTV is in place in all Welsh slaughterhouses. However, I am committed to working with food business operators in a supportive relationship to achieve the same objective. CCTV is useful in safeguarding animal welfare and is also an effective training tool.

Raising the profile of the food and drink industry is a priority for Welsh Government, and I am proud to promote Welsh provenance. Our food labelling legislation sets the standards required of food producers to meet its obligation in providing information to the consumer. All fresh, chilled and frozen pork, lamb, goat and poultry meat must be labelled with an indication of origin, meaning mandatory labelling of the place of rearing and place of slaughter of the animal from which the meat is obtained.

With nearly all UK supermarkets committed to 100 per cent free-range eggs by 2025, I have asked the Wales animal health and welfare framework group to review the available evidence on the welfare and biosecurity impact of different production systems. Ninety per cent of eggs produced in Wales are free range, which is much higher than anywhere else in the UK. It is my ambition for Wales to become a free-range nation for egg production.

We've worked in partnership to review and update our laying hens and pullets and broiler codes of practice. Work continues on these codes to allow them to be laid before summer recess. These codes will include guidance to reduce incidence of injurious pecking. The codes of practice for the welfare of horses, and one for dogs, were published yesterday. The welfare of game birds is a priority for me. Officials are working with the shooting industry and welfare organisations to review and update our existing code of practice for the welfare of game birds. It is important the code reflects the latest husbandry and management techniques, and standards of care the law requires.

Information on the supply chain of puppies is of particular significance in this process, and a number of colleagues have raised the issue of Lucy’s law with me over the last few months. It is essential we address the root cause of any welfare concerns in changes to legislation. Last week, I announced we are undertaking a consultation early in the new year on this important issue. Whilst I support the Farm Animal Welfare Committee's opinion in favour of universal use of well-designed and operated free farrowing systems, I believe this should only be implemented if piglet mortality rates are uncompromised. I will maintain a close interest in new developments in husbandry systems that may provide the answer to the conflict between sow and piglet welfare.

Good animal health and welfare are central to our approach in Wales; for example, through the HerdAdvance animal health planning initiative, launched at the Welsh Dairy Show. Prevention is always better than cure. It reduces the need for antibiotics, lessening the risk of antimicrobial resistance. The continued effectiveness of antibiotics underpins our one health agenda. This is World Antibiotic Awareness Week, and I urge AMs to become antibiotic guardians, as I have done today—[Interruption.] 

Okay? Thank you.

Thank you.

I hope the Minister recovers her voice shortly. Thank you, Minister, for your statement, or Cabinet Secretary, it's very much appreciated. Animal welfare is one of the issues that is always one of the big issues that are in most Members' postbags. Periodically, there are campaigns, but I never find a time in the year where some issue on animal welfare isn't capturing the public's imagination. And it is beneficial that this institution does have a vast array of responsibilities and powers available to itself to bring either forward legislation or regulation in this particular field, compared to where we were 20 years ago.

If I could touch on a couple of points out of the statement, because I appreciate it's only a 30-minute statement, it is, so I don't want to take other Members' times, but if I could touch on the Lucy's law proposal, I know that the Cabinet Secretary met campaigners around Lucy's law last week, and, sadly, I didn't have the opportunity because I was unwell at the time, but I know I'm tied up on a future date to meet with them. Could the Cabinet Secretary confirm what type of consultation she will be bringing forward in the new year? Third-party selling of puppies and kittens is an issue that we have talked about much in this Chamber and it is a rather unfortunate tag that, in particular, west Wales has been home to much of the puppy farming industry, and I'm sure we want to lose that tag as soon as possible and get back to responsibilities in this area. So, the sooner we can legislate in this field, I know that many members of the public and, indeed, Members on this side of the Chamber would be very grateful.

The responsibilities around education of the public are really important. The Cabinet Secretary touches on the work that Julie Morgan, the Member for Cardiff North, has done around the postal workers union, as well, and it is a huge responsibility when members of the public take on owning an animal of whatever type. I, too, have been with the RSPCA on a drive-by and I was overwhelmed, in some respects, by this one incident that we looked at, where there were four dogs in this one particular house, and the owner didn't have an idea at all about the responsibilities on them to neuter the dogs and provide good food for the dogs and a good home, and, in the end, the RSPCA ended up taking those dogs out of that environment. But I always remember the inspector saying, 'I bet you I'll come back in a month's time and there'll be a dog back in that house, and the process will be begun all over again.' It is a huge responsibility to be a pet owner, and, therefore, the job and role of educating people about those responsibilities is a huge performance that Government can undertake with the levers it has available to itself.

I notice, at the start of the statement, the Cabinet Secretary talked about the money that had been made available back in the summer to the charities—the £500,000. It has been a very difficult summer; the feeding and welfare of livestock has been a big issue on farms. I'm just a little surprised that that money hasn't already hit the charities, because, as the Minister identified, this money was designated for families under particular stress at that time. We are now in November. I think the statement indicates that that money is going to be made available at the back end of this year. Could the Minister clarify why it has not been made available to the charities so it can be dispersed amongst the agricultural community, to the needy cases that require that money coming forward?

And labelling—you also touched on labelling. The informed choice of the consumer is a really important area. Only recently, there was some social media activity around the purchase of chicken within one of our major supermarkets, and on the front of the packaging it highlighted that it was British chicken, when you turned it over, 'Produce of Thailand'. That just clearly is unacceptable. I believe, in the environment and sustainability committee, we have taken evidence recently that indicates we do have powers in this particular area around labelling, and so I would be interested to understand: has the Cabinet Secretary given any consideration to exercising those powers so that the consumer can be informed on welfare when they are making the purchases that they require?

And my one final other point, if I may, Deputy Presiding Officer, is capacity within local authorities and enforcement agencies. It is all well and good us passing legislation, passing regulation here and talking very grandly in this wonderful Chamber of ours, but the reality is you need the enforcement agencies to be resourced in the communities, whether they be local authorities or the police themselves, to actually use that legislation and those regulations to drive up standards of welfare. We know full well that, very often, local authorities, in particular when it comes to trading standards, have not got the officers to undertake many of the basic functions that are placed on them. So, what assessment has the department made of local authorities and third-party agencies' abilities to actually implement the legislation and regulation we have now around animal welfare, let alone new regulation and legislation that will be brought forward?

I thank Andrew R.T. Davies for his list of questions. I quite agree with you. I think probably all of us in the Chamber, as Assembly Members—. Certainly, the biggest postbags I've always had, as the Assembly Member for Wrexham, are around animal health and welfare. It's very interesting that the only correspondence I've had as an AM in relation to the technical notices that are coming out of the UK Government around Brexit have actually been around animals. I think we're certainly a nation of people who absolutely love our animals.

Andrew mentioned Lucy's law and what we would be consulting on. I've made it very clear we will be launching a consultation in the new year on the impact of banning the third-party sales of puppies and kittens in Wales, and as I say, we will be doing that early in the new year.

I think you're right about education, and certainly the work that I've been doing with Julie Morgan and the meetings we've had with Councillor Dilwar Ali and David Joyce—. I mean, some of the photographs that David has brought to those meetings of injuries that have been sustained by postal workers just going about doing their job are truly horrific. And you're quite right; it is a great joy to be a pet owner, but it is a huge responsibility, and it's very important that we work with the public around education, and in our schools too. I've had conversations with the Cabinet Secretary for Education around this, and she's very supportive.

You asked about the £0.5 million that I announced at the Royal Welsh Show around the dry weather summit and why it hasn't gone out to charities. My understanding is that the charities felt that that money would be more needed in January and February of next year. I'm due to meet the Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution—I think it's on 28 November—when I will clarify that, but that money is certainly ready to go to those families who, as you say, within—. We had that very long, hard, wet winter, then we had the snow in the spring, then we had the dry weather. Autumn's brought flooding. So, as we approach winter, I'm very conscious that there are many in the agricultural sector that will require funding, and that was the reason I brought the basic payment loans forward. It's the first time I've done that. So, on 3 December, people will know that if they don't get their basic payment, so long as they've applied for the loan, they will get that.

The points you made around labelling are absolutely right, and the incident that you described is completely unacceptable. We do have some powers, but I'm also working with DEFRA in relation to labelling, and, again, post Brexit, I think there is an opportunity to make sure that we absolutely beef up our labelling to make sure that people know—consumers can be absolutely confident in what they are buying.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement—a bit of a scatter-gun statement, I think. You covered about 15 or 16 different policy areas within the welfare of animals subject area. I want to pick up on the £500,000 contribution, as well, to rural charities, because many of us have supported rural charities over the years, through contributions or involvement in various activities. But for the Welsh Government—. And I made this point previously. For the Welsh Government to endorse, through its contribution, the fact that farmers are really dependent on charity now says a lot, I think, about where we are, or where the farming sector is, or where it finds itself under your watch at the moment, and I think that's quite an issue of regret for me, that you feel that you have to do that. It says a lot about where the sector is, these days, because what farmers want, of course, isn't charity but action: action to ensure the availability of fodder to Welsh farms over the coming months, so that they can protect the welfare of their animals through having sufficient food available. We remember how the Irish Government announced, back in April of this year, that they were going to support the importation of fodder to Ireland, much of that coming from Wales or through Wales, making it much more difficult, therefore, I'd imagine, for Welsh farmers to source the fodder they need, and making that fodder more expensive as well. I would much rather see greater action from Welsh Government than contributions to charity, as important as the role of those charities is.

And, of course, in your response to the dry weather situation, you've leant on the basic payment to try and address some of those pressures—that very basic payment, of course, that you will be getting rid of, if you get your way in relation to future proposals for farm support here in Wales. So, what happens when the basic payment is gone? Clearly, farmers will be committed, through the public goods and economic resilience aspects, to fulfil certain obligations, but where will they have that security and that stability that they look for, so that they can keep their farms afloat and, of course, protect the welfare of their animals?

The RSPCA inspectorate to receive statutory status is something I would very much support, but, of course, the Wooler report was published, as you say, four years ago, so I'm just wondering how much longer we need to wait. Maybe you could tell us in response when you hope to take decisive action on this.

Likewise with dangerous dogs, we've been talking about this for years and years and years. I remember six, seven years ago when I joined with you in paying testament to the people that you name in your statement, and I remember events calling for action on this front six, seven years ago, as I say, and still we're waiting, and you do get quite impassioned in this section of your statement:

'These are our citizens, our animals, our health impacts and our life-changing traumas.'

So you're writing a letter.

'I'm corresponding with the UK Government'.

You say in the preceding sentence that aspects of this are devolved, so why aren't we getting on and doing something? I'd like to hear a bit of urgency, because I don't want to be here again in another seven years talking about this.

On stunning animals before slaughter, clearly there'll be an opportunity tomorrow to expand on some of this in a debate in this Assembly, but I would like to ask whether the explicit labelling of food where an animal has not been stunned is one way of maybe at least ensuring that the consumer can make an informed choice.

The codes of practice for the welfare of horses and the one for dogs that were published yesterday, we welcome those. Of course we were promised them before the summer. Maybe you could explain why the delay. Lucy's law: likewise, I would urge the Government to get a move on. Maybe you could confirm whether it is your intention to make sure that there is legislation on that in this Assembly at the very least.

And just finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, two issues that aren't actually in the statement. On 17 June you said that you'd investigate the need for new codes of practice on primates and other exotic pets. There's no mention of that in the statement. I was wondering if you could give us an update and whether you could tell us whether it is really a new code of practice that we need when maybe some of us would be in favour of an outright ban. So maybe you could tell us where we are at in that respect.

Finally, there's no reference at all in this statement to vets, veterinary surgeons, and of course given concerns around the sufficiency of the workforce post Brexit, for large animals and small animals, I'd like some reassurances that—I know you're on the case, but we need to know that there is a sufficient workforce here so that we don't fall back post Brexit in not being able to implement a lot of the aspirations that are in this statement.

Can I thank Llyr for his list of questions? It is a very big area of responsibility in my portfolio and it's very hard to just pinpoint it. I did look at perhaps having a statement on farm animals, for instance, or companion animals, but we thought we would have it a bit more general.

You ask about the £0.5 million that I referred to in my answers to Andrew R.T. Davies, which we've given to the agricultural charities, and of course it's not that we want our farmers to be reliant on charity. However, it was very clear to me, certainly over the summer down at the Royal Welsh Show and at the agricultural shows and when we had the dry weather summit at the Royal Welsh Show, that regarding the weather volatility, unfortunately a lot of our farming businesses aren't resilient and sustainable in a way that we would want, and as you're aware—obviously you referred to the basic payment scheme going and being replaced by schemes that are in the consultation, and I don't want to pre-empt the consultation, which only closed a couple of weeks ago—one of the reasons why we want to look at having a new scheme is because we don't believe the basic payment scheme has enabled our agriculture sector to have that resilience and that sustainability that is needed when you have the unprecedented weather that we've had this year. Again, farmers, I'm not saying there won't be support for farmers. I want to make that very clear, and I'm very grateful to have the opportunity again. We have said we want to replace the direct payment scheme. However, there will be the economic resilience scheme and the public goods scheme that you referred to, and every farmer will be able to apply for both of those schemes.

You talk about the RSPCA and the statutory status, and I welcome your support for that. I'm certainly looking into that very carefully. I mentioned the RSPCA are doing a piece of work. They've employed a person to do that, and I had a discussion just last week with the RSPCA, and I do hope to be able to make more of a decision and an announcement early in the new year.

You mentioned dangerous dogs and, as I say, a lot of the legislation isn't devolved; it is reserved. Interestingly, on a couple of occasions when I've been out with the north Wales rural crime team, they clearly don't think that the UK Government's legislation is fit for purpose. So I'm not just corresponding. I'm corresponding with the UK Government, I've had meetings on several levels around the legislation, particularly in relation to dangerous dogs, but also the meetings that I've had with Julie Morgan and others to look at what powers we have. So, for instance, do we have the powers to look at fixed-penalty notices? Do we have the powers to look at licensing? So that is a big piece of work and I am committed to taking this forward as quickly as possible with Julie Morgan.

You asked why the codes of practice were delayed. Well, I think there's one word for that and that's 'Brexit'. With the number of statutory instruments that are coming through, they've had to take precedent over the summer. I am probably clearing several statutory instruments a week at the moment—it's a huge piece of work. But we have to make sure that statue book is there on 30 March. So, that has to take precedence. So, you're right, we are looking—. I've promised to look at others: primates, exotic pets—do we need to look at a ban? And that's something I'm happy to do.

I think the Member raises a very important point on veterinary surgeons. Clearly, we have a very high number of veterinary surgeons who are EU nationals. So, it's very important that when I have my discussions with DEFRA—and we've got the next quadrilateral with Ministers on Monday here in Cardiff—that we leave the UK Government under no uncertainty how important this sector is to us. And I have done that over the past two years. At the moment, we believe we have the workforce, but, obviously, further down the line, I think there could be difficulties.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement and I'm very pleased that she has taken the time to meet Councillor Dilwar Ali and Dave Joyce from the Communications Workers Union with me. As she knows, my constituent, Dilwar Ali, is involved in this campaign about dangerous dogs because his young son was viciously attacked by a dog when he was in his own back garden in 2011, and he's been left scarred for life. I think it's true to say that we have been campaigning since that time for the welfare of dogs, really, and to try to reduce the number of attacks by dangerous dogs.

Some of the information that Dave Joyce has brought to us has been very distressing, and the Cabinet Secretary has referred to some of the awful injuries that postal workers have suffered. But, he has drawn our attention to the fact that the number of attacks are actually increasing in Wales, and a total of 167 postal workers were the victims of aggression from dogs in 2017-18, and this is a rise of 22 per cent. So, I wondered if the Cabinet Secretary had any comments about this apparent, quite a large rise in the number of attacks.

It's already been mentioned that the Cabinet Secretary is looking to see if there are any further powers that can be used. I do commend the fact that she's doing that, because I think there are many things that could be done in a preventative way to try to prevent these awful attacks. We have discussed, here in this Chamber, dog control notices and we've discussed licensing and all these other issues, but I think it is important that we get a clear idea of what we can do and what we can't do. So, I look forward to an update on that when she's ready.

And I'd just like to, lastly, comment on Lucy's law. I'm really pleased that there is going to be a consultation on Lucy's law, because I think it's a matter of vital importance that we don't allow puppies and dogs and other animals to suffer in the way we know happens.

Thank you, Julie, and I would like to pay tribute to Councillor Dilwar Ali. This campaign he's had, as you say, is on the back of a family member having life-changing injuries following a dog attack and, I'm sure, when he sits in those meetings with us, it must be even more harrowing for him. But, you're quite right, I think it was just last week that we met again and, certainly, the information that Dave Joyce brought from the CWU was that the number of attacks are worrying. One hundred and sixty-seven people being attacked going about their daily jobs is completely unacceptable, and I am committed to doing all I can to work with the three of you to take this issue forward. I think we have to accept that the vast majority of dog owners are responsible—they take their responsibilities very seriously. I think, obviously, Wales was one of the first countries to introduce the compulsory microchipping of dogs. In Wales we've got our breeding regulations that say that dogs should be socialised as far as they can be before they leave the breeder. I do think that does have a lasting impact on the behaviour of a dog later in life. I'll mention that there are elements of the Dangerous Dogs Act that are not devolved, but I am committed to continuing to work with the UK Government to address the deficits, as Dave Joyce sees.

In relation to Lucy's law, sorry, I didn't answer Llyr's question around would I be doing it in this term of Assembly. Obviously, we'll be going out to consultation in January and it will then be about looking for a slot in the very packed legislative programme, but I would certainly want to do that. I think it's something I'm personally very keen to do. I think it's really important that we work jointly on these issues and I am really grateful to the rural crime team up in north Wales. I think some of the ideas they have around this agenda are very helpful to me. I do think we need the UK Government to look at that legislation to make sure it is fit for purpose and certainly, at the moment, I don't think it is.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary, and the actions you have taken to improve animal welfare in Wales. I too support the introduction of Lucy's law and look forward to legislation to ban puppy and kitten farming. Cabinet Secretary, when do you expect to introduce any new legislation identified by the consultation?

Cabinet Secretary, a group of vets has accused DEFRA and UK Government Ministers of telling bare-faced lies about the effectiveness of the badger cull in England. The vets state that claims the cull in Somerset and Gloucestershire was working were not based on any scientific evidence. Cabinet Secretary, do you have any plans to abandon badger culls in Wales, based upon these new developments?

An independent scientific review into DEFRA's strategy for controlling the spread of bovine TB, released today, has found that culling could reduce between 12 and 16 per cent of new cases in cattle, but that in order to achieve this more than 70 per cent of badgers would have to be killed. Cabinet Secretary, the report's authors recommend non-lethal controls such as a vaccination. Do you agree that this is much better than driving our badger population to near extinction?

Moving away from wildlife and on to domestic animals, pressure is being put upon the UK Government to consult on banning the sale of fireworks. Given the impact that fireworks have on domestic animals, particularly at this time of year, does your Government have any plans to consult on restricting the sale of fireworks and allowing organised firework displays only?

Finally, Cabinet Secretary, I welcome the fact that you have become an antibiotic guardian. The threat we face from antimicrobial resistance not only threatens our farm animals and our pets, but also poses a danger to human health. Cabinet Secretary, apart from championing the cause, what is your Government doing to reduce the use of antibiotics in agriculture? Thank you. Diolch yn fawr. 

Thank you, Caroline Jones. In relation to Lucy's law, I think you will have heard me say that we will be having a consultation in January and I will then, depending what comes forward from the consultation, be looking at a slot in the legislative programme over the next couple of years.

In relation to the report that Caroline Jones spoke about with the DEFRA Ministers and the badger cull, I think there are two important points here. One is I'm not here to defend the UK Government's policy in relation to badger culling. I have made it very clear that we would rule out an England-style cull here in Wales from the day I've been in portfolio, and there is no badger cull here in Wales. What we have is a refreshed TB eradication programme that I introduced in October of last year. I'm committed to bringing forward an update on how the programme is working, probably around April of next year, when we've got a full year's data to be able to report on.

I think what we're doing, having a bespoke action plan on those farms where there is a significant breakdown and has been for many years, those bespoke action plans are all being undertaken as we speak. You'll be aware, I'm sure, that we had a vaccination policy in relation to TB and unfortunately the vaccination wasn't available for the fifth year. But, we have got some pilot areas where we have used vaccinations over these last few months. 

In relation to banning fireworks, that would be a matter for the UK Government, but I would be very interested to see anything that they bring forward.

And, as I said, I have become an antibiotic guardian today and I would urge fellow Members to do so. I think it's very important that we work with the agricultural sector to ensure there isn't overuse of antibiotics. And certainly the work that we've done in relation to antimicrobial reaction is very important, and that's been a significant piece of work.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary. 

Item 7 on our agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services on winter delivery planning, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services, Vaughan Gething. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased to update Members on how NHS Wales, local authorities and other partners are planning to deliver resilient services for the winter. Last winter was one of the most difficult that our health and care services have faced in several years and saw increased challenges for our front-line staff. This was not, however, unique to Wales as health services across the UK were put under immense strain. Significant snowfall, freezing conditions, increased demand for GP and emergency care services, increased admissions to hospitals for older people with complex conditions, and the largest number of flu cases since the pandemic of 2009 meant that our NHS and social care system was under unprecedented pressure. Despite these pressures, the majority of people accessing health and social care services during last winter received timely and safe care. This is testament to the thousands of committed staff working in often difficult circumstances, often going above and beyond what could reasonably be expected of them to deliver professional and compassionate care. 

Members will be aware that an evaluation of health and social care resilience over the last winter was published recently. Reflecting on learning from this evaluation, it was recognised that a co-ordinated and collaborative whole-system approach is essential. It also suggested that prioritising delivery of a small number of areas in a targeted way ahead of this winter would support better management of surges in demand and changes in patterns of demand.

As I stated in my written statement on 25 October, my officials have worked with national clinical leaders, leaders from the NHS Wales organisations and local authorities to develop five winter delivery priorities for this winter. These will increase focus on the management of patients in the community, make sure there is clinically focused hospital management to manage risk and peaks in demand, and to ensure that people are able to return home from hospital when they are ready.

While we recognise that pressures on the health and care system are a year-round reality, planning for winter remains a significant priority for our health and care system and national agencies. Preparations for this winter have been taking place throughout Wales and across organisational boundaries since last winter. Local health boards, the Welsh ambulance service, local authorities and other partners have been working over recent months to develop and finalise integrated winter delivery plans for their health and care communities, aligned to those five priorities. 

Integrated winter delivery plans have been received from every health board and they have been scrutinised by my officials, the NHS Wales delivery unit and the national programme for unscheduled care. Feedback has been provided to help improve their plans ahead of the winter. The Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust has developed a national plan that has been considered and agreed by the Emergency Ambulance Services Committee as well.

The local plans include an additional focus on providing telephone advice to people with urgent care needs, increasing access to services in the community over evenings and weekends, and collaborative working with the third sector to support people to leave hospital when they are ready.

To support the delivery plans, I announced a £20 million package for the NHS and social care partners in Wales ahead of this winter. Learning from previous years, I made the decision to allocate this funding earlier this year to ensure local health and care teams are as prepared as they can be for the winter to come. This funding is, of course, on top of the £5 million I announced on 17 October to help relieve pressure on critical care units and the £10 million I announced on 22 October to support sustainable social services through this winter. It will help people to access care closer to home, ensure there is sufficient available hospital capacity and help people to leave hospital for home when they are ready. Sixteen million pounds of that £20 million package will be allocated directly to local health boards to support delivery of actions featured in their plans, alongside their partners in the ambulance service, local authorities and the third sector.

I expect that funding to be used to support health boards’ delivery against milestones identified for this winter, as part of the adoption and adaptation of the primary care model for Wales. Delivery against these milestones will be monitored through monthly meetings with directors of primary and community care. We've made clear our expectations to health boards that this funding must be used to support delivery of actions outlined in their integrated winter plans, and that, again, will be evaluated as part of another review of winter resilience after this winter finishes.

The remaining £4 million of the £20 million package will fund nationally agreed priorities for the winter period, and these include increasing capacity in emergency departments to support patient flow, four high-impact Welsh ambulance service projects to manage patient demand in the community, and two pilots to extend primary care out-of-hours access.

The winter will also see NHS Wales work more closely with the third sector. For example, local health boards will work with the British Red Cross to support patients and staff in emergency departments, and transport relevant patients home, helping them to resettle and reconnect with community services. The Welsh ambulance service will also be working with St John Cymru Wales to scale up a project, trialled in south Wales last winter, to introduce a dedicated falls service, and I outlines this in my statement last week about the amber review. This will help avoid sending essential emergency ambulance resources to people who can safely be resettled without a clinical intervention.

Health boards have been asked to formulate operational plans for the crucial 18-day period between 21 December and 6 January. That's in recognition of the particular challenges that this period presents due to the number of bank holidays. This year’s Choose Well winter campaign that I launched recently places more of a focus on the role of community pharmacy and the wide range of other services that are available within the community. They're often closer to people’s homes and available at more convenient times for a range of people in the evenings and weekends.

I was pleased to launch the annual Beat Flu campaign on 3 October, and I had my flu jab in a community pharmacy in Cwmbran. The Beat Flu campaign encourages all those who are eligible for the free flu vaccination to get protected. This year, the vaccine will be more widely available than ever before, including for staff within the social care sector, paid for by the national health service.

But there is no reason to think that this winter will be any less challenging than previous years and, yet again, we will rely on the dedication of our staff at the most extreme times of pressure. However, the plans that we have across health and social care come from a partnership between our NHS, local authorities, the third sector and the Government. The combination of local and national plans should provide increased resilience against the inevitable pressures that will come over the winter months. As ever, it is our aim, and that of our dedicated staff, to make sure that patients continue to access the care they require, when they need it and where they need it. 

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for your statement today. One of the things that does seem to mark out the winter months is these winter pressures on the NHS and, obviously, over the Christmas period, as you alluded to in your statement. With the bank holidays and all the rest of it, it is a particularly challenging management time for the NHS, and we do pay tribute to the work of the NHS staff across the whole estate, because it needs everyone within that estate to work, as well as the voluntary sector, to meet those challenges. 

I will take a couple of points out of the statement, in particular around the capacity. You can talk about the extra money you've put in, which is very welcome, but is that extra money buying additional capacity, both in hospital beds and access to GP practices and primary locations, in particular? In the statement you talk about increasing access to services in the community over evenings and weekends. Well, if you talked to most people, they do have difficulties at the best of times trying to access appointments in the evenings within the GP sector, for example. So, what additional capacity will the resource that you're identifying buy over these coming months so that that will actually treat patients in the best location, which is the community itself?  

Here in Cardiff, for example, over the Christmas period last year, there was a certain period of time when there was no GP out-of-hours provision whatsoever because the health board was unable to attract any GPs to fill those rota slots. Can you give a commitment today that that situation will not happen this winter, given the preparedness that you've identified within your statement this afternoon? In particular, and I did raise it with the leader of the house, could you touch on staffing levels within the NHS, in particular in maternity services? You did indicate that you were going to come back to the Chamber to inform us about staffing levels within maternity services across Wales in light of the Royal Glamorgan Hospital situation and the staffing numbers there. If you could use, maybe, this statement to give us an assurance that your officials now have satisfied themselves and confirmed to you that staffing numbers are robust in the services that will be called upon for the winter months, I think that would be greatly appreciated.

The flu vaccination—obviously there's a widespread campaign around flu vaccine across the length and breadth of Wales. Only this morning I was hearing of issues in north Wales in particular, where there does seem to be a shortage, certainly in some GP surgeries, and patients unable to actually have the jab when they've presented themselves to have that vaccination. Can you confirm whether you are aware of such instances where patients are turned away when they present for the vaccination, and, if that isn't the case, are you able to give an assurance that, if constituents do want to have the flu vaccine, there is ample supply here in Wales for that programme to actually meet the goals that we want it to achieve?

Obviously, what's really important as well is to focus on the wider NHS estate. There is little or no point in having the hospital itself working if the car parks, for example, or the roadways into the car parks, are blocked up. Very often, these are the things that do tend to get overlooked. I can remember in Llandough hospital, some two years ago, the hospital itself was functioning very well but because the car parks were iced up and snowed under, basically they couldn't get any patients in or staff to assist in the changeovers that were required. So, when the hospitals and health boards look at their estate, they should look at the entire estate and the workings on that estate so that we don't find that sort of anomaly happening again that puts undue pressure on the hospital environment itself.

You also touched in your statement on the increase in community facilities that will be made available. Could you explain what increase you're looking at creating this winter that wasn't available last winter in the community, so that patients know where they need to go and present? It is important, as you quite rightly identified within your statement, to say that this is a multi-agency approach that's required, from the voluntary sector, from local authorities and the health service itself. If all walk in unison together, then we can have confidence in the plans that you've outlined today. But what we saw last winter was a breakdown in the service, regrettably, despite the best endeavours of many people across the length and breadth of Wales. I do point to that specific point that I touched on, where, in Cardiff for example, there was no out-of-hours provision whatsoever and so that only leaves the A&E department to take the brunt then of all that extra demand arriving at the doors of the hospital, which puts pressure on the hospital itself, and that pressure drives the service down. So, can you give us the commitment that the capacity will be in the community? Can you give us the commitment that health boards have got the staffing levels they require, and, above all, what new initiatives will you be bringing forward where you've learnt the lessons from last winter? 

Thank you for the wide range of questions. Some of your broader points were about capacity across the system—you started and ended on those points. On capacity within the beds part of the system, and not just within the hospital setting, but the ability to flex bed capacity, that requires staff, and that's the biggest limiting factor, rather than the physical beds and space themselves. But there are also beds in different parts of the system, so a focus on reablement beds, to get people out of hospital if they need an intermediate setting before going back to their own home wherever that may be, whether it's a private residence or if they're in the residential care sector.

There's always capacity to make better use of the capacity within the pharmacy sector too, which I've outlined in the statement. There are more services that pharmacies can provide than many people are aware of. We want to make the best possible use of that service. I've outlined in both the amber review and in today's statement some of where that extra capacity will be—for example, more clinicians available to service the clinical desk with the Welsh ambulance service, where lots of demand ends up being filtered through during this time of year, and, where the 111 service has been rolled out, there is more resilience in the out-of-hours service and not just people interacting with the emergency ambulance service as well. So, we will have more staff to help make that work. That partly follows on from the statement last week on the amber review. Today, for example, you know that, across the system, the successful pilot of advanced paramedic practitioners in north Wales is being rolled out through the service. So, that's extra capacity but not just numbers, but the sorts of people making use of the skill that those advanced paramedics have. Local health boards have decided with their local authority partners where best to deploy the skills of those advanced paramedics. So, yes, there are going to be more staff in and around our system, and we really are trying to learn lessons from the last winter. It should be a positive that that lesson learning takes place between professional staff and leaders of staff, so I'm not getting drawn into the operational detail of that because, actually, that's not where a politician should be. It's about the assurance that we are providing them with the resources they need to deal with the capacity and where they need that capacity to try and deliver a more resilient system through this winter.

But it would be foolish of any health Minister in any Government to try and provide an absolute guarantee that the system won't come under pressure or strain during the winter, and that includes our ability to provide out-of-hours services and how all parts of the system flex with each other. That's why we need to make better use of integrating the whole system together, because otherwise I recognise that that pressure goes into different areas. That's why we are looking to provide more capacity across the social care side of the system, because the dedication of our staff has to be in all of those sectors. If we achieve greater flow through the healthcare system, as we expect to do and as we want to do, that means that people will arrive in the social care sector more rapidly than before. We need capacity in that sector, not just in beds but in staff to do their job too.

On some of the specific points you made, on the operational plans that health boards are delivering, I do expect them to cover the estate within our hospitals so people can actually move around that estate—that's staff and patients and visitors too. On the assurances on the maternity services, we have received assurances, and I'll be providing a written note for Members to confirm that those assurances have been received about the staff members on maternity services around the country.

And then, on the flu vaccine, there was significant additional demand for the manufacture this year. Every year, public health organisations agree on the right strains of the flu vaccine to target. There's a slightly different vaccine available depending on different age groups and the efficacy of that. The manufacturer had some short-term supply issues at the start of the season. They're being resolved and the batches are being released across England, Wales and the rest of the UK as well. So, if anyone has not had the flu jab who wants it they should re-contact either their GP or their local community pharmacy and they can give them local information about when to have the jab and when it will be readily available in each area of the country. But we've actually got ahead this year in our flu campaign. We expect and want to vaccinate more of our staff and more of the public, and there should be more opportunities to do that in different locations around the country too.

I'd like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement. I'll just start with a general issue. Cabinet Secretary, you quite rightly highlight at a number of points in your statement the huge pressure that there has been on staff. I think you said in a recent interview:

'Last winter was really difficult and meeting staff who were at the sharpest of sharp ends. Knowing they are committed, and knowing that they want you to do something for them. Sometimes that’s listening and there’s times people say "You can make this better for us".'

Cabinet Secretary, are you confident that the plans that you've outlined for us today will relieve the pressure on staff? Nobody could expect you to guarantee that there won't be additional pressure, because there always is at winter time, but are you confident that it will relieve pressure on staff and make this winter somewhat less stressful for them? I have to say that my inbox and my postbag suggest that there's a certain amount of scepticism out there about how much has changed, so perhaps you can take the opportunity this afternoon to further reassure staff.

Turning to the main content of your statement, you talk about the winter delivery priorities focusing on management of patients in their communities and ensuring that people are able to return from hospital when they are ready. Now, you'll be aware of concerns that have been raised consistently by the Royal College of Occupational Therapists about the lack of occupational therapists available both to take part in the assessment processes when people are ready to leave hospital and to assess their homes to make sure that the homes are appropriate to receive those patients returning home. Will the initial resources that you've announced today help increase the occupational therapy capacity where that's needed to facilitate people going home from hospital as quickly as possible?

With regard, then, to the winter delivery plans—and I'm sure we're all very pleased to know that they're in place—you refer in your statement to feedback having been provided to the care providers, to the local health boards, to improve those plans. Are you able to share with us a little bit more of the concerns that you did have about those plans, or that your officials had, and what steps you expect local health boards to have put in place to address them. I fully take on board what you say about detailed operational matters not being a matter for you, but given that you have highlighted that feedback was needed, I think it would be helpful for us to know what that feedback was in order to be assured that that was fully taken on board.

Like Andrew R.T. Davies, I welcome the £20 million package. Could you tell us, please, whether this is new funding for the health budget or whether this is funding that's been moved from another priority to this priority, and, in which case, where that funding has been moved from? I realise and appreciate how very tight the budget is and I am, as I've said, welcoming that additional resource, but it is important for us to understand where other pressures may arise if that funding has been moved.

I would very much welcome the references to some of the positive work with the third sector, and I'd just like you to tell us this afternoon what you propose to do to ensure that, where there is good project working in particular areas with the third sector, that that is learnt from and that those good uses of the third sector are extended nationally. Of course, there will be different third sector provisions in different parts of Wales and it may not be possible to do it everywhere, but where there is good practice, I'm sure that you would agree that it's best that that's shared and used.

One of the important parts, of course, is that your statement highlights the emergency care system—out-of-hours GP services and the 111 call centre. Now, given the extremely critical audit office report on out-of-hours care that came out last summer and the concerns that the Royal College of General Practitioners have raised today again about the number of general practitioners we have, the gaps, and general practice's capacity to cope, with 84 per cent of GPs saying they're concerned that their workload will negatively affect their ability to provide care for their patients this coming winter, can you assure us, and can you update us on the progress on implementing that report's recommendations so that out-of-hours care will be strengthened this winter and will be as robust as you are setting out for us that you hope that it will be?

Of course, finally, winter planning is not just about making sure that doctors and nurses are available in our hospitals. Hospitals, particularly, have a whole range of support staff to make sure that pharmacies are stocked and equipped, to make sure that porters are in place to help patients to move about and so on and so forth. Can you confirm that keeping these support services operational is also part of the key, particularly, holiday planning that you've expected the local health boards to make to prepare for the Christmas season?

I tried to cover the final point in the series of questions in the statement. I tried to refer to the range of bank holidays that take place between 21 December and 6 January. We know that's partly about bank holidays and also about the additional surge that we tend to see both after Christmas and after new year when people have put off going to seek help and advice, and after each of those particular milestones we see a surge in demand coming into the whole health and care system, not just our hospital sector, but general practitioners certainly see that surge in demand as well.

On your—I'm trying to address the number and the range of questions that you asked—I think the plans will help to make sure that we have the best prospect of delivering the best possible service through winter, and I recognise there is always pressure and stress on staff. We're talking about the busiest end of the service, both in emergency departments, but even more so in primary care. The busiest part of our system is actually primary care. And I can't take away all of the stresses of the job. And there's something about honesty when you meet staff—being honest with them about what you can do and an understanding of the pressures that they're going through and recognising that the system really is busy all year. But what should give people some confidence isn't a group of politicians who sit down with a variety of officials in a room and decide to concoct plans that have no bearing on practice. The advice we get and the plans are drawn up by people leading and working in our system. For example, the clinical lead that we have for unscheduled care is actually an emergency department consultant who works in the Heath in a busy department, has been part of leading an improvement in that unit and has, frankly, buy-in from her colleagues around the country in a way that a politician or an official who has never done that job doesn't have. So, there's real confidence that it is possible to deliver improvement as well as understanding the specific nature of some of the workspaces and demand coming into different parts of the country.

On your particular point about occupational therapy, there's a challenge about the shorter term and the money may help with some of that shorter term capacity through winter, but there is, of course, a longer term challenge as well, and that's where we'll look at our training places and the numbers we invest. We've had a significant increase in occupational therapy training places over the last four to five years. The same goes for some of the points made by the Royal College of General Practitioners today. We're actually looking again at how we recruit and where we recruit GPs to and from. In the last two years—we overfilled our GP training place numbers the year before last; this year, we had a 98 per cent fill rate in GP training and Health Education and Improvement Wales will be looking again at both how we recruit, but also the numbers of training places again in this year.

On your point about out of hours, it's something that I recognise as a challenge. The 111 programme that I talked about is not just about a different way to deliver part of an out-of-hours service; it's actually reshaping the model of how we deliver out-of-hours services, and a broader range of healthcare professionals—GPs, pharmacists, nurses and therapists in particular—to make sure that a range of advice is available and to make sure that there is resilience across the whole system.

On your point about money, the £20 million that I announced weeks ago for the national health service, with partners—that's one-off money to make sure that we get through winter this year. The £10 million that you will have heard us put into the social care system—that's one-off money, but, of course, that will be followed by £13 million of recurrent investment into the social services system from the health budget for the next financial year. 

Finally, your point on the third sector. We have national partnerships in some areas. The examples I've given are St John Cymru and the Red Cross, but, equally, you will understand that there are more local third sector partners that deliver services, and that is absolutely part of the learning for this winter. And I expect we'll learn again at the end of this winter what has worked successfully and what we could do even more successfully in other parts of our system.

Thanks, Minister, for your statement today. Just a couple of points to raise. Vaccination has been mentioned a couple of times. You describe in your statement that you're now encouraging social care staff to get vaccinated, which is a good development. There was an issue a couple of years ago that there was actually a less than 50 per cent take-up of the flu vaccination from within the NHS staff. I guess a lot of this is due to actually publicising the availability. Are you confident that there's going to be a much better take-up this year?

You're right about encouraging people to not always see a doctor and that sometimes, they're better off going to see the local pharmacist, so you're directing people to try and see the pharmacist where possible, which is, again, a good development. Of course, it does raise the ongoing issue of the co-location, which was a recommendation of the health committee a couple of years ago after their inquiry. They wanted pharmacy services co-located within A&E departments. I wondered if you'd had further reflections on that.

And with the telephone advice, yes, there's obviously going to be a need for more telephone advice. Are more people being taken on to offer this advice and are they being trained well enough to give reliable advice? Because, obviously, that's what the public need to be convinced of. It's a very challenging job, so I'd be interested to hear how the training is going and how you're going to offer increased capacity this winter. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you for those questions. To deal with your last point about reliable advice on the telephone, we'll either have staff who go through a series of options that is drawn up by a clinician to get to the right point about whether further advice is needed, but lots of our advice is actually directly with the clinician. If you ring up what would've been the NHS Direct Wales line—if you ring up 111, you will get to talk to a call handler, to then be screened and be put through to a relevant healthcare professional. So, yes, there is training available, and it's actually about making better use, in those telephony services, of skills that paramedics have as well. A successful pilot that I visited last winter in north Wales that has been rolled out is actually using the skills of advanced paramedics to screen calls and to give people advice to avoid actually having to send an ambulance when it's not necessary. We know, for example, that some of the big priorities for improving the Welsh ambulance service this year—we think that the ambulance service thinks that up to three quarters of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admissions could be avoided if they got the right advice and support, and they could do that and deliver that over the telephone. And that is about the right person giving that advice.

I do think we'll see again an improvement in the uptake of the flu vaccine by NHS staff. We've seen that over the last couple of years and that isn't by accident—it's a deliberate attempt, both by health boards as employers but also, frankly, with some leadership from staff organisations as well. Both the Royal College of Nurses and Unison, I know, have been very consistent in encouraging their members to take up the flu vaccine and making sure that those opportunities are available in workplaces for that to take place. We've learnt from that by looking, this year, through community pharmacy, to deliver the flu vaccine service for residential care staff. By definition, residents in those areas are much more likely to be vulnerable. 

On your point about pharmacy, I would much rather see a pharmacy service where people recognise they can get it in the community. I reckon that there are challenges about having a pharmacy service located in A&E, but I want the message to be: 'Use your pharmacy in your community; it's at the most convenient place—you'll avoid needing to go on to a busy hospital site to go to an A&E, and try and get the support and advice that you could and should get there, rather than travelling unnecessarily to your hospital.' I think that will help the person, who doesn't need to go to hospital, as well as those that really do, to avoid additional traffic unnecessarily.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement this afternoon? It's important that we look at the issues facing us. One of the disadvantages of going after other speakers is that most of the questions get asked, while the advantage is that I don't spend so much of your time. But there are a couple of points I want to highlight and perhaps ask you questions on.

In the summer, ABMU, my health board, had a consultation on beds and capacity, and as a consequence reduced the number of beds, which it said it used as surge capacity last winter. Now, those beds are therefore gone, so the question I want to ask is: will you publish, perhaps, your analysis of the implementation plans for each health board, so that we can see that and be assured that the considerations for surge capacity and other matters have been reflected upon in those analyses? It's crucial that we ensure our constituents are able to be reassured that the beds in the hospitals, which have now been reduced—that that will not have an impact upon the availability during the winter period. Now, over the time that I've been a Member of this Assembly, I have seen the improvement in the winter preparedness plans. I have also seen a continuation of the challenges every winter presents to the health boards, and patients need that reassurance.

Can you also answer a question on capacity, as to what's in the community? Many district nurses in my area are struggling with the workloads they have, very often, and clearly your intention is to get people out of hospital as quickly as possible, back in the community, back under the care of the social care sector, or the district nurses, and yet we are seeing them challenged every day in that service. What analysis have you done of the capacity of district nurses within the health board regions to ensure that they can deliver on your intention of getting people back in the community as soon as possible? I fully appreciate we want to get them out, and we've got a problem with the flow through the hospitals, because we see the ambulances stacked up outside the front. We all focus on the front, but not focus on the back; we've got to get people in the community—but being cared for in the community is the crucial element here.

On that question, also we see people waiting in the hospitals; there are very many systems for discharge, but they can't get discharged because systems in the hospitals are slow. Will you also ensure that the systems in the preparedness of those health boards allow patients to be discharged quickly, and there's not some bureaucracy being kept? Gareth Bennett talked about pharmacies; how many patients wait in a hospital, in a bed, for hours, whilst they wait for a pharmacy to actually deliver the medication before they can be released? So, have you done an analysis of the systems within the health boards to ensure that this flow you want—we all want—is actually achievable?

Thank you for the questions. We could put up a series of the key actions from the local health board winter plans, but you'll know that, of course, every health board plans to flex its bed capacity during winter, because they know there will be a greater likelihood of needing to admit people, for the right reasons, and they're more likely to stay for longer, as I outlined earlier. But I'll certainly give some thought to publishing something in a useful way that would inform Members, rather than provide more fog, and will actually be helpful for Members to look at as well. 

On your point about the type of capacity needed, well, it reinforces the crucial partnership between the health service, local government, but also housing providers as well, to actually be able to plan and commission for the right capacity in the right place, because, often, it doesn't need to be a hospital bed; it could be a bed in the care sector, and it's often more appropriate for that person, and we'll definitely see that running through the winter plans that each partnership has provided.

And I recognise your consistent interest in district nurse capacity—not just for this winter, actually, but more broadly—and the chief nurse principles that have been introduced. It's one of the areas we're looking at with a potential extension on staffing numbers, to understand not just what we need, but how many people we need and where we want them to be. So, there'll work done not just by the chief nurse's office, but of course HEIW will take an interest in that as well.

On your challenge about discharge from hospital, it's one of the areas that I've regularly focused on, actually, about understanding what more could we get out of the pharmacy, in particular hospital pharmacy, where people have got their discharge advice and they're ready to go, and actually they need to be able to go home and to have medication to go with them. It is one of the areas where I think we'll be able to make greater progress soon in the next year, because I do think there's a greater role for community pharmacy. If they're prepared to step up, and they're able to deliver that service to patients in their own homes, those people can leave hospital more quickly than some of them are able to do now. I think there's a real gain to be made in delivering that greater flow, and, actually, for the person who wants to leave the hospital, to enable them to do so.

But two of the big five winter delivery priorities are a focus on getting people out of hospital when they're ready, but also looking at a discharge-to-assess model as well. We regularly talk about this: discharge someone to assess their need rather than keep them in hospital in an artificial environment to try and understand their need in their home environment. It reinforces the point about the role of therapists and, in particular, occupational therapists, to understand the need of that person. Again, that is a partnership between health and local government, and it goes back to where we launched the 'A Healthier Wales' plan. We went to Ynysybwl and we looked at the work that therapists had led to get someone out of hospital sooner, into their own home, to assess their need, and a package of care was provided. That's the genuine partnership that we're looking for between health, local government and, crucially, the citizen.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next items are the Sustainable Drainage (Enforcement) (Wales) Order 2018 and the Sustainable Drainage (Appeals) (Wales) Regulations 2018. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, I propose that the following two motions under items 8 and 9 are grouped for debate. Does any Member object the grouping?

I call on the Minister for Environment, therefore, to move the motions. Hannah Blythyn.

Diolch, Llywydd. The two items laid before the Assembly today are part of the regulatory suite that make sustainable drainage systems, or SUDS, a mandatory requirement on new developments from early next year. Both of these instruments have been introduced under powers contained under Schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010. A number of external organisations have contributed significantly to the development of this policy, and I'd like to take the opportunity to thank those representatives from local authorities, the Welsh Local Government Association, the Home Builders Federation, water companies and Natural Resources Wales.

The 2010 Act makes provision for the establishment of a SUDS-approving body or SAB to be set up within each local authority alongside their lead local flood authority duties. SAB approval will be required before construction of drainage systems can commence on new and redeveloped sites. The sustainable drainage enforcement Order provides for the enforcement of breach of the approval required in relation to drainage systems. The Order makes provision for the SAB or local planning authority to exercise powers of entry and issue enforcement notices or stop notices to a developer who breaches the requirement for approval. Similarly, it details enforcement for the failure to comply with such notices. It also provides for developers' right to compensation and right to appeal enforcement decisions to the Welsh Ministers, which in practice will be via the Planning Inspectorate.

Complementing the Order, the sustainable drainage appeals regulations provide for a right of appeal to the Welsh Ministers against the decision of a SAB in relation to applications for approval or in relation to the duty to adopt SUDS once constructed. The regulations detail the developers' right to appeal SAB approval and adoption decisions, set SAB procedures for appeals and their determination, and a power for the Welsh Ministers to affirm or substitute a decision made by the SAB.

In my statement on 16 October responding to storm Callum I stressed the importance of adapting to our changing and challenging climate in the context of flood-risk management. Flooding experience shows how quickly our infrastructure can get overwhelmed by heavy rainfall. Mandating the use of effective SUDS forms part of the response to these challenges, and implementing this legislation is vital to ensure long-term viability and to adapting to the challenges of climate change.

Llywydd, I commend this Order and these regulations to the National Assembly.

There are no speakers in the debate on these two items. Therefore, I presume that the Minister doesn’t want to reply to the debate—no. Therefore, the proposal is to agree the motion under item 8. Does any Member object? The motion under item 8 is, therefore, agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The question remaining is the proposal to agree the motion under item 9. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion under item 9 is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

That brings us to item 10, which is a debate on the Children’s Commissioner for Wales’s annual report 2017-18. I call on the Minister for Children, Older People and Social Care, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Llywydd. I would like to begin my contribution to this debate by thanking the children’s commissioner, not only for her annual report, but also for her tireless work on behalf of children and young people in Wales throughout the year. I'm sure that Members would agree that giving children a voice and advocating on their behalf is a crucially important role. Therefore, I welcome her report and the valuable work that she has done and will continue to do.

Wales has led the way in children's rights by enshrining them in law through the Rights of Children and Young Persons (Wales) Measure 2011—the first UK nation to do so, and it's something that we in Wales should be very proud of. We are passionately committed to children's rights, and this is clearly demonstrated by us being the first UK nation to appoint a children's commissioner.

Children's rights are entitlements—they are not optional—and we as a country will work hard to ensure that children's rights are understood and are respected. Children's rights support our ambition for each and every child in Wales to have the very best possible start in life. They are the driving force behind key programmes and policies in Wales, programmes such as Flying Start, our work on tackling adverse childhood experiences, and, indeed, our parenting campaigns. In short, children's rights are part of our DNA—they're crucial to the way that we do things in Wales.

Of course, there are many areas of policy that impact on children's lives right across our programme for government, and I've written to my Cabinet and ministerial colleagues highlighting the importance of keeping children's rights at the very centre of the work that we do. And I know that children's rights are being taken seriously right across Welsh Government. Recent examples of good practice include the ministerial focus on children's mental health and well-being, and universal support for children through the Healthy Child Wales programme. And the children's commissioner plays a crucial role as an independent champion of children's rights in Wales. As part of this role the children's commissioner helps to hold the Government to account, and I can confirm to Assembly Members that she is certainly taking that part of her role very seriously indeed, and we welcome it.

Each year, the commissioner is required to publish an annual report setting out how her office has safeguarded and promoted the rights of children and young people in Wales. In this year's annual report the commissioner has made 15 recommendations to the Welsh Government across education and health, children's services and transport. Now, the First Minister will publish his full response on or before 30 November, which means that I won't be setting out the full detail of our response during today's debate, and I hope Members understand that.

But, returning to this year's report, I want to draw the attention of Members to some key themes that the commissioner makes. Now, in particular, I'm delighted to see that the report does recognise the progress that's been made on the proposed legislation to remove the defence of reasonable punishment and on advocacy for vulnerable children. The report also highlights the commissioner's achievements in the first and second year of her three-year strategic plan in terms of project and also core work. Some of that core work includes the commissioner assisting more than 550 individual children and young people through her investigation and advice service. This is hugely valuable work, supporting the needs of vulnerable children and young people.

The annual report also sets out how the commissioner has implemented the principles of her children's rights approach in her own work and that of other agencies. And I'm encouraged to see how her work has challenged and supported other public bodies in Wales to adopt a children's rights based approach. Examples within the report include the Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust and the National Museum of Wales, amongst others.

The need to get services working more effectively together for our children and young people is a prominent theme in this year's report and I couldn't agree more that this needs to be done. This is also a major priority for the Welsh Government's reform programme. If we want to bring about real and sustainable change, we must work together to deliver services in a co-ordinated and integrated and a timely way. And we have to ensure that the rights of children and young people are embedded deeply in everything that we do. It's only when our programmes come together seamlessly that we will get the best value for parents and children from the limited resources that are available to us. So, we are committed to working across Welsh Government, with the public, with the third sector and with our own communities, including with children and young people.

The research, we know, is clear, childhood experiences are instrumental in shaping our lives, they impact our physical and mental health and they influence educational outcomes and economic prosperity lifelong. The research also makes clear that, with the right support, children can overcome and recover from childhood adversity. Our role is to help them build the resilience they need to be able to do so. To achieve this, we're committed to supporting that joined-up, responsive, early years system that puts the unique needs of each child and family right at its heart. This was a central commitment we made in 'Prosperity for All'.

It is important that we work together to maximize the opportunities to improve the outcomes for our children and our young people, to ensure that they all have the best possible start in life and go on to fulfil their potential. We do know that we only do that effectively when we listen and respond to the views and needs of children and young people themselves. Article 12 recognises they are right to have their voice heard and listened to and acted upon in decisions that affect them. We're committed to ensuring children and young people are full and active citizens in Wales, whose views are taken into account. They have clear views and a valuable contribution to make to the design of our services. I am clear, as Minister, that children's views will continue to be essential in the development and the delivery of our legislation, our policies and our programmes. We must ensure that they consistently have an active voice in the workings of Government.

For the only point today, I'll turn to Brexit. With Brexit currently dominating the news across the UK, it is imperative that we do not lose sight of those that it will impact the most. I've been taking the time to listen to the views of children on Brexit and other issues. They've talked to me with great passion about their concerns for future funding, their opportunities to study abroad, whether Brexit will lead to a reduction in environmental standards, and so on. We owe it to them to fight for the best outcome for Wales in the current negotiations. We will do everything in our power to ensure that their voices are heard and that our children's futures are not harmed. We want our children to grow up in a Wales they can be proud of. 

I note that the Member for Ynys Môn has put forward an amendment to the Government's motion. With regret, I say we won't be supporting the amendment. The rad, amber, green ratings referred to in the amendment are the commissioner's assessment of the Welsh Government's response to recommendations in her 2016-17 annual report, they do not form part of this year's annual report itself. So, I hope Members will understand why we won't be supporting those, useful as the RAG ratings are. 

As a Government, we have and will continue to work collaboratively with the commissioner and others for the benefit of children and young people. I will continue to focus on delivering for children and young people right across Wales, ensuring that their voices and their rights are at the forefront of everything that we as a nation hope to achieve. 

Therefore, I look forward to having conversations with the children’s commissioner and practitioners who work with children, and, most importantly, with children and young people themselves about how we will do that. Thank you very much.

I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on Siân Gwenllian to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much. Despite the claims made by the Minister, it’s a cause of concern that many recent decisions taken by the Welsh Government have been taken without giving full consideration to the rights of children. In her written evidence to the scrutiny of the draft Welsh Government budget, the children’s commissioner, in a report that is quite damning of the Welsh Government, says this:

'children’s rights appear to be an "add-on" within this budget...

'There does not appear to have been progress around the prominence of children and children’s rights within the budget considerations;

'There is a lack of analytical evidence in the form of Children’s Rights Impact Assessments to show whether children are better or worse off as a result of the budget decisions'.

There was no children's rights impact assessment prepared for the budget proposals, not even for the three important areas that have been subject to budgetary cuts, which are the school uniform grant, the minority ethnic attainment grant and the all-Wales schools contact programme.

The commissioner’s report, which will be discussed on Thursday, raises major questions, and I do look forward to hearing the Government committing to taking specific steps to increase and improve its performance significantly.

I turn specifically, therefore, to the commissioner’s annual report for 2017-18, and refer specifically to the traffic-light system of monitoring the progress of the Welsh Government in terms of taking action on recommendations, which is an excellent system for scrutiny. Yes, this is scrutinising work emerging from the 2016-17 annual report—that’s what the commissioner is doing, but she also provides live updates on her website. In our amendment, we quote from a report from September 2018, which shows a lack of progress, unfortunately, with only four of the recommendations categorised as green and five categorised as red. This does raise major questions about the Welsh Government’s commitment to the rights of the child.

The red recommendations include childcare, with the commissioner stating that

'The Welsh Government should ensure through the childcare offer pilot and any subsequent scheme that the children of non-working parents do not miss out on the increased childcare being offered to children of working parents.'

She goes on to say that the current proposal would mean that the children who would benefit most from childcare would miss that opportunity to develop key life skills at an early stage. With the most disadvantaged children starting school 10 months behind those from wealthier backgrounds, Plaid Cymru shares the commissioner’s concern.

Another issue that’s flagged up as being red by the commissioner is Government deficiencies in terms of elective home education. Again, I quote the commissioner

'the Welsh Government needs to amend the current guidance to give it statutory force and include a compulsory register for all home educated children to ensure they do not end up “off the radar” from even universal services.'

Every child has a right to an education, and local authorities have a responsibility to ensure that they receive an education. We must enable local authorities to do this work.

According to the children’s commissioner,

'Since this recommendation was made, the Cabinet Secretary made a statement in the Senedd in January 2018 outlining the intention to consult on changes to secondary legislation to strengthen the existing powers of local authorities.

'To date no consultation has been introduced and the anticipated timeline for this is spring 2019.' 

Again, those are the words of the commissioner.

Whilst the Welsh Government is dragging its feet, there is a risk that many children will miss out on their right to an education, and there is a risk that there are children who are going under the radar, in terms of the receipt of basic services.

Briefly, another issue that the Welsh Government has failed to take action on is British Sign Language. According to the National Deaf Children’s Society Wales, last year deaf pupils were 26 per cent less likely to receive A*-C grades in the core subjects, as compared to their peers who don’t have a hearing impairment. This gap exists because of the barriers that those with hearing impairments suffer, and this, again, is flagged up with a red light by the commissioner.

There’s no time to pursue the other two areas, but Ministers do need to address these issues as a matter of urgency—those that have been flagged as red by the commissioner, but also those that are amber. The Government must publish a timetable in order to convince us that things will be different—that things will improve—when we come back to this place next year.

I offer my thanks to the children's commissioner, and her office as well. We will be supporting the Plaid Cymru amendment to the motion because it sums up pretty well, I think, some of the current concerns, which are, as Siân Gwenllian pointed out, still live red risks, as the audit risk and assurance committee of the commissioner's office has identified. And they're five policy areas that have a direct, material effect on young people, their families, the life chances of both, where we see the frustration of those who want to provide services, and the frustration of the commissioner herself, who has been unable to force change. What is also rather worrying, I think, is that this is not dominating the headlines to help us hold Welsh Government to account, and help the people we serve better understand what we do in this place, and how we represent them on their priorities. I really hope that the media will scrutinise Welsh Government's response to this report—or, as we've just heard, lack of response to this report—because I suspect action on the failures addressed within it matter more to our constituents than smoking in town centres and Powys's festive pizza mess-up, I have to say.

Because some of the criticism contained in this report should anger us every bit as much as the findings that, in all fairness, were covered by the BBC today about the number of young people who self-harm when they are in jail, because the issues are connected. The mental health of these young people should be far more urgently important to them and to us as a society than the distraction of whether they've got the vote or not, because those of us who do have a vote need to keep asking why we're failing to keep our very young out of prison. Despite the commissioner's welcome work with health boards and Parc prison in my own region—where they have a very good record of working with families to maintain a healthy parental relationship, but were on the wrong end of this self-harm report—and despite the work with local councils, it seems that our aspirations for better health advocacy, and a reduction in the incidence and effects of bullying at an early age, are broadly unmet. 

Of course, this echoes the concerns articulated in the 'Mind over matter' report, which I won't go into again today. But if the commissioner is recommending giving statutory force to a national approach to statutory advocacy in order to improve the offer in health and even education, Welsh Government must tell us if and when they intend to do this.

We talk about early intervention in this place all the time, and advocacy is part of that. It can be highly effective at community level, preventing escalating issues that allow our young people to become damaged adults. While there may have been some progress, it's neither geographically consistent—for example, with looked-after children, the take-up of the advocacy offer was just 2 per cent in Gwynedd, but 88 per cent in Caerphilly—nor does it capture health and education as fully as it might. So, I hope the recommendation relating to the regional partnership boards is something against which we'll see clear progress by next year. 

Having said that, I would also hope to be able to follow the spend on that progress. As we've said before, particularly in our committee, integrated budgets make the connection between expenditure and outcomes for children and young people unnecessarily difficult to trace.

Now, turning to education directly, I've seen first hand how the right way has made a difference. Craigcefnparc Primary School in my own region is a really good example of how everyone's understanding of children's rights has contributed to the whole-school ethos, and the application of that has now turned the fortunes of that school around and made it exactly the kind of school we would all want to see. How sad it is, then, to hear that, despite the work of Welsh Conservative Mawr councillor Brigitte Rowlands and the families in that community, that Swansea city cabinet members are refusing to visit the school to see it for themselves, which is very disappointing considering that they will be making the decision whether or not that school closes.

I hope the commissioner is alive to those occasions where commitment and lip service appear interchangeable, because I remain unconvinced that the due regard that we and Welsh Government must all give to children's rights in policy and legislation is replicated in the delivery of those policies and legislation by public bodies. I don't think, Minister, it is in the DNA yet, so do we need to legislate?

Briefly, then, a three-point finish. The commissioner's recommendation on revisions to Welsh Government's current transport offer, we heard a bit more about that on the back of the budget, but Welsh Conservatives have a recommendation of their own—a more generous offer of a green card giving free bus travel up to the age of 24, acknowledging that young people may still need help to get to work, especially if that is a low-paying first job, as they quite often are. 

Secondly, I reiterate what Siân Gwenllian said regarding British Sign Language, and I note the regretful tone of the National Deaf Children's Society Cymru's view on the commissioner's findings. 

To conclude—the Welsh language. I would like to see more details in reports on how children’s rights to live through the medium of Welsh are being delivered, and, perhaps, some co-operation with the Welsh Language Commissioner on that issue. Thank you.

I'd like to start by paying tribute to Sally Holland and her staff for all the different issues they've taken up during this year, and also for the way she's worked so closely with us Assembly Members and with the Children, Young People and Education Committee, where she has appeared frequently and has really influenced, I think, the way that we've made decisions. And of course, most importantly of all, working directly with children and giving children a voice in Wales.

I'd like to thank her for her commitment—her long-standing commitment—to getting rid of the defence of reasonable punishment. I note in her annual report that this is her top recommendation to the Government, and she says that this legislation should take place as soon as possible. I know that she has actually campaigned on this for many years. In fact, this has been a recommendation of all children's commissioners since the office was created: Peter Clarke, Keith Towler and now Sally Holland.

So, I think that their persistence and commitment to getting rid of the defence of reasonable punishment is finally reaching a conclusion and I'm very pleased that the Minister has concluded and has confirmed that we will be having legislation next year. More and more research is actually reinforcing the importance of the Welsh Government taking this action, because a report published in BMJ Open in October, looking at 88 countries, found that in countries that had outlawed smacking or hitting children there was much less likelihood of violence and fighting between young people. Fighting was less common among 13-year-old boys and girls in countries with a total ban on corporal punishment compared with those without, with 31 per cent less fighting for boys and 58 per cent less for girls.

There's also been a lot of research recently from the American Academy of Pediatrics, which provides guidance for doctors and child healthcare providers. It has published a new policy statement that recommends that adults caring for children use healthy forms of discipline, such as positive reinforcement of appropriate behaviours, setting limits and setting expectations, and not using spanking, hitting, slapping, threatening, insulting, humiliating or shaming. So, the research is certainly reinforcing the decision that the Welsh Government has taken to go ahead with this legislation. And Sally Holland, in her annual report, actually quotes children and young people's views about this legislation, and I think it shows really what children do think. It says,   

'Children should be protected not smacked'.

'Smacking can always go too far, where do you draw the line?'

'Some people think you have to smack children for them to learn how to behave. I disagree, it is completely unnecessary'.

'You should talk and explain so that they don’t do the same thing again.'

'Instead of smacking you can ban TV or the iPad; anything is better than smacking'.

So, Sally Holland has been taking direct evidence from children about their views on smacking. So, it's absolutely great that the Welsh Government is taking this action and will be soon joining the many countries around the world who have already done this. 

Finally, I would just like to refer to an issue that the children's commissioner raised last week when she drew attention to inequalities in school sport. I'm sure many of you did see the stuff on the television about the frustration that young women feel about not having equal access to sport. It can't be right that more and more girls, for example, are wanting to play football, but a 13-year-old girl says she's been criticised and called a man or a lesbian for playing a boy's sport. She was told by her teachers that she can't play football in school as hockey and netball are the sports for girls.

Sally Holland quite rightly says that it's depressing to hear about gender stereotyping in schools in this day and age, and she described the sex segregation of school sport as 'surprising' in 2018. So, I think this is a very important point that has been brought up by Sally Holland, because we want our young people—girls and boys—to stay as active as possible and school sport is obviously one of the key ways to do that. So, I'd like to ask the Cabinet Secretary to comment on that when he does respond, because I think we really do have to find out the number of schools, especially secondary schools, that still offer only segregated sport for boys and girls, and whether there is any guidance for schools on this.

Can I thank the Minister for bringing forward this important debate and also put on record my thanks to the children's commissioner, Sally Holland, and her team for the excellent work that they do on behalf of children and young people here in Wales? I think it's a sad fact that, in 2018, many children and young people in our country don't enjoy the same safety and privileges that we in this Chamber were blessed to be growing up with. So, I welcome some of the key recommendations in Sally Holland's report, which of course were aimed at getting vulnerable young people and children access to the help and support that they need.

I did note the references that the commissioner made to the work of the Children, Young People and Education Committee on mental health, and I think it is important that we ensure that there is access, as Suzy Davies has quite rightly said, to ensure that people can get access to those services in a very timely manner. And I picked up of course on her references to bullying also and the need to ensure that that is tackled, quite rightly as has already been discussed this afternoon.

But, Presiding Officer, we've got much to do for our children and young people. The youngsters of today are the Assembly Members of tomorrow, and we must ask ourselves what legacy we are leaving to them. Will they be looking back in gratitude when they sit in this Chamber in the future or will they be wishing that we had done more? A key part of our advocacy will be making the right policy decisions. When there is so much to do it's vital that we do the right thing for our children and young people, and I have to say that one thing I'm disappointed about in the commissioner's report is the recommendation to remove the defence of reasonable chastisement. It seems to me to be the wrong course of action when you consider the actual harms that children are indeed facing. The report states that children in Wales do not have equal protection from assault in law compared to adults, but, of course, that is misleading and inaccurate. The law clearly protects young children and all children, indeed, from violence, but it also recognises that light physical discipline, such as a smack on the hand or the backside, should not be a criminal offence. And removing the defence of reasonable chastisement, I think, will destroy this distinction and leave many loving parents across Wales who smack their children at risk of arrest, conviction and even prosecution.

The report goes on to say, of course, that the Government has an obligation to take action where there's a potential risk of harm to children in Wales, and I agree with that absolutely. But there are people out there who do abuse children, and we should be empowering social services and the police to track them down and bring them to justice, not wasting the time of the police and social services by sending them after ordinary, hard-working mums and dads who choose to occasionally smack their children as a form of discipline. The evidence does not show that light smacking does any harm to children. The Government consultation on abolishing reasonable chastisement admits this. In fact, it stated, and I quote:

'there is unlikely to be any research evidence which specifically shows the effects of a light and infrequent smack as being harmful to children.'

And I would urge all of the Assembly Members present in this Chamber to read the work of Professor Robert Larzelere, one of the leading academics in this area of child discipline. His evidence to the Government's consultation on this matter is very compelling. So, will the Government also commit to following that evidence on this matter, rather than trying to take up what they believe is a fashionable thing? And I have to contend that it's not particularly fashionable either. We know that the results of a Welsh poll back in 2017 concluded that 76 per cent of the Welsh public don't think that smacking should be a criminal offence; 77 per cent are concerned that a smacking ban may well flood the police and social workers with trivial cases and make it more difficult for them to target their resources, their limited resources, to stop serious child abusers; and 77 per cent of the Welsh public also think that it should be the role of parents and guardians, not the state, to decide whether to smack their children.

So, I think it is absolutely vital that we do what we can to improve the lot of children and young people here in Wales and that we pursue measures that will genuinely help children, but this particular proposal, in terms of a smacking ban, is not the right way forward, and I would urge the Minister in his response to consider the weight of evidence, which is absolutely against the Government's plans.

I call the Minister for Children, Older People and Social Care to reply to the debate. Huw Irranca-Davies. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I don't think, in the time remaining, I'll be able to answer every single point in the full detail I normally give, but I will do my very best. Can I just, first of all, say to Siân and to others who have challenged us on what we're doing? We do not—we recognise—embed a rights agenda overnight and we welcome the challenge, both from the children's commissioner and from others, but it is fair to say as well that the children's commissioner, who we work with diligently on a wide range of policy areas that have been referred to this afternoon, she also recognises where we are achieving as well as putting the challenges down to us about where we need to do more, and we do know that we need to do more, not just as Welsh Government, but all partners across Wales, to embed the children's rights agenda. We can agree on that.

The RAG ratings issue: I entirely agree, we need to equally respond to those. I did say at the outset of my remarks that we wouldn't be responding in detail because the First Minister will also—. Sorry. I can't respond in detail to every single point there, but it is important that we recognise that within the report the children's commissioner has recognised how far we have advanced. That does include in terms of the legislation. Whilst we won't agree with every detail on every minutiae with the children's commissioner, we welcome the challenge.

Darren, it's interesting that you've just expressed an area where you disagree fundamentally with the children's commissioner, but also many other people out there now, who see that it is actually time to follow in our own way in Wales what 53 other countries have done, and not in a question, by the way, of interfering in children's rights, but also balancing those rights that we talked about of the child to a safe, secure home, wrapped up with the work that we've done over many years now with positive parenting, which is bearing dividends as well there.

And we have committed, Julie, I have to say, to bring forward—. The First Minister made clear that we would bring forward legislation in year three of this Assembly, which is the year now in front of us, and we look forward to doing that. We will work through the detail with all parties, by the way, and we will listen to the views of stakeholders, but we've made clear that we're bringing forward this legislation because we think it is actually in line with the work that we've done on positive parenting. It is the right thing, as well, for a modern and progressive country like Wales to do, that believes in the children's rights agenda.

Will you take an intervention?

I don't think I have time, Darren, unfortunately.

It was just on the positive parenting point.

And the issue of Parc prison, can I say it is important that we look upon those youngsters in Parc prison as young people first and foremost and make sure that the support is there available for them, so that the worrying stories we've heard about self-harm are addressed? I believe that Parc prison has responded in some way by saying that the data that has been brought forward might not reflect the most recent data, where I think they suggest that they've had a significant decline in it, but I think we do need to take an interest within that.

Julie's point in terms of segregation in school sports: this is very interesting and I'm happy to write and to confirm what the guidance is on this. I've actually had it within my own—. Very good local schools there, I've had it brought to me by parents myself saying, 'Why are girls and boys split for sessions when they're actually playing together outside of the school within a sports team and, yet, within the school, somehow, they're being split within sessions or even within playtime?' So, I'll happily write on that matter.

If I could turn to the issue of sign language in the very short time available to me, obviously, people will know that the Welsh Government formally recognised British Sign Language as a language in its own right in January 2004 and, since then, there have been iterations of supported training to increase the number of qualified interpreters in Wales to ensure that legislation, policies and programmes are in place across Government that recognise the importance of accessible communications. But, we do acknowledge there are still a number of issues currently being faced by members of the deaf community in Wales in relation to BSL, including a shortage of BSL interpreters. So, the Welsh Government recently responded to the Auditor General for Wales's 'Speak my language' report. It contained recommendations on how public bodies, particularly those on front-line services, provide interpretation and translation services for BSL and other languages, and the Welsh Government accepted all three recommendations and indicated that we will be reviewing current provision of BSL to ensure that our approach meets the needs of individuals and their families. We'll continue to progress work on these actions over the coming month, and we're also considering recommendations made in a report by the Petitions Committee to improve access to education and services in British Sign Language.

Now, I want to thank all the Members—.

Sorry, I wanted to turn to the issue of elective home education as well in the couple of minutes that I have. Now, we're in agreement with the children's commissioner that all children in Wales should be accounted for. However, this isn't a matter just for education; it's also a matter of concern for all agencies with responsibility for children and young people and making them visible. So, we've instigated cross-departmental work to consider the strengthening of those multi-agency processes for those children not in routine contact with universal services. But in terms of education, we are clear that the primary policy intent behind the proposals that are developing is to ensure that home-educated children and young people in Wales receive that suitable education, and in so doing, parents also can be signposted to other services that are available to them. 

Now, I do acknowledge that the children's commissioner has been concerned about the timing of the consultation and the regulations, but we have to get this right. We have to bring forward both the regulations and the statutory guidance with due deliberation and to get it absolutely right. It requires considerable work to appropriately and informatively develop the policy, and we're taking that forward. It's not dissimilar in its complexity to that of primary legislation. 

Now, the report—both the First Minister and I have taken the opportunity to meet with the children's commissioner to discuss the report. The First Minister will publish the full Welsh Government written response by 30 November—I've turned red. Could I—?

Yes, you've turned red.

Diolch, Llywydd. Now, the discussion that we've had today will help shape our response, and I'll make sure that a response is available to Assembly Members. We'll respond to all of the 15 recommendations that the commissioner has made. We might not be able to agree with every single recommendation to the nth degree, but I can commit that we will continue to drive forward progress on children's rights and well-being. Diolch, Llywydd.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time. The vote is on the debate on the Children’s Commissioner for Wales's annual report, and I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 18, no abstentions, 28 against. So, amendment 1 is not agreed.

I call, therefore, for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Julie James. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 45, one abstention, none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

That brings today's proceedings to a close.