National Assembly for Wales

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

The first item, therefore, is questions to the First Minister, and the first question today is from Andrew R.T. Davies. 

Llywydd, the chief economist’s report, to be published alongside the budget, will provide an assessment of economic prospects in all parts of Wales.

Thank you, First Minister, for that answer. Two weeks ago, Welsh Government brought forward the business development grant that had to be suspended after 24 hours. I appreciate that does show a sign of demand out in the economy, and in particular in South Wales Central. As a regional Member, I've been contacted by businesses across the region who obviously found it very frustrating, after putting a huge amount of time and effort into their plans, that the scheme was either suspended or oversubscribed, depending on which message you received. Can you give any confidence that those businesses that were unfortunate not to get in before that 24-hour deadline closed will be able to resubmit their bids in the coming weeks and months ahead and gain that support to take them into 2021 from the Welsh Government?

Llywydd, I thank Andrew R.T. Davies for that supplementary question, and, of course, he is right that there are many, many businesses in South Wales Central, and in other parts of Wales, who've looked to the third phase of the economic resilience fund for assistance. In terms of the £200 million lockdown business grants, 22,000 grants, worth over £61 million, have already been paid out. And in relation to the £100 million business development grant aspect, where there were 6,000 applicants on that first day, hundreds of payments have already been made, and millions of pounds have already been paid out. We are, of course, looking to see whether it is possible, by drawing funds from other parts of the ERF where maybe the demand hasn't been so great, or looking to see what possibilities there may be later in the year to supplement the business development grant strand of phase 3 in order to allow other businesses who weren't able to get their application in in that first 6,000 to benefit further from the fund. 

First Minister, we don't have any clarity or certainty yet whether the UK Government is going to be able to negotiate an EU trade agreement, and we don't know whether there's going to be any further support for businesses. We see that sectors like the aviation sector in my constituency have been abandoned by the UK Government. We've lost jobs in avionics, at BAMC, GE and many others, and, at the same time, the UK Government is rolling over a whole series of trade agreements internationally with very little scrutiny, if any at all, in Westminster, and this is causing controversy. I'm wondering what steps are being taken by the Welsh Government to ensure that Welsh interests are protected in those trade agreements, because they do affect Welsh manufacturing, Welsh agriculture and, ultimately, Welsh jobs. 

Llywydd, I thank Mick Antoniw for that. He's right to point to the absence of sector-specific assistance in some very important parts of the Welsh economy. Steel is uppermost in our minds at this point, given Friday's announcement, and it really is imperative that the UK Government come to the table with a sector deal for steel that will protect jobs here in Wales, but also protect the UK economy. If Britain is to be a globally trading nation, then we can't expect to do that without as foundational a sector as steel available indigenously within the United Kingdom.

Of course, Mick Antoniw is right, Llywydd, that the UK Government is using prerogative powers in Parliament as a way of bypassing scrutiny on trade deals, and no wonder that they are in trouble on that. Constitutionally, surely, they want to involve devolved Governments in those discussions, and not to rely on brute constitutional force in order to impose deals on other parts of the UK, which we could have helped in a constructive way, by providing the information that we have and they don't, to make those trade deals suitable for all parts of the country. I agree with Mick Antoniw that, at the heart of this, is a set of underlying attitudes towards devolution in the United Kingdom, as we saw so spectacularly with the Prime Minister's very ill-judged comments overnight.

I thank Dai Rees for that question, Llywydd. The promise that Wales would not be a penny worse off by leaving the European Union has met with little success. The UK Government has refused to negotiate continuing participation in inter-territorial co-operation programmes, for example, worth over €100 million to Wales. The Welsh Affairs Select Committee describes progress on the shared prosperity fund as 'negligible'.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. Many communities across my constituency have benefited from projects that have been funded by the European Union through structural funds—whether that's been skills-based—they would never have been able to receive otherwise, and these communities are now developing as a consequence of that. Now, as you say, we were promised 'not a penny lost' at the time, but the shared prosperity fund still seems to be lacking total detail, and I'm hearing in fact that they may well wish to bypass Welsh Government in that funding. Now, given the comments made by the Prime Minister last night, is it worrying that this shared prosperity fund may therefore not deliver the same types of programmes that would help our communities but in fact will keep just the projects that the Tory Government in Westminster want and nothing else?

Well, Llywydd, that is a major concern for not just the Welsh Government but all the partners that we have across Wales and who have worked with us so carefully, led very often by our colleague Huw Irranca-Davies, in order to devise a regional economic strategy for Wales that will make use of the replacement funds that we were told were guaranteed to be available to us. Now, I quoted the Welsh Affairs Select Committee, Llywydd. I do so because it has a Conservative majority and a Conservative Chair, from Wales, and this is what they said about it:

'The UK Government',

they said,

'announced as far back as 2017 that it intended to replace EU funding with a Shared Prosperity Fund...yet details remain scant on key aspects, including how much Wales will receive under the new arrangements, how it will be administered and to whom it will be targeted.'

Its repeated promises of a consultation have failed to materialise, progress has been negligible, and it demonstrates a lack of priority. Well, that simply isn't good enough. These are major issues that matter in every part of Wales, including, as Dai Rees said, in his constituency. People in Wales are entitled to know that the promise that was made to them is going to be kept—not a penny less and not a power stolen. And that's what we will be holding the UK Government to account over.

First Minister, I wonder if I could ask you about what can be learned from the Scottish example. EU funds have in the past been used to invest in infrastructure, as we know, and as Dave Rees has just alluded to. Do you share my view that our National Infrastructure Commission for Wales could not only learn some valuable lessons from the experiences in Scotland, where their commission is committed to being outward looking, forward thinking and innovative, but we could radically rethink our strategy to attract investment in Wales, as we move out of the pandemic and grow back greener—however you want to describe it—as there are ways to work differently in the future and make the most of the funds that we do have?

Llywydd, I'm very happy always to learn from lessons elsewhere. Part of the huge benefit of being members of the European Union has been that it has allowed us to learn from the experience of other member states in the way that they have deployed European funding, as they have, in turn, learnt from Wales about some of the ways that we have done things here. And where there are good examples elsewhere inside the United Kingdom, then the Welsh Government is always open to learning from experiences that can help us to make the most of the funding that we have. The problem is we don't know the funding and we don't know how it's going to be used. 

First Minister, many businesses in Wales felt that past EU structural funding programmes were held back by far too many rules and overly bureaucratic processes and, as a result, some programmes failed to deliver upon their stated aims, namely to raise the economic prosperity of Wales and our people. So, First Minister, what discussions have you had with the UK Government about ensuring that replacement structural funding programmes are flexible and responsive to the needs of Welsh businesses and the Welsh population? 

Well, Llywydd, it's one of the sadnesses that we've had almost no opportunities at all to have those conversations. My colleague Jeremy Miles, who leads for the Welsh Government on these matters, wrote to the Minister said to be responsible for the shared prosperity fund, back in October, asking for meetings with UK Government Ministers in order to be able to contribute some of our thinking and to take advantage of some of the flexibilities that could be there in the future. A meeting was never provided.

We've had one meeting with the Secretary of State for Wales, who promises us further meetings once the Chancellor makes his statement on 25 November. But that's just not good enough. We want to have discussions before the announcement is made, not after it. In that case, we might be able to do some of the things that Caroline Jones was referring to, because I think we have always said that at the other side of the European Union there may be more flexibilities—we may be able to use the money differently geographically, we may be able to draw in other funds in a way that you can't within the European Union, we may be able to use money for purposes that the EU rules did not allow us to use the money for here in Wales. There are some opportunities here. We have identified them with our partners. We would like to have had an opportunity to share that with the UK Government and, despite asking for those opportunities, they have never come our way. 

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

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, from the start of this week, people on low incomes in Wales will be able to claim £500 if they have to stay off work and self-isolate due to COVID-19. I'm pleased to see that those payments will now be backdated to 23 October. However, it remains the case that local authorities in Scotland and in England have been delivering the grants for some weeks and backdating them to 28 September. Now, the Minister for Health and Social Services has made it clear that Wales's payments have been delayed because the Welsh Government has had a

'practical challenge in getting all of our systems in place to make this work'. 

Can you tell us what those practical challenges are? And can you also tell us why the Welsh Government isn't backdating the payments to September, like in other parts of the UK, as surely this means that people on low incomes in Wales will be financially disadvantaged compared to people in England and in Scotland? 

Well, Llywydd, we backdate to 23 October, because that is when the firebreak period was introduced in Wales, and that gives us a reason for doing that. The purpose of the £500 is to assist people to self-isolate. It's no assistance to people to do that if the period of self-isolation has already been completed many, many weeks ago. The practical challenges are in designing a system that is not open to fraud, because we cannot have a system in which people simply self-declare that they have been asked to self-isolate and then claim £500 of public money. We need to be certain that if people get the £500, as we want them to do, because we want people to be able to self-isolate, then we need to know that those people have been asked to do so by our test, trace, protect system and, therefore, are bona fide claimants of this public money. 

Well, First Minister, it's absolutely crucial that those who need additional support throughout the pandemic have actually access to it, whether that's financial support for someone living on a low income that has to self-isolate, additional guidance and support for those who were previously on the shielding list or mental health support for those who simply don't feel like they're entitled to it. Now, First Minister, I'm sure you'll share my concerns about the news that a recent Mind Cymru survey found a third of adults and a quarter of young people failed to get help because they didn't think they deserved it. As you know, it's so important that intervention is provided as early as possible to stop some conditions escalating, and substantially improve outcomes for patients. You've recently reshuffled your Cabinet, which now recognises mental health as a significant policy area, therefore, can you tell us how the Welsh Government is responding to concerns from organisations like Mind Cymru about ensuring people are getting the help that they need, and what further action can the Welsh Government take to better communicate to people the importance of reaching out and accessing mental health support and services if they are struggling to cope during the pandemic? 

Llywydd, let me begin by agreeing with Paul Davies that getting the help you need for people who feel the pressure of these extraordinary months in their sense of mental health and well-being is very important indeed. And there is something for us all to think about in that result that people hadn't failed to get help in the sense they'd asked for it and help wasn't available; they hadn't gone looking for help, because they somehow didn't feel that they were in the right place to do so. That means, I think, that we have to make sure that we have as varied a repertoire of assistance for people as we can devise, because people who need help for mental health and mental well-being will want to access that help in a whole variety of ways.

One of the ways in which we have been able to do more is by funding Mind Cymru itself—I think that was the latest announcement that we've made £10 million-worth of additional investment in mental health services during the pandemic—because Mind operates at a community level, so it doesn't provide services to people who have acute psychotic conditions, but it does provide help to people who are just looking for that bit of additional support and advice and guidance, where community-based services can be the most significant. In that way, we are doing our best to try to make those services as available as possible to break down barriers that people may feel, to make sure they get that crucial support.

Let me just put one point to the Member, however, because he's referred twice so far to the crucial need for people to get the support that they need: this Government, with others, has been lobbying the UK Government to make sure that 35 per cent of all families in Wales below pensionable age do not lose over £1,000 when the Chancellor withdraws the £20 a week that had been added to universal credit during this pandemic. I wonder if he'd like to add his name to that call today, because that is genuinely crucial support that families in Wales no longer know that they can rely on.

Well, I know that, First Minister, you want to distract from talking about your responsibilities as a Government in order to avoid highlighting your failures—

Just try, just try.

—your failures when it comes to the health service, your failures when it comes to the education system—

You could have said 'yes'; you could have said 'yes'.

—and your failures when it comes to the economy.

First Minister, figures today show that 23 deaths were registered in care homes—almost triple the amount registered last week, which is a significant cause for concern—and yet, figures still aren't available to confirm exactly how many care homes in Wales are directly affected by COVID-19, and how many residents in Wales, so that the Welsh Government can support care settings more effectively. Now you'll be aware of the delays that some care home residents and staff have faced in getting test results back quickly and there's also been concern over the high rate of false positive test results that has also added significant pressure to the sector, and we now know that people are discharged from hospitals into care homes within days of receiving a positive COVID test, which I know you will agree is unacceptable. So, First Minister, as the challenges facing care homes across Wales continue, can you tell us how many care home residents and staff have been affected by COVID-19 in Wales? Can you also tell us what the Welsh Government is doing to turn around the time it takes care home staff and residents to get their COVID test results, and how it's addressing the issue of false positive tests? Given that the Welsh Government has commissioned further analysis of the discharge figures, can you tell us what further interventions are being considered to support care home residents and staff throughout this pandemic?

Well, Llywydd, this second wave of coronavirus has had an impact on care homes here in Wales, despite the very careful preparation that the sector made during the summer and the additional investment that the Welsh Government has made in that as well. This is a deadly and highly infectious disease, and as levels of coronavirus in the community rise, so the threats to closed communities, such as hospitals and care homes, rise as well, and it's a very sad number that the Member referred to at the start of his question.

As to test results, the delays in test results are almost exclusively from the lighthouse lab system, and those are not in our hands, although performance there has improved in the last three weeks and we look to that system to go on improving. When there is a positive case then we use the Welsh system, because that does get people results back within 24 or 48 hours, and we'll continue to do that. The false positive issue, I'm afraid, is not that significant an issue at the moment. False positives happen when there are very low levels of coronavirus. As the levels of coronavirus rise, then false positives don't occur in the same way. So, at the moment, it is not a problem that is the most significant one we face in the care home sector. It was a particular problem when levels of coronavirus were at their lowest ebb amongst care home staff, where positive results did turn out often not to be genuine, but I'm afraid as the numbers rise, then that is not the problem that it used to be.

As to the point that the Member raised about people discharged from hospital into care homes, there is a lot more analysis that is needed of those figures to make proper sense of them. We don't know where those tests were carried out. It is possible they were carried out in the care home to which the person who lives in that care home was being returned. It is possible that it happened not in the hospital episode before someone was discharged back into the care home, but in a previous hospital episode. So, there are important things that we need to learn about where the tests were carried out, when they were carried out and what impact they may have had. That is why we have said that we will carry out further analysis of the figures that were published yesterday, and I think it would be sensible for anybody to wait. The Member's been very keen on data in previous weeks in this Chamber and I think he would be wise to wait until we have that extra data before we draw any conclusions.

To end, Llywydd, by going back to the point I made to the Member: he could have offered us a simple 'yes', couldn't he? He could simply have said that, in the crucial support that he was keen to ask me about earlier, the £1,000 and more that 35 per cent of families in Wales are about to lose, he might just have added his voice to those of us who would like to persuade the Chancellor not to allow that to happen.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, according to media reports, Tata Steel UK is currently seeking £500 million of funding from the UK Government as part of the Project Birch initiative in order to sustain its future. Accepting this support, it's said, will require Tata to close both its two blast furnaces at Port Talbot and replace them with electric arc furnaces that will produce steel from scrap rather than iron ore. While this will reduce the emission of greenhouse gases in Wales, it will also lead to very significant redundancies among the steelworks' employees. If this happens, history tells us that the probability of the re-establishment when clean technology becomes available is small, and Wales will have lost a vital part of its industrial base. Would you agree that a policy of reducing UK greenhouse gases, while increasing them in other countries via imports, at the expense of Welsh workers jobs, would represent a short-term fix rather than a genuinely sustainable industrial strategy, and is the very opposite of a just transition to a decarbonised future?

Well, Llywydd, while I'm happy to agree with the final point that the Member raised, I'm not prepared to follow the path down which he made his argument. It is very important that we do not talk about steel making in Port Talbot as it is carried out today as though it has already been lost. And the company, I know, is very keen indeed that we don't talk about it in that way because it has customers that it is supplying, it has order books that it needs to fulfil. So, I am committed to doing everything that the Welsh Government can do to help create a sustainable future for steel making in the United Kingdom and here in Wales.

That can only be secured through proper discussions between the UK Government and the company. It's a matter of great disappointment that that has not happened properly already, and may have contributed to the decisions that the company has made—the fact that they have not been able to secure an agreement through Project Birch, despite many months of trying to persuade the UK Government to do so. I don't think that any of us are in a position to know what the outcome of that will be, and I don't think that we should talk about it in a way that undermines the company's current ability to go on trading, to go on providing jobs in Port Talbot and to secure a future for that community. 

History has taught us as well, hasn't it, First Minister, that we cannot rely on Westminster to solve Wales's economic problems. Indeed, to reverse the Prime Minister's logic, it is because Westminster has proven so disastrous to Wales that this Senedd exists. So, now is the time to show the difference that having our own Government can make, by bringing forward a counter proposal to protect jobs and livelihoods in Port Talbot and the surrounding area, including the protection of primary steel making.

The UK Government is reportedly being asked to part-nationalise the company. Isn't it even more important that the Welsh Government takes a stake in a company that is overwhelmingly Wales based in terms of its workforce, so that those workers and their communities have a seat at the table? Can you confirm that you would be prepared to do so? And, can you confirm that you are also developing a fully fledged alternative strategy for Port Talbot, based around maintaining the works in their current configuration in the short to medium term, investing in the development of hydrogen based steel production in Wales, and ensuring that the Port Talbot works is converted to use the new technology to produce carbon-neutral steel by 2035?

Well, Llywydd, the Senedd exists not because of the failure of the Boris Johnson Government, but because of the success of a Labour Government in making devolution happen in the first place. Devolution thrives when there is a Labour Government to support it, and devolution comes under the sorts of pressures that it is now under when we have a Conservative Government, and where you scratch the surface of the Conservative Party and all its old hostility to devolution rises back to the surface.

That's what happened yesterday, when the Prime Minister thought that he could show off in front of a few Conservative MPs from the north of England. But, we have the Senedd because of the Labour Party, and this Labour Party will continue to make sure that we use all of the powers that we have here—all the powers that we have of persuasion and the powers that we have to intervene—not at this point to make a counter proposal, but to work with the company on the proposals that it will want to bring forward.

We have a part to play in that, and part of what we bring to the table were the points that Adam Price made towards the end of his second question. We do want to see a carbon-neutral steel industry here in Wales. We do want to see that as soon as possible. It is why the steel institute that we are creating as part of the Swansea city deal is so important to the future of the steel industry here in Wales. It will bring all the power of research from the university in Swansea, and all the power of the local authorities, with the interest that they have in making the steelworks a success, to help to create the type of future for the steel industry that we want to see.

We will play our part in that, not at this point by developing counter proposals, but by trying to make sure that the company and the UK Government are able to get together, with the assistance that we can provide, to fashion a way forward for that industry.

Do you agree, First Minister, that the only secure and sustainable future for Port Talbot and the other Welsh plants in the long run is to return the ownership of the Welsh steel industry to Welsh hands—to nationalise as a first step, and then to recapitalise with the kind of green bond advocated recently by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in their report to you, and then finally to mutualise and create a Welsh steel co-operative? Dŵr Cymru has been a success despite the scepticism at the outset, so why not Dur Cymru?

The Basque co-operative, Mondragon, which the Welsh Government is already working with, as you confirmed last week, has previously indicated its willingness to provide advice and support in establishing an employee-owned business at Port Talbot. Why not take them up on that offer? A worker-owned integrated steel plant is by no means unprecedented internationally.

At the height of the last crisis, which was only four years ago, the Welsh Government funded the Excalibur management buy-out at Port Talbot to the tune of £0.75 million. Is the Welsh Government prepared to put similar resources and energy, now, behind the idea of a Welsh-owned steel co-operative?

What we will do, Llywydd, as I've said, is put our energy and our commitment to the steel industry in Wales at the service of the company and the UK Government in the discussions that they need to have. That is the way forward for this industry at this point. Now, there are many things that Adam Price said to which I am, myself, attracted. I had the privilege of spending a week in Mondragon, while a Member of this Senedd, and saw the fantastic work that has been achieved there. I think I said last week, Llywydd, that I'd received a letter from the President of the Basque Country that day, inviting Welsh Ministers to further discussions with the Basque Government about mutual ways in which we can learn from one another and help one another. But on the narrow point of what needs to happen next in relation to the very important steel industry and its impact on communities here in Wales, the efforts of the Welsh Government are not going to be distracted into alternatives at this point. Our efforts are concentrated on discussions with the company, persuading the UK Government, getting them properly around the table, finding a way forward that protects those communities and those jobs.

Can I thank Leanne Wood for that question, Llywydd? We work with partners in employment, mental health, non-coronavirus health needs and in combatting coronavirus itself, to mitigate all the health harms in the lives of people in the Rhondda. In recent days, both incidence and positivity rates in the area have fallen as a result of the combined efforts of local services and local people.

The coronavirus isolation scheme has finally opened after much delay, but it will not provide much comfort for the parents of children who have to self-isolate. Only people formally told to isolate by the track and trace teams are eligible for payment, and this is no good for a parent without childcare who has to take time off work to look after a child who has been ordered to stay at home. There is also no right of appeal if an application is refused. Given the discretionary assistance fund is usually only applicable to people without savings and facing destitution, and that very few employers give paid leave to people to look after children, many parents will be facing poverty by the inflexibility of the coronavirus self-isolation scheme as it is applied in Wales. I keep arguing, First Minister, that you need to make it as easy as possible to enable people to self-isolate, so how are you going to remedy this particular problem?

Well, Llywydd, I'm happy to look at the points that the Member has raised, of course, and if there are things that we can do that will make the scheme fit better with individual circumstances of the sort she described, then I'm very happy that we should do so. We've put £5 million further into the discretionary assistance fund here in Wales, to allow it to be able to respond to the coronvirus-induced difficulties that families in Wales experience, and we have already made thousands of payments through that fund and millions of pounds have been allocated to families in Wales to help with coronavirus-related needs. That will now include the needs of families who need to self-isolate. The word 'discretion' in the discretionary assistance fund is there for a reason. It is there to enable the decision makers to take into account the specific circumstances of individuals and families who make an application to that fund. So, it is not a rigid, rule-based system. It operates within a framework that is fair to people and then allows decision makers to exercise their discretion so that the unique set of circumstances in front of them can be properly attended to. If there is more that we can do as experience of the £500 emerges, and particularly if we need to fine-tune it to make sure that the needs of children are taken into account, then I'm happy to say to the Member that I'm very willing to do so.

First Minister, many areas in the former south Wales coalfield, like the Rhondda, have had a very high level of infection and the population there will be sick for some time to come with long COVID and other related problems afterwards. I'm particularly concerned about how this is going to be managed. What health services and clinics will be available for people, especially if it reduces their ability to hold down a job or to seek a job, given the economic inactivity that areas like the Rhondda currently suffer?

Those are very important points that the Member makes. He's absolutely right that, in the early months of coronavirus, people living in deprived communities experienced mortality rates almost double those in less deprived areas, and we certainly saw the effect of that in the Rhondda Cynon Taf local authority area. The first thing that we have to do, Llywydd, is to get on top of the impact that the current second wave is having on our hospital services, because at the moment, our hospitals are having to deal with the immediate crisis of more people coming through the door for this reason, and that, inevitably, has an impact on their ability to go on providing other services such as the rehabilitation services to which David Melding referred. I know that he will be glad to have seen the fall in the incidence rate in RCT over the last seven days. A week ago, it was 478 per 100,000 in the population; today, it's 259. The positivity rate has fallen from over 25 per cent to 18 per cent. And, in the last couple of days, in hospitals in the RCT area, there are now 14 confirmed cases in critical care—that's the lowest since 27 October. There are 206 confirmed cases in other acute beds in the Cwm Taf Morgannwg health board area—that's 50 lower than the same day last week and 64 lower than the highest point, which was on 3 November. And it's provided we can go on bearing down on the current flare up of numbers that the health board will then have the capacity to be able to attend to the longer-term consequences. I agree with the point that David Melding was making that if you have an older, sicker, poorer population, then those long-term impacts are likely to be more profound.

As our international strategy outlines, the USA is a priority relationship for Wales and is vitally important to our economy. I have written to both the President-elect and the Vice-President-elect to congratulate them on their victory and to convey our renewed commitment to forge even closer links based on shared values and mutual interests.

I thank the First Minister for that positive and constructive response. I'm sure, like me, he would welcome the fact that it looks as though we're going to have a proactive, engaged and constructive partner, now, willing to play its role on the global stage, including by rejoining the World Health Organization in dealing with the global pandemic and by recommitting to the Paris agreement and actually taking a full and active role in Conference of the Parties 26 coming up.

But could I ask the First Minister what does he think we can do even more on the diplomatic, the economic, the social, the cultural ties? And what will the US presidency bring us in terms of perhaps things that we're not thinking so much about, like the attitude to trade and EU relations being currently negotiated by the UK Government, and also the Belfast agreement, the peace process, which, we have to remember, colleagues of ours put a lot into over successive Governments, including our good friend Paul Murphy?

I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for that. I agree with him that the most striking advantage that we will see from a Biden presidency is the re-engagment of the United States in those huge international issues and organisations, which it used to be such a reliable partner in and has ceased to be so over the last few years. So, the fact that it will re-engage with the World Health Organization will mean that its ability and the world's ability to deal with coronavirus will be strengthened. The fact that it will not now turn its back on the Paris climate accord will be good news, not just for the United States but for the whole of the world. That is the most striking thing that I think you see, from outside the United States, as being to the benefit of us all.

We will use our international offices, of course, to continue to engage both in economic opportunities for Wales, cultural links between Wales and different parts of the United States, but also the political links that we need to build with the incoming administration. I think I said last week, Llywydd, that the Welsh caucus on Capitol Hill is to be reformed. My colleague the former First Minister visited the caucus, met people involved in it, and I look forward to the day when ministerial visits to different parts of the world, and particularly the United States, are available once again. Because that will allow us to take forward even faster the international strategy we debated last week, with the envoys that we have been able to appoint—two of them in the United States—and the diaspora that we know is there in the United States, willing to help us to keep Wales's profile high there and to engage on all that agenda that Huw Irranca-Davies set out in his supplementary question.

First Minister, last week marked World Kindness Day, and there are Members of your own party, you included, who've advocated a kinder politics. But kindness is not something that the left have given to Donald Trump during his time as President of the United States. Do you agree with me that no matter who the President of the United States is, it is important that Members of this Chamber, including those heckling on your back benches right now, must not make petty personal attacks that we've seen against people like Donald Trump over the past four years and should instead practise what they preach?

Well, I'd be able to provide a different sort of answer to the Member if I thought that the President to whom he referred for a moment took the advice that Darren Millar has offered. Eschewing petty personal attacks? Have you never seen the tweets that that man has poured out during the four years, and the vile abuse that he has heaped on the heads of people who disagree with him? And when he refers to kindness, I think of those 500 children who will now probably never see their parents again, and that was the direct cause of actions that that man insisted on in the United States. I won't use the word 'kindness' when I refer to the previous President of the United States while I still have those 500 children in my mind.

The direct harms from COVID-19 in Newport are best addressed through measures we can take together to reduce contact with others, travel only when necessary, and work from home as much as possible. The Welsh Government plans actively for new vaccination and mass testing possibilities, including their availability to Newport citizens.

First Minister, I had a look around the new Aneurin Bevan University Health Board Grange hospital last week. It officially opened today, but its birthing centre had already seen its first delivery—a baby girl, fittingly born two days ago, on Aneurin Bevan's birthday. Will you agree with me that this state-of-the-art facility is a very welcome addition to NHS capacity to serve generations to come, as well as having a vital role to help combat COVID-19? And in assisting the front-line NHS effort against the virus, will you carefully consider enhanced testing for asymptomatic domiciliary care staff and enhanced testing in our secondary schools, which would also reduce lost school time?

Well, can I thank John Griffiths for that question, Llywydd, and particularly for what he said at the start? I'd very much like to congratulate—and I'm sure Members here would—Poppy and her parents. The first child to be born at the new hospital, and to be born on Aneurin Bevan's birthday—what a fantastic start for the hospital and for that family, and it's a sign of what is to come from that state-of-the-art hospital in scale, size and purpose, the single most important hospital since the university hospital here in Cardiff was opened at the beginning of the 1970s.

It will do a very, very important job over this winter, in helping us to deal with the coronavirus crisis, with the hundreds of extra beds that it provides in that part of Wales, but in the longer run, in fulfilling the Gwent Clinical Futures vision, which I know John Griffiths, as the local Member, will have been much involved in, nearly a decade ago, when that was being planned and produced. It's a very proud moment, I think, for us here in Wales to have seen that facility open ahead of time and available to that local population.

It will be an important part, Llywydd, of the way in which that facility and health services more generally in the Gwent area will be able to develop over this winter by using some of the new mass testing possibilities. As in so much of coronavirus, this is happening very rapidly around us all the time, and we're likely to have thousands of these lateral-flow tests available to us in Wales every day in the very near future, and that will give us new possibilities in asymptomatic testing of front-line workers, and we may be able to do more to allow children who, at the moment, have to go home if a single child is found to have coronavirus in a school—we may be able to deploy them to allow those children to return more rapidly to education. So, there's a lot of work going on with our colleagues in the health service and others to make sure that this new possibility is put to work in those parts of Welsh society where it has the most impact, and, Llywydd, we've talked previously on the floor of the Senedd here about using them to enable visits to care homes, one of the really, really difficult issues that families have had to face over this extraordinary period. 

First Minister, we'd also, on these benches, like to extend our congratulations to—I believe it's baby Poppy's parents and also welcome the hospital, which, of course, is hugely beneficial to all my constituents across South Wales East. There have been many concerns that people have been inboxing me about recently, because doctors have come out and said that they're concerned about the staffing levels in the new hospital for when it's opening. How can you reassure this floor today, First Minister, that there will be enough staff to cope with the demand when the hospital opens its doors? Thank you.

Llywydd, I thank Laura Anne Jones for what she said originally. Of course, the hospital has already opened its doors. It's been receiving patients for some days now. I saw an exchange of correspondence between the medical director and one doctor employed by the health board that I think set out very clearly the way in which staffing arrangements have been agreed, agreed with clinicians, agreed with the nursing leadership in the health board. Those staffing arrangements have been put in place. It's not to say for a moment, Llywydd, that the system is not under pressure. The health service is under pressure absolutely everywhere right across the United Kingdom, and most of Europe as well, and that is certainly true here in Wales. But working within those pressures, plans have been drawn up, they've been agreed with the people who need to operate them, and they are being put in place as this hospital receives its first patients.

I thank Mike Hedges. Llywydd, the Welsh Government is focused on those practical actions that maximise income and reduce essential living costs. In this term, we have introduced the only nationally funded and designed holiday hunger programme in the United Kingdom, and in January, we will provide the first ever help with breakfast costs for children entering secondary school.

Can I thank the First Minister for that response? Like I—sorry, I had to cough there. We all remember when employment used to be the way out of poverty, but we know now there are a lot of families with people working—in some cases, both parents are working—who are living in poverty. We also see the £20 per week uplift in working tax credit being ended in April by the Westminster Government. What is the Welsh Government doing to end exploitative contracts paying less than the real living wage on either zero-hours or low guaranteed hours contracts for those directly or indirectly funded by the Welsh taxpayer?

I thank Mike Hedges for that, and he returned to the point that I made earlier this afternoon, Llywydd, that in terms of in-work poverty, universal credit was meant to be the solution to in-work poverty, and it's not turned out to be, of course, because it was never funded generously enough to make it so. It has a marginal tax rate of 63 per cent, so if you are a poor working family and you earn an extra pound, you get to keep 37 pence of it. It's not much of an inducement, is it, to make your way further into the world of work? And this year we have the additional difficulty of the Chancellor's refusal to confirm that the additional £20 each week to universal credit will be carried on beyond the end of this financial year. As I said, 35 per cent of non-pensioner households in Wales are set to lose over £1,000 a year through that change of policy. I hear noises off, as you do, in the Chamber, Llywydd; they would be better directed to supporting those families than to making the sort of remarks I was overhearing.

How do we act, Mike Hedges asked? Well, we act ourselves. The NHS in Wales became a living wage employer when I was the health Minister, and has been ever since. We use our economic contract to make sure we're promoting fair work wherever Welsh Government public money is provided. We act with others, Llywydd: the social partnership council will launch the workplace rights campaign before the end of this month, and that will be another way in which we can act to deal with in-work poverty, and we support the campaigning work of others.

I was privileged to be able to launch Living Wage Week here in Wales on Monday of last week, and it was, in a difficult year, very encouraging to hear all universities in Wales are now living wage employers, the Welsh Local Government Association has been accredited this year as a living wage employer, and Cardiff council has an ambition to make Cardiff a living wage city in a way that is an inspiration to many other cities across the whole of the United Kingdom.

Question 7 [OQ55897] has been withdrawn. Finally, therefore, question 8, Helen Mary Jones.  

I thank Helen Mary Jones for that question, Llywydd. Hywel Dda health board has made steady progress over recent years to reduce waiting times for planned surgery and diagnostics. The impact of the coronavirus and the necessary diversion of clinical resources to respond to it have had an inevitable impact on waiting times despite the enormous efforts of front-line staff.

I'm grateful to the First Minister for his reply, and of course I associate myself with what he said about the huge efforts that front-line staff have been making in hospitals and community settings across the Hywel Dda area. But the need for the restoration of ongoing regular treatments is becoming more and more urgent. One of my constituents, Colin Jones from Llanelli, has described being in terrible pain since his GP referred him for a possible hip replacement. It hasn't even been possible for him to see the consultant yet to find out if that's the right way forward. So, understanding the difficulties that there are in providing for those—well, it doesn't feel 'routine' to Colin, I suppose, but for those outwith-COVID treatments—what further work can the Welsh Government do help Hywel Dda University Health Board and health boards across Wales to get those elective surgery waiting lists further down?

Llywydd, I have to repeat something from an answer I gave earlier, which is to say that the single most important thing that we can all do to help our health boards right across Wales is to do everything we can to stem the flow of coronavirus patients into those hospitals. Twenty-one per cent of all hospital admissions last week were for coronavirus, up from 19 per cent the week before, and while that continues, it inevitably drives down the capacity of the system to do non-coronavirus work. So, the most important thing we can do is to do everything that we are asking people to do to bear down on coronavirus, because that will allow the health service to do what it has been doing right through the summer, which is to restore the levels of non-coronavirus work back to where they were—well, as much as possible to where they were—before coronavirus hit. We're not back to those levels, and that is because, as I know the Member understands, even when clinicians are attending to non-coronavirus work, they are working in conditions to prevent the risk of coronavirus, which compromises the productivity rate that was previously possible in the health service.

What the Welsh Government is doing beyond everything we try to do to bear down on coronavirus itself is to support clinicians in the very difficult job that they do of having to clinically prioritise the people who need their attention. And that is a desperately difficult message to give to the individual that Helen Mary Jones referred to, but there will be people with even greater clinical need and, in Wales, I don't think we would ever want to step back from that basic principle that those who need the help the most get to the front of the queue.

Thank you, First Minister. 

The next questions are to the Deputy Minister and Chief Whip, and the first question is from David Rees. 

I have regular conversations with the third sector. At my recent third sector partnership council meeting, third sector networks reported on the impact of COVID-19 on their operations. In particular, the decision by the UK Government not to extend the furlough scheme during our firebreak.

Thank you for that answer, Deputy Minister. I'm sure you agree with me that the voluntary sector and the local authorities working together have been hugely supportive of our communities during the COVID-19 pandemic. And without their support, many people will have had great difficulties getting through this difficult time. But we are still going ahead with more need as we face the winter months, and self-isolation has created loneliness and situations of desperate need for many people, and therefore the voluntary sector will be required to step up once again over this period of time. But funding becomes a serious challenge in this situation. What funding streams are you looking at to ensure that those organisations can get the money to ensure that they're able to provide the voluntary sector needed to deliver on the COVID-19 needs? 

I thank David Rees for that question and also agree with him about the way in which the voluntary sector, indeed volunteers particularly, have come forward in response to the pandemic and shown the care and compassion that they displayed, particularly at the height of the pandemic during the lockdown, but since then. And if we look now, we've got 34,229 registered volunteers on our Volunteering Wales platform, with over 20,000 of those registered since 1 March. But the third sector is supporting that great swell of enthusiasm and support from volunteers. So, that's why I announced the Welsh Government's £24 million COVID-19 third sector support fund back in April, and we've made supporting the sector during the pandemic a priority of this Government. And, of course, the sector will play a key role if we are to see a fair and just recovery from the coronavirus pandemic. I do also urge charity and third sector organisations who still need support to explore the funding available that we have from the third sector resilience and the voluntary services recovery funds.

And just to finally conclude on the point in terms of your constituency, Neath Port Talbot council voluntary services has received £215,997 in Welsh Government funding this year, and that includes additional support from the infrastructure enabling fund.

We have just published international relations action plans, which set out the short and medium-term priorities for delivering on the international strategy. We're focusing on key initiatives to showcase Wales and demonstrate that we're an outward-facing and globally responsible nation.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, and can I wish you well with these new aspects of your portfolio? Now, last week, the First Minister set out the Welsh Government's strategy for Wales's place in the world and the important relationships that we're seeking to deliver for the future. Since that time, we've seen two significant events: first, the unsavoury events surrounding the outgoing President of the United States, who continues to bring disgrace to that great office that he will soon have to vacate. Despite this, however, I hope the Welsh Government is working to support a smooth transition of power, and I welcome the First Minister's letters to both President Biden, and, especially, Vice President Kamala Harris, congratulating them on their victory. But, secondly, and much closer to home, the utterly chaotic scenes at the heart of the UK Tory Government over the last week, culminating in COVID spreading around the PM, and ending with his inflammatory comments about devolution—comments on which, by the way, the Welsh Tories have been virtually silent.

So, Deputy Minister, at this critical time, do you agree with me that the behaviours on display in and around Downing Street, just like in the USA, demean Government and are a total distraction from the important issues that need to be resolved in the coming days and weeks in order to help Wales and the wider UK family of nations to face the post-Brexit future with confidence?

Thank you, Dawn Bowden, for raising those very important questions. And, of course, the peaceful transfer of power is a critical element to any democracy, and a smooth transition is even more critical, given the times we're in and the need for the incoming administration to prepare and meet the challenge of coronavirus. Of course, it has been widely recognised and supported that our First Minister recently wrote to congratulate President-elect Joe Biden, and Vice-President-elect Kamala Harris. And I do echo these congratulations—I'm sure we all do—and particularly the fact that the US has the first female Vice President, who will also be the first Asian-American and first African-American Vice President. That's a huge result, which has raised great hope, particularly amongst American people, but across the world. But I think the fact that they stood, the President and Vice-President-elect, on a platform of fighting for equality, tackling racism and also tackling climate change and fighting coronavirus so, so strongly echoes what Wales holds dear, and I, of course, foresee that our relationship with the USA will be a prosperous one. 

But, on your second part of your question, I'm afraid I'm filled with much less optimism, because our focus, and the focus of the UK Government, must be on these incredibly difficult times we're in. In Wales, we're focused as ever on the health and well-being of the nation. We won't be distracted from that, and neither should the UK Government allow itself to be distracted. But the news overnight of Boris Johnson's remarks on devolution, the points that have been echoed in this Chamber this afternoon, really show the lack of engagement on EU transition particularly, but also engagement on how we are working together as four nations to tackle the coronavirus; it does make us more concerned than ever. Chaos in Westminster worsening, I would say, post Cummings, when we need collaboration, we need respect for Wales, the Senedd, and the powers that we're exercising here to keep Wales safe. 

The sector’s response to the crisis has shown the strength and depth of the sector. It has also highlighted the importance of a strong and resilient third sector, which is why I have established the third sector partnership council recovery group to ensure a fair, just and green recovery. 

Thank you for that response, and I note the response you gave earlier to David Rees. I want to ask specifically about the situation of environmental bodies in Wales. Like a number of other organisations, they're facing difficulties, often because their sites are a source of revenue and have had to close, also membership is suffering, given that individuals tend to cut back because of the wider economic situation. But these economic organisations and bodies are delivery partners that are very important to Welsh Government when it comes to a broad range of projects and programmes related to tackling the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis that we are facing in Wales, and it's becoming more and more difficult for those bodies, because of the loss of core funding, mainly, to play a full role in that work.

And I want to know what you're doing specifically from the point of view of the environmental voluntary sector, because if we're talking about having a green recovery, then we will be starting from a further point back than we would wish, unless, of course, some of these bodies get the support that they need.

I'm grateful to Llyr Gruffydd for that specific focus on the environmental third sector, also recognising of course that, as well as tackling and responding to the coronavirus, we've also had the flooding. And that of course has had a huge environmental impact, and the third sector, again—and the volunteers—rose to respond to that. But I think the £24 million to support the Wales voluntary sector has reached out to as many of those charities—not just those who are perhaps more focused on health, social care and housing, but also to those in the environmental sector. We have the third sector resilience fund—£1 million—that's helping third sector organisations financially through the crisis. And I think that's a key point you make, those who perhaps also have seen—many have seen a fall in their fund-raising, donation income. In fact, the fund to date has supported 112 organisations, with awards totalling £4.63 million. And I will get specific information about how many of those are in the environmental sector, because I believe those are the ones who we need to see take us forward, in terms of their crucial work, particularly tackling climate change.

But I think also our voluntary sector services recovery fund is about how we can move forward, focusing on reducing inequalities across society as a result of COVID-19, and many communities suffering disproportionately. Enabling them to look forward in terms of recovery is the purpose of that fund, which is also supporting many organisations across Wales.

We've worked to support Gypsy and Traveller communities during the pandemic to address issues related to employment, education, digital exclusion, healthcare, utilities provision and communication.

The most recent report on the impact of COVID on the Romany and Traveller community this month, called 'Moving for Change', highlights the suffering of this community, because they are mainly low-income families that rely heavily on work in construction—both on building sites as well as on people's homes, doing roofing repairs, tarmac laying, and landscape gardening, et cetera. Of course, they're not the only self-employed community who've suffered financially—taxi drivers, musicians and theatre workers face similar destitution, frankly, as only those in employment have been eligible for the job retention scheme. Additionally, low literacy levels and poor internet connectivity on Traveller sites makes it very challenging for the Gypsy and Traveller community to understand what they might be eligible for in the way of self-employed support from the Welsh Government's economic resilience fund. What has the Welsh Government done to reach out to this most disadvantaged of communities?

I thank Jenny Rathbone for that question. And I do welcome the Romani Cultural and Arts Company report, 'The impact of the novel coronavirus pandemic upon Romani and Traveller communities in Wales 2020', and many insights and recommendations from that report that we are now considering, alongside other evidence, to inform work—very relevant as well to our race equality action plan.

So, we are looking now—we funded the Romani Cultural and Arts Company to undertake additional community engagement to support the plan's development and to make sure that we're engaging with the views of the community. But I think the Welsh Government's continuing to fund the Travelling Ahead project to provide a range of services to Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities in Wales is crucial. And they have helped those in self-employment to access UK Government schemes, including the coronavirus self-employment income support scheme, and also those facing extreme financial hardship, which of course you recognise, in that community. The advisers have assisted in completing applications to the discretionary assistance fund, described earlier, of course, by the First Minister. And we've ensured that those who have got the expertise and access to Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities are engaging with them.

But I'm also very pleased that we have funded, through the voluntary services emergency fund, a helpline to provide an accessible first port of call for information—the BAME COVID-19 helpline—on a range of issues, including employment and welfare, education, housing, personal safety and health issues. And, of course, that also—we will be reaching out to Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities to make sure that also local authorities are taking their responsibilities seriously in terms of access to learning and, indeed, improvements to ensure that broadband is available. 

Question 5 [OQ55873] has been withdrawn. So, thank you, Deputy Minister. 

The next item is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the Trefnydd to make the statement—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. I have one change to this week's business: the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales will make an oral statement on Tata Steel immediately after this business statement and announcement. Draft business for the next three weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Thank you for your business statement, Trefnydd. Can I call for a statement from the Minister for Health and Social Services on dentistry in Wales. You may be aware that a number of dental practices operated by BUPA will be closing next year, as a result of an announcement that that company has made in north Wales. That will affect around 10,000 people in my own constituency who rely on the BUPA practice in Colwyn Bay, and, as you will be aware, there's already a dearth of NHS dentists with which they can seek alternative registration. I'm very concerned about this situation, and I would like to see the Welsh Government working with the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board to come up with a solution for these particular people in my own constituency and, indeed, those that have been affected elsewhere in the Caernarfon area, as I understand it. So, can we have a statement on this very important issue? Thank you.  

Thank you to Darren Millar for raising this issue. In the first instance, I think I'll ask the health Minister to ask his officials to liaise with the health board in north Wales to better understand the situation, with a view to providing him with an update in due course. 

Before I raise issues under the business statement today, I'd like to take this opportunity to correct the Record. Last week, I mistakenly voted against the joint motion on Armistice Day, and I'd intended to abstain on the motion as tabled, in order to vote on Plaid Cymru's amendment. Though I understand that the vote can't be changed retrospectively, I am very grateful for this opportunity, Llywydd, to correct the Record. 

We know that the after effects of long COVID can leave people breathless, fatigued, unable to concentrate and in pain. A study from King's College London found that older people, women and people experiencing a number of different symptoms when they had coronavirus were more likely to develop long COVID. Earlier this week, the Government in England announced plans to set up more than 40 specialist clinics to deal with long COVID. Can we have a Government statement on the Welsh response to tackling this debilitating condition? Will services and rehabilitation clinics be set up here to treat people and help them get back to as normal a life as possible? How are we going to contribute to research on this? What is the strategy in Wales to deal with long COVID? 

Well, Leanne Wood would have heard the First Minister, in response to a question from David Melding earlier, talking about the challenges posed by long COVID, particularly indeed in the constituency of the Rhondda, and the need to ensure that the individuals affected have the support that they need. I will definitely ensure that the health Minister is aware of your concern about this and your request for a statement specifically on long COVID, and I know that he will give consideration as to when would be best to update the Senedd on the approach to supporting individuals who've been affected.FootnoteLink  

I'd like to ask for an oral statement from the Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services on care home visiting. I was very grateful to the Deputy Minister and the Minister for mental health for attending the cross-party group on dementia that we held recently and where we focused on this issue, but I'm sure they would both agree with me that the evidence we heard from those living with dementia was absolutely heartbreaking about the impact of restrictions on visiting. I'm sure other Members would, like me, be very keen to explore, on the floor of the Chamber, the potential of new rapid lateral flow testing to deliver safe visiting to care homes. Now, I'm as keen as anyone to see students come home for Christmas, but I really do believe that delivering safe care home visits must be a top priority for Welsh Government.

Well, it is indeed an incredibly difficult time for people who have loved ones in care homes and in nursing homes and, indeed, for those people in those settings who are not able to see the family and friends who they love, as well. So, that is absolutely well understood. And the need to balance people's rights and to support their well-being with a desire to protect people living in care homes from the risk of infection is absolutely a challenging one.

In response to a similar request from Lynne Neagle and others, the week before last the Minister provided a written statement that related to the work that is focusing on care homes, and particularly talked about the fact that we're considering a range of options to support providers to enable those risk-assessed visiting options, including, for example, visiting space through those visiting pods and so on, and also, of course, the piloting of the rapid testing for visitors. So, as I say, we've recently had the written statement, but I'm aware now that Lynne Neagle's very keen to have the opportunity to hear an oral statement and to ask questions on that, and, again, I'll ensure that that's given due consideration.

Trefnydd, I would like to call for a statement from the Minister for housing regarding homelessness during the pandemic. A few months ago the Minister stated that the Welsh Government had a commitment to end rough-sleeping and made emergency accommodation available—a move that I and many others welcomed at the time. However, as the pandemic continues apace, we are, once again, seeing rising numbers of people forced to sleep in shop doorways, behind bins or on industrial estates. And in recent weeks I have had a number of such people come to my regional office desperate for help. Just this weekend, I witnessed at least three people sleeping rough. As we enter the winter months, and with COVID-19 on the rise, it is more important than ever that we find accommodation for those who find themselves without a roof over their head and with nowhere to practise good hand hygiene. So, Trefnydd, I would be grateful if you could ask that the Minister for Housing and Local Government makes and urgent statement to this Senedd about the actions the Welsh Government will be taking in the coming months to end rough-sleeping once and for all. Diolch, Llywydd.

Thank you for the opportunity just to comment briefly on the work the Welsh Government's been doing in terms of ensuring that people are able to get off the streets during the coronavirus pandemic. The work that has been done by Welsh Government alongside partners in local authorities and the third sector has been absolutely incredible in ensuring that people are able to be off the streets at this time. But the next step, of course, is ensuring that people are able to go on into what our housing Minister calls their 'forever home', and I think that that work will be really important, as will ensuring that people don't return to the streets over the Christmas period. In terms of when the next opportunity to hear about that would be, I would just highlight that there is a question to the housing Minister on rough-sleeping tomorrow in the Chamber, so that might be an early opportunity to hear the next plans.

Trefnydd, I wonder if we could have an update from the health Minister on critical care provision, specifically in south-east Wales. Today saw the well-publicised and long-awaited opening of the new Grange University Hospital in Cwmbran. Hopefully, this will transform critical and specialist care in south-east Wales. It's true to say it's a fantastic new building, new facility, but there are issues that need to be ironed out. Some NHS workers have confided in me that they fear that the hospital could be understaffed. There are around 471 beds and many private rooms, which is great on the face of it, but, of course, you then need more staffing cover or nursing cover than you would with traditional wards. So, could we have an update from the Welsh Government on what is being done to recruit more staff into new facilities such as the Grange University Hospital?

Thank you to Nick Ramsay for raising that concern, and you will have heard the First Minister respond to a very similar issue raised during the course of First Minister's questions this afternoon. Of course, the Grange hospital is a state-of-the-art hospital with facilities that are ideally suited to the safe management of patients with and without COVID, and of course there are many isolation rooms there to prevent the spread and so on, so it is, as Nick Ramsay says, an excellent facility. We are satisfied that the health board has discussed the plans to open the hospital with clinical colleagues, including perhaps those colleagues who have been directly in touch with you. But, of course, it's right and proper to raise any concerns that people have and that everyone must work together to ensure those risks are minimised. So, I would invite Nick Ramsay to perhaps send the concerns that he's had raised with him anonymously to the health Minister in order for him to consider them and ensure that those concerns are raised directly then with the health board.

May I ask for a statement from the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs on the Government's decision to cut the support that it's been providing for the hydro energy sector in Wales? I have to say that it's bizarre that on the one hand we have a Government that says they want to develop renewable energy in Wales, but on the other hand is cutting the support provided to the hydro energy sector—indeed, pulling the mat from under its feet, leaving some of those projects unsustainable. I know of at least one that is facing an increase of 1,000 per cent in the business rates that they will have to pay. Now, the sector offered a compromise, and the Government to all intents and purposes ignored that. The Government has also ignored the recommendations made by a report commissioned by the Government itself, which proposed a long-term resolution to the situation. Communication with the sector has been exceptionally poor, with many feeling that you've buried your heads in the sand and certainly turned your back on them. So, we do need a statement to try and understand the rationale of Government in making this decision, which does appear to be a mistake as it will do nothing but undermine the efforts to tackle the climate crisis.

In addition, can I ask for a statement from the environment and rural affairs Minister on the UK Government's intention to reform small breweries relief. Now, currently small breweries, of which we have very many here in Wales—those that produce less than 5,000 hectolitres per year—get a 50 per cent reduction in the duty that they pay, but the UK Government intends to reform that, reducing the threshold significantly, seriously impacting the majority of breweries here in Wales. I've raised this previously both in committee and here in the Chamber. The Minister said she wasn't aware of the issue but that she'd check whether the Government have made any representations. She subsequently wrote to me saying that the Government haven't, it's not devolved and, therefore, the Welsh Government wouldn't be pursuing this. Now, that stands in marked contrast to the approach of the Scottish Government, who have mounted a concerted effort in making representations on behalf of the small breweries there. So, the Scottish Government have been proactive; the Welsh Government is just sitting back and saying, 'It's not our problem.' Now, small breweries are one of the success stories we have in terms of the growth of the sector, and much of that will be undone if this duty threshold is reduced. I implore the Government to do something about it and I want to hear exactly from the Minister what your plans are.

So, on the first issue, of course, the Welsh Government has given significant support to the hydro sector, but you'll be aware, of course, that our support is very much focused on community-led hydro schemes. I do note that you have a question to the Minister for Environment, Energy and Rural Affairs on renewable energy tomorrow, so that might be an opportunity to raise that, or I'm sure that you'll write to the Minister to raise those concerns on behalf of the sector as well.

I personally share Llyr's concern about the small breweries relief. I've certainly raised that as a constituency Member with the UK Government on behalf of the amazing Gower breweries that we have—I had to take the opportunity to drop that in. But I will speak to the Minister on this particular issue, because our small breweries are particularly important for many of our communities.

Minister, could we have a debate on the Wales and, indeed, the UK-wide calls for the UK Government to develop a benefits take-up campaign across the UK to make sure that all of those who are entitled to financial support are actually getting it, particularly as the downturn hits our lowest income families and disadvantaged communities, and also whether we'd make permanent the current temporary £20 a week increase for universal credit and extend it across the new benefits that will be replacing universal credit in the near future? This is surely a moral obligation, so let us show where the Senedd stands on this issue. 

And, similarly, could we also have a debate on the annual real living wage campaign, which began last week, and the Citizens Cymru Wales campaign for care workers to be paid the real living wage? Again, it would allow Members here to show their support for this in principle, but also recognising—COVID has certainly shown us this—that it is those low-paid workers who are actually the most valuable, the ones who look after our friends and our family, who stock our shelves, deliver our goods, work on the shop floor and factory floor. They are the ones who really deserve and need a real living wage. 

Presiding Officer, just finally, on a very different subject, I've been asked by cultural facility providers in my area if we can have a statement that explains why arts centres and theatres as buildings in their entirety have to remain shut? Because these theatres are more than simply performance spaces; they provide space for workshops, classes, meetings, educational services, and they're professionally operated and regulated and can meet safety requirements. So, a statement could help clarify that these places, these facilities, can open, subject to regulated activity, and it's not to do with the name of 'theatre' or 'cultural venue' or 'performance space'. This would be a real help. Thank you, Trefnydd.

Thank you for bringing forward three really important issues this afternoon. The first related to the importance of ensuring that everybody is accessing all of the financial support that they are entitled to, and maximising the take-up of welfare benefits is one of our important strands of action at the moment. Through our own funding, we're certainly making a big difference in this area. Between January and September of this year, the benefit advice services delivered through the Welsh Government single advice fund have helped households across Wales to claim over £20 million of additional welfare benefit income. And let's remember, that's £20 million of funding that then is almost certainly being reinvested in local communities as well. It's absolutely the case, though, that the Department for Work and Pensions does need to do more, and a joint letter has now been issued to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, signed by Ministers from Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, calling on them to have a more strategic approach to the take-up of welfare benefits, and I think that that's an important campaign that we can all get behind. And, of course, the real living wage was something that the First Minister spoke passionately about during First Minister's questions this afternoon, and he, of course, sponsored that event recently in the Senedd. He referred to the work that we're doing to ensure that the economic contract, for example, takes all of that into account, and the work that he led personally in terms of ensuring that the NHS is a real living wage employer as well. So, I think we're making a lot of progress in that area, but lots yet to do.

And then, finally, we have started the process of allowing theatres to reopen in a limited capacity, and our guidance has now been revised to allow theatres to reopen for those premises if they're seeking to broadcast without an audience present at the premises, or to rehearse as well. Our expectation is that events should be able to—events more generally—resume no sooner, I think, than spring. So, the £63 million cultural recovery fund will need to be there to support the sector and ensure the long-term sustainability in the meantime. But, in the light of the wider public health context, theatres and concert halls are required to remain closed to the general public, and our test events programme is on hold. So, that, unfortunately, is the situation at the moment, which is why it's even more important that we put that recovery fund in place.

Could the Government give a statement on why huge swathes of mature, healthy trees are being felled from the side of our trunk roads? And, in that statement, could we find out who has authorised these devastating interventions, an extreme instance of which is being carried out as we speak on the A4042 Cwmbran bypass?

It's well known that trees are a particularly important element in combating climate change, in that they absorb huge amounts of carbon dioxide. Their position along all the roads in Wales makes them particularly efficient in this process, not to mention their important sound-absorbing qualities.

Minister, even a cursory inspection of these trees shows that they were both mature and healthy and, therefore, were not presenting any specific safety hazard. So, could we have a statement explaining why a Government supposedly committed to a carbon-free Wales is allowing, perhaps even authorising, this environmentally devastating practice?

Well, I'm not familiar with the particular trees or the stretch of road to which David Rowlands is referring at the moment. So, perhaps I'll invite him to write to the Minister for transport in the first instance, describing the concerns that you have, so that he can look into it and provide you with a more detailed response.

I thank the Trefnydd. In accordance with Standing Order 12.18, we will now suspend proceedings briefly to make some changes in the Siambr. Thank you.

So, we'll reconvene the Plenary proceedings this afternoon with item 3, which is a statement by the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales on Tata Steel. I call on the Minister for Economy, Transport and North Wales, Ken Skates.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Tata Steel announced on Friday, 13 November that they have initiated discussions with SSAB Sweden regarding the acquisition of Tata Steel’s Netherlands business including, of course, the IJmuiden steelworks. In addition, they have initiated a process to separate Tata Steel Netherlands and UK business in the future. Crucially, Tata Steel also made it clear that they are reviewing all options to make the business self-sustaining without the need for any funding support from Tata Steel India in the future. The uncertainty around what this might ultimately mean for the UK business will undoubtedly cause deep concern for the 8,000 Tata Steel employees across the UK as well as their families, local communities and the significant numbers involved in their supply chain.  

The First Minister and I spoke with Dr Henrik Adam, chief executive officer of Tata Steel Europe, on Friday. Dr Adam explained that Tata Steel is determined to find a sustainable future for operations here in the UK and to safeguard the workforce. Dr Adam also made clear that the creation of a UK-only operation marks a critical point for the business.

Now, we must take this opportunity to create a sustainable, secure and successful footprint for Tata Steel here in Wales, one that is aligned with our low-carbon aspirations, is truly fit for the future and ensures that we maintain our indigenous steel sector here in Wales and the UK for the long term. Significant support is needed, particularly investment, but we are clear that the steel industry in Wales, with the right internal market conditions, can have a sustainable and successful future. 

I am aware that there are particular concerns over the separation with the Tata Steel plant in IJmuiden, which will mean that Tata Steel UK will lose access to the research and development capability in the Netherlands. Over recent years, we've seen significant investment in our research and development capability here in Wales related to the steel sector. Initiatives such as the Steel and Metals Institute, SUSTAIN, FLEXIS and ASTUTE mean that we can build on this expertise to further develop our domestic research and development capabilities.

The COVID pandemic has raised important questions around our economic resilience, and the time is now right to ensure that we maintain our steel-making capability for the long term. We have seen how important it is that we have strong, resilient, local manufacturing and supply chains. We need our steel sector to be at the base of our low-carbon future in energy efficient buildings, in renewable energy, in low-carbon electric vehicles and, of course, construction. Also let’s not forget that steel itself is endlessly recyclable. 

It is therefore vital that the UK Government commits to real and significant support for Tata Steel and the sector as a matter of urgency—support that will make a lasting difference to the sector and genuinely secure its future, not just paper over the cracks. And this is not a new ask; the sector has been calling on the UK Government for many years to take action in key areas, including energy prices, and to provide an effective package of support of the type that other sectors have received through specific sector deals.

So, I spoke with the Secretary of State for Wales on Friday, and yesterday I raised the matter with the UK Government's business Minister Nadhim Zahawi MP. I am also seeking a meeting with the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. The First Minister has already written to the Prime Minister about the strategic importance of Tata Steel, and he is also seeking an early discussion with the Prime Minister to discuss finding a sustainable future for the company. Only the UK Government has the capacity to provide the scale of support now required. Proactive and rapid support would represent tangible action on the levelling-up agenda and demonstrate the UK working for Wales at this critical time.

In addition, it is important, I think, Dirprwy Llywydd, to emphasise that a 'no deal' Brexit would be extremely damaging for the UK steel sector, and it's therefore vital that the UK secures a comprehensive trade deal with the EU with tariff-free access to EU markets. That comprehensive trade agreement with the EU is the No. 1 trade agreement priority for UK steel makers. The EU is by far the largest export market for UK steel companies and their UK-based customers in the manufacturing sectors. It's vital that the steel industry in Wales is not disadvantaged through unnecessary trade barriers such as additional customs, tariffs, quotas or technical barriers to trade.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the UK Government's significant spend on areas such as infrastructure also means that there is huge potential in terms of opportunities for UK steel makers, which would help protect jobs in steel companies, their supply chains, retain GVA in our economy, and potentially reduce carbon emissions by shortening those supply chains. I will be seeking further discussions with UK Government Ministers and the company over the coming days and weeks to work together to secure the future of Tata Steel's plants in the UK and here in Wales, and I can assure Members that I'll keep them updated on those discussions.

Minister, can I thank you for your statement this afternoon? I'd agree that Tata Steel's decision to split the UK and Netherlands businesses will be deeply concerning for steelworkers across Wales and their families and the local community and wider supply chain. Uncertainty is often unwelcome, and I'm afraid we've had plenty of that during 2020, sadly. I am conscious, as well, that we do use the right language in terms of our conversations about Tata, because what I don't want to do—I'm sure what we can all agree on is that we don't want to undermine Tata's abilities themselves to come forward with solutions and their own abilities.

In your statement, you say you believe that the steel industry is of strategic importance and that it has a future in Wales and the UK, and I would agree, and I sincerely hope that you are right in this assertion. You say in your statement, Minister, that Tata Steel will lose access to the R&D capacity in the Netherlands, and I think this is a particularly important aspect for us here in Wales. I wonder if you can expand on what you've said this afternoon in terms of our abilities within Wales and the UK, but Wales specifically, in terms of strengthening our own R&D capacity. What weapons does the Welsh Government have in its own armoury to ensure that steel production can be self-sustaining here in Wales? I wonder if, Minister, you could outline what steps the Welsh Government is taking in order to utilise public procurement and investment to encourage modern methods of construction here in Wales.

Perhaps you could also update on discussions that the Welsh Government has had on creating the correct regulatory environment, which protects the production across Wales and the jobs in the wider supply chain. Furthermore, the Welsh Government's objective of decarbonisation and the condition of public subsidy of being carbon neutral by 2050 through the use of electric arc furnaces could have the effect, of course, of reducing the number of staff that are necessary on the site at Port Talbot, so how does the Welsh Government intend to meet the objectives of decarbonisation and protecting the livelihoods of the people who are directly employed as part of the wider supply chain at Port Talbot? Finally, it may also be helpful if you could update us on any work with regard to reforming business rates and reforming the business rates system that will help businesses across Wales in this particular sector.

Can I thank Russell George for his questions? I'd agree with his statement at the outset that, whilst, obviously, this will create anxiety—an announcement of this type always leads to uncertainty and, therefore, uncertainty—during the conversations that we've had with Tata, it is absolutely clear to us that Tata remain fully committed to the UK, and absolutely determined to take their assets through the necessary transformation to make them competitive and to guarantee the jobs that are contained within the Tata sites across the UK.

I guess a test of that commitment will come soon, in the way that Russell George outlined, in that we know that, as they disentangle two sides of the business and separate them out, R&D facilities will remain in the Netherlands, so too some of the functions that include sales, procurement and digital services. So, we would expect, as part of the separation of the company, those capabilities to be re-established here in the UK. I think that move to re-establish R&D, sales and procurement will be a clear demonstration by Tata that it is fully committed to the future of steel in the United Kingdom.

I think Russell George is also right to identify that, whilst the UK Government has the key role to play in providing the support necessary for steel, and particularly Tata in the context of today's discussions of a viable future, the Welsh Government also has a key role to play as well. We have stood behind Tata for many years, since 2016, offering crucial support in terms of skills training packages and R&D, and those offers of support remain in place. We've invested approximately £11 million, for example, in skills training provision, and we've also invested heavily in research and development facilities. I mentioned a number of them in my statement, and R&D is going to be critically important in terms of driving competitiveness and innovation beyond some of the steel sector-specific research and development facilities that we've invested in. We've also invested in manufacturing facilities that rely on steel as part of the supply chain—so, bringing businesses, particularly small businesses, together in those research facilities, enabling them to work together, to innovate, to use products that come from the Tata Steel family in the UK. I can point to one particular example: the Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre in Broughton, just a stone's throw from the Shotton facility.

In terms of procurement, Members will be aware that, insofar as procurement is concerned, the Welsh Government was the first signatory to the UK steel charter, which complements our earlier procurement advice note, by encouraging projects in Wales to source and benefit from high-quality British steel wherever is possible. As part of our actions to improve procurement practices, in addition to compliance with public contract regulations, we've implemented an additional mandatory legal position in our tender pre-qualification questionnaire that no dumped steel—no dumped steel at all—is to be used in any contract awarded by public sector bodies in Wales. But we're going to be looking, obviously, to the UK Government to see what more they can do to ensure that UK steel makers have every opportunity to be part of supply chains for publicly funded projects with a steel requirement. I received, just in the last 24 hours, the latest UK steel newsletter. I'd very much encourage Members to gain access to it; it's incredibly informative, and it identifies in there that demand for steel in the UK will rise from £3.8 billion today, this year, to £6 billion by the end of this decade. So there are huge, huge opportunities in terms of procurement here in the United Kingdom. And of course for Tata, there are particular opportunities in terms of automotive, because Tata supplies more than a third of the steel for the UK automotive sector's requirements.

Then, finally, with regard to business rates, I will of course ask the Finance Minister to provide an update on the work that's concerning the future of business rates. I know that this is extremely important to Tata and other steel operators in Wales. However, the key concern for steel businesses, particularly for Tata, relates to issues such as uncompetitive energy prices, where operations on the continent enjoy electricity prices up to 80 per cent lower than the United Kingdom. Then, secondly, the big challenge for steel in the UK is to ensure that it can transition in the context of our ambitions for net zero, and that requires considerable state intervention.

I'd like to begin by thanking the Minister for his statement and for the briefing that he provided to opposition parties on Friday. I'd associate myself with everything that he said about the huge importance of the steel industry to Wales. We tend, for obvious reasons—because of the number of jobs—to focus on Port Talbot, but as the Minister has said, there's a much broader significance. Extremely important in Llanelli, part of the region I represent, are the people employed at the Trostre plant.

Now, in the Minister's statement he focuses a lot on the role of the UK Government and reports back on the discussions that he's had, and obviously all of that is important. I do understand what he says about the need for the UK Government to step in and commit to real and significant support for Tata. But I need to ask him this afternoon: what is his plan if they don't? Experience suggests that we can't rely on this UK Government. If we just think of the recent experience of furlough, where that support was not made available when it was needed in Welsh communities, but it was there as soon as it was needed in Surrey, what reliance can we place on the UK Government for doing the right thing here? What if conditions, as has been reported—those conditions that the UK Government place on that support—lead to really significant redundancies? I have to ask him: is it his understanding that UK Government support, as again has been reported, is likely to be conditional upon the replacement of blast furnaces at Port Talbot with electric arc furnaces?

I agree with everything the Minister has said about decarbonisation, but I hope he would agree with me that this is not the way to do it. Taking on board what the Minister has said about the likely rise in demand for steel in Wales and across the UK, does he agree with me that we shouldn't rush to decarbonise our steel industry in such a way that means that we have to massively increase steel imports, effectively exporting our carbon footprint instead of dealing with it using new technologies and making our steel industry sustainable using, for example, emerging hydrogen technologies? Now, if this isn't a risk, what has been reported, surely it's in the company's best interests in terms of customer confidence for this to be firmly and finally denied, and if it is a risk, then surely we need to publicly debate it and the potential implications.

The Minister refers to Tata reviewing all options to make sure the business is self-sustaining without the need for any funding support from Tata in India in the future, and I'm sure we would all understand why that would be. I understand what the First Minister said to Adam Price about the Welsh Government being at the service of the UK Government and the company at this time. But does the Minister accept that it's dangerous to rely on this alone as a strategy? Shouldn't he and the Welsh Government be, at the same time, exploring other models that would enable the ownership and control of the company to be taken back into Welsh hands if that's what's needed? The Welsh Government was prepared to support a management buy-out, potentially, of Port Talbot a couple of years ago. Will the Minister this afternoon commit to considering other potential ownership models if the approach he's currently taking is not successful? Would he consider a co-operative model? Would he look at a not-for-profit company? And if the UK Government does end up taking a stake in the company, will he commit to finding a way that the Welsh Government can do so too, so that we have a seat at the table when future decisions about this vital industry are made?

Can I thank Helen Mary Jones for her questions? Of course, Helen Mary Jones is right to point to the fact that it's not just Port Talbot we're talking about, and thousands of workers at Port Talbot, but the other Tata Steel plants across Wales, which employ huge numbers of people who are very well paid. In fact, the steel sector in the United Kingdom pays an average salary of £36,000. And, bearing in mind that many steel sites in the UK are in areas that require levelling up, the loss of any of those jobs within those communities would be very damaging indeed, which is why, I think, the UK Government is acutely aware of its responsibilities in regard to supporting Tata. The indications that we've received from the UK Government, and from Tata, are that discussions are proceeding, and that they have been positive, and that an outcome may be with us soon. But, obviously, every day that is lost intensifies anxiety within the workforce, and therefore, those negotiations have to be taken forward at maximum pace. And it's hugely important, as I've mentioned, to the levelling up agenda, given that Tata Steel sites are in some of the most deprived communities in the United Kingdom, which require direct state intervention to enable them to appreciate a greater level of prosperity. 

Now, Helen Mary Jones raises a number of questions about both the technologies that are used and the ownership models that might be considered. I'm not going to be drawn on the potential use of hydrogen or electric arc furnaces today, because, right now, our focus is on making sure that Tata Steel draw down the necessary funding from the UK Government in an agreement, in a common purpose, to transition the sites into a position where they are globally competitive. And let me just assure Members that Tata Steel employs the most skilled, the best steel workforce in Europe, if not the world. Given the right tools and investment, Tata Steel operations in the UK can outcompete any other facility anywhere around the world. So, the UK Government can act as an enabler for this hugely important sector to become the world's finest.

Now, during my time in this position, I've worked with four different Secretaries of State for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, and each one has given assurance that they wish to see the steel sector brought into a position where it's highly competitive, and where it has a strong and sustainable future. This fourth Secretary of State that I've been working with, Alok Sharma, can be the person that delivers the goods. And that is absolutely vital in the interests of the employees, not just directly employed by Tata, but also the supply chain.

Now, talk of nationalising Tata, I don't think it answers the exam question that we face. The exam question is: how can Tata's operations transition in the context of our net-zero aspirations? How can Tata Steel's operations operate in a competitive way given the disproportionate costs of energy in terms of the business model? And whether or not you nationalise the operations, you are still going to be faced with those energy costs, which only the UK Government can do something about, and the need to decarbonise. And, so, actually, the ownership model is a debate, whilst very interesting to us—and I've just recently nationalised the railways—I can say that it is not relevant to the challenge that we face right now, that steel faces right now. The major challenge that we face right now is in ensuring that the transition is safe and can be secured in a way that guarantees the maximum number of jobs, and that means having a transition, utilising whatever technology might be preferred, a transition that takes not just a few years, but 10 years, to guarantee those jobs, to ensure that, as Helen Mary Jones rightly said, we don't rely on imports from other operators that are polluting the planet, but that we have a safe transition period put in place to guarantee jobs, and to make sure that we can, in a safe way, meet our net-zero ambitions. 

I'm grateful to the Minister for his statement this afternoon. Ebbw Vale, of course, is synonymous with steel, and many other communities within my constituency, and other people's constituencies, were built on steel, and people employed both in steelworks and in allied industry. Steel matters to all of us, and all of us in Blaenau Gwent have seen the impact of steel closures—the impact on people, on families, on the community as a whole. And we also know that steel remains central to our future. It remains central to the economy of Blaenau Gwent and other parts of this country, and it is essential that an activist Government works with the different owners and businesses to ensure the future of steel. And I'm glad that the Conservatives recognised that during this session this afternoon.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I was interested by the Minister's response to Helen Mary Jones, to Plaid Cymru, and what he said there about the role of energy and the role of sustainability, in terms of the business model that Tata currently has. I recognise what he says about the importance of ensuring that there is a business available to Tata over the coming years, and that we have a business model available to sustain steel, but I also think that there are ways in which the Welsh Government can take a more activist approach. The point the Minister makes about energy is absolutely critical and central to the future of this industry, but we also know that this Government can take an activist approach to ensure that we have energy supplies that are based on renewables, based on sustainability, and also delivered at a price that businesses and consumers can afford to pay.

So I hope the Minister, in responding to the statement this afternoon, and responding to what is happening in Tata at the moment, will take that longer view of the industry and our foundational economic industries, because they all share some of the same and similar challenges and an activist Government can invest in that—not only that industry, but in that economy, to create an economy that is sustainable in market terms, sustainable in financial terms, and sustainable in environmental terms as well.

Can I thank Alun Davies for his questions? And he's absolutely right that Ebbw Vale, like many other communities in Wales, was built on steel. We're often very sentimental about the past, about the role that steel has played in shaping our communities, our culture, our heritage in Wales. But I think we should be equally enthusiastic about the future of the sector in Wales. Because as I've said, with the tools, with the investment, with some of the challenges that the sector has faced for many years in terms of energy costs, with those addressed, the sector has a very strong future indeed. And I know all too well—just as the Member Alun Davies has outlined—the pain that can be caused when jobs are lost from steel facilities. I was a youngster when more than 8,000 jobs were lost in a single day at Shotton steel, but I very much, very much recall the pain, the suffering that it caused immediately, and also the ongoing scars that it dealt to the wider community.

Alun Davies is absolutely right that energy is a crucial consideration in how we support Tata and the wider steel sector. I continually raise the need for action on high electric prices faced by UK steel makers and energy-intensive industries. According to UK Steel—and, again, I'd point to the latest news data, which is incredibly informative—our UK steel makers pay 80 per cent more than their French counterparts; they pay 62 per cent more than our German counterparts. So, it demonstrates just how uncompetitive, due to the energy prices, some parts of our processes are in the UK. And of course, other energy-intensive sectors and businesses also face those disparities.

Now, the UK Government—and I welcome this—has stepped forward with an industrial energy transformation fund; I do welcome that. However, the fund is only worth just over £300 million, and the support that is required for Tata is support that goes beyond the energy price issue, that goes beyond sector-wide transformation. It needs specific business support from the UK Government. And in our many meetings with Tata, we are always open to requests for support, in order to help the transition, the transformation of their businesses. But we are always reminded that the key player is the UK Government, with the ability, the capabilities to be able to invest in a way that provides that safe transition.

And renewables—. Alun Davies is absolutely right: the Welsh Government's role in promoting renewable energy is going to be hugely important, not just to steel but for other intense-energy operators in Wales. And there's massive potential in terms of onshore and offshore renewable energy. For my part, I'm particularly excited about the development of floating offshore wind, which could be worth billions of pounds to the Welsh economy and, if we promote it in the right way, if we attract the right investors in—and we are working incredibly closely with the sector—we could not just deploy floating offshore wind, but we could also manufacture those turbines. We could also ensure that the research and development capabilities are secured in Wales as well, linked to the wider manufacturing families, including, of course, the steel sector. 

Thank you for your statement, Minister. Steel workers and their families in my region are deeply concerned with the decision by Tata to split the UK and Netherlands businesses. Do you agree that it is important that we make it a priority to ensure Tata's operations in the UK are self-financing? We must ensure that Port Talbot has a future role in providing the UK's steel needs. Minister, what steps are you taking to ensure that steel produced in Port Talbot is used in major infrastructure investments by the Welsh and UK Governments? What role does the Tata plant have in providing the steel for the south Wales metro and road improvement schemes, such as the Heads of the Valleys dualling? And, finally, Minister, what actions has the Welsh Government taken to assist Tata with decarbonisation and reducing their energy costs, both of which are vital to ensuring the sustainability of all its UK operations? Diolch.

Can I thank Caroline Jones for her questions? I'd agree entirely that the announcement will cause deep concern for workers, but we have to assure those workers that we are all—we are all—determined to safeguard their jobs, to provide the support that's required in order to see Tata's UK facilities become more competitive in the global market, provide more steel for the UK and for other nations. And for the reasons that I've already outlined, I'm confident that Tata are truly committed to the UK.

But, as I've said, also, an early indication will come of their commitment in the form of some of the consultation that will take place now during the company's separation process, including how Tata responds to the needs within the UK for research and development, sales, procurement, digital functions to be re-established. Once we see the re-establishment of those particular capabilities, then we can have even more confidence that Tata is on the right path to securing UK operations and to make them self-financing. Making them self-financing is a considerable ambition, but I think it's one that's necessary to secure all of the UK's plants for the long term. But it will require, as I've said on repeated occasions, direct intervention by the UK Government, and those discussions are ongoing, but I would urge UK Government Ministers to bring those negotiations to a swift and positive conclusion as soon as possible.

Steel workers in Wales and across the UK employed by Tata have suffered anxiety for far too many years now, and it's time that they're given the assurance that, even with those other challenges we face in terms of decarbonisation and Brexit, they will have a future in that sector. Transport for Wales has engaged directly with businesses across Wales, including with Tata Steel, in terms of opportunities for businesses through the metro transformation programme. Other businesses in the steel sector in Wales, the likes of Liberty Steel, for example, they produce a significant amount of steel for Network Rail's operations. So, there are obvious opportunities there with the metro for steel businesses in Wales.

And I've already answered the questions regarding energy, the energy prices, the need for steel businesses in Wales to become competitive. There is the industrial energy transformation fund that I've already pointed to, but we have been ready to work with steel businesses, through some of the research and development and innovation centres that we've been funding, to ensure that they can reduce their carbon emissions, to ensure that they can undergo the transformation that's required to make them competitive globally.

Thank you. We've had one speaker from each of the four groupings here today. So, can I now ask for brevity, and that includes brevity in the answers as well, Minister, perhaps? We've got a number of questions.

Apologies. 

It's all right, but we've got a number of questions which we intend to get through. So, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Secretary of State for Wales, Simon Hart, and the UK Minister for Business and Industry, Nadhim Zahawi, met Tata Steel early last Friday, ahead of the company's announcement on its commercial operations in mainland Europe. It was agreed that both UK Government and Tata Steel would continue to work together to protect the future of high-quality and sustainable steel making in the UK. I therefore welcome your engagement with them.

Tata Steel Colours in Shotton remains a key part of the north-east Wales economy. They told me five years ago that they were critically dependent upon the supply chain for sustainable British steel and that they were reliant on feedstock from the heavy end in south Wales, as they described it. What consideration will you therefore give to this during your engagement with both the UK Government and Tata Steel? There are still 700 employees at Tata Steel in Shotton, with its hot-dip galvanising, organic coating, panel line for building systems and its apprenticeship programme. What consideration will you therefore give to these key issues during your engagement with both UK Government and Tata Steel? Tata Steel in Shotton is also in the running to host a Heathrow logistics hub. What consideration will you therefore give to this during your engagement with both UK Government and Tata Steel?

And finally, reference was made to the Dŵr Cymru model. As you're aware, I previously worked in the mutual sector for over two decades, for the building society that actually merged with the Shotton steel building society—the John Summers Building Society—and I know that, unless mutuals make a surplus, they go out of business, just like a for-profit business. Do you therefore agree with me that the priority must be keeping them in business, with whichever model can best deliver this, rather than putting the models first?

Can I thank Mark Isherwood for his questions and his contribution, and agree with him that discussion over ownership models is actually a distraction right now from what has to be done? And I think we have to focus right now on supporting Tata to undergo the transformation that I've outlined that is necessary to make them more competitive and to secure the long-term future of the facilities in Wales and across the UK. 

I've spoken on numerous occasions now with the Secretary of State for Wales, Simon Hart, since the announcement, and I've also spoken, as I said, with Nadhim Zahawi, and I'm seeking further discussion with the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Alok Sharma. I'm keen to make sure that the Welsh Government is able to support the UK Government in providing the finances to Tata Steel UK's businesses, primarily Tata Steel here in Wales, by adding value—by adding value. And the role that we can play in the Welsh Government in adding value is to support the workers to undergo skills training and to ensure that the right research and development capabilities are developed. That's our key role, and that's why I think it's really important that those ongoing discussions involve Welsh Government wherever possible. 

Mark Isherwood asked a number of questions specific to the Tata Shotton site, the Shotton Colours site, which employs 760 highly skilled people. That site has enormous potential—huge potential. It's my understanding that demand for products from that site had returned, prior to the announcement, to pre-COVID levels, demonstrating just how competitive that site is, just how high the quality of those products is. And I remain very excited indeed about the potential for the Tata site in becoming a logistics hub—not just a logistics hub for Heathrow, but for other businesses across multiple sectors. And my officials are working incredibly closely with Tata Steel to understand some of the barriers that need to be overcome in forming that logistics hub at the Shotton site and, in particular, how we can open up a third access to the site. That would be vitally important in securing the site as a logistics hub serving not only Heathrow but potentially many other sectors and, as I've already mentioned, floating offshore wind. I think there could be an opportunity there for renewable energy manufacturing or logistics as well.  

Minister, can I thank you for your statement this afternoon? I find it very encouraging, the position that you've taken. Can I also thank you for all the support that the Welsh Government has given to the steel industry over the years? Steelworkers in my constituency are very grateful for that support and, as you quite rightly pointed out earlier in your contribution, they are the best in the world and they have given much to the industry, and now they want the industry to continue honouring their commitment to them and to their families.

In relation to your points made, I think that it's important that the UK Government now takes this opportunity—and I see it as an opportunity—to actually get a steel industry for the United Kingdom, which will provide a foundation for other manufacturing across the country. And this is a chance, I think, for them to step up to the plate and become an active player in the industrial strategy of the UK. I hope they take it.

Now, in your statement, you indicated that the funding support from Tata Steel India in the future is not going to be needed. That's their focus—they want to make it sustainable. But have you had any indication as to to when they will continue supporting it and at what point they expect to be self-sustaining, so that we have at least a target we can look towards in ensuring that industry becomes self-sustaining?

Also, on the decarbonisation agenda, everyone talks about hydrogen. That is some years down the line, as the technology is not quite there yet. But one thing that is available is carbon capture and storage. Are you looking at further research and development in that area to ensure that there's a possibility of decarbonising the industry in Port Talbot in particular, because, clearly, that's where the heavy end is, and that's where the large carbon emissions would be? Have you had good discussions with your colleague in the Cabinet, Lesley Griffiths, regarding the emissions trading scheme that is being put into place to replace the European emissions trading scheme to ensure this is not going to be detrimental to the steel industry in the future and that the UK model will be very supportive and useable for the UK steel sector?

We talked about skills and the separation of the businesses into a Dutch component and a UK component. And we do know that the elements are currently based in Holland, because they did go from Port Talbot over to Holland—the R&D and the sales. What discussions will you be having for the skills agenda to ensure that those come back? And how are you working with the research and development, particularly Swansea—because I know that Tata work with Swansea and Warwick, but particularly Swansea and the Steel and Metal Institute—to ensure that that's the centre for R&D for steel in the UK and it becomes critical for Tata to work with them?

Can you bring your—[Interruption.]—to a conclusion?

I will conclude, but, as I'm sure you're aware, Deputy Presiding Officer, this is critical to my constituency and my workforce there.

Absolutely.

My final point, though, is—there's a lot of talk about levelling up by the UK Government. You mentioned in your press release on Friday that the First Minister was seeking a phone call with the Prime Minister. Has he returned that phone call, and has he agreed to make sure the levelling up applies to Wales and the steel sector as well as anywhere else?

Can I thank Dai Rees for his questions and say that he is a powerful and passionate advocate for Port Talbot and for the steel sector as a whole in Wales? I very much welcome his contribution today, and I would agree with him that this does present the UK Government with an enormous opportunity to demonstrate a commitment, a true commitment, to levelling up, but also to secure what I think is a nationally strategic interest for the United Kingdom. I think steel is important to our national security. I don't think it's possible to imagine a scenario where, as we reach the end of the transition period, we could possibly tolerate the idea that steel making could be lost from the United Kingdom. That is simply unimaginable. And the UK Government can therefore take this opportunity to guarantee that we will have a viable, secure future for the sector across the United Kingdom, and there are many, many opportunities I've already outlined, in terms of procurement as well, with demand purely within the UK estimated to almost double over the course of this decade—huge opportunities if procurement is sorted to make sure that we capture as much of the public spend as possible for UK steel operations.

I'm working with Tata and also, I have to say, with Community. I had a very, very good discussion, a constrictive discussion, with Roy Rickhuss today at Community. I can say that we are perfectly aligned with the Community union. There is not a cigarette paper between us in terms of our belief in the sector, our commitment to Tata, our desire to make sure that steel in the UK has a strong and viable future, and we're going to be working together with Tata in understanding exactly what the move towards becoming self-sustaining means, and how that can be reached and when it will be reached.

Carbon capture could have an important role in terms of meeting our obligations on carbon emissions, and, in terms of the emissions trading scheme, Deputy Llywydd, I'm afraid I could talk for quite some time about the ETS, but I'll just say that—

No, I don't think so.

—the Welsh Government, working with the UK Government and, obviously, other devolved administrations, has developed that UK emissions trading scheme; it's going to operate as a stand-alone scheme, or it's going to link to the EU ETS, and the legislation is now in place for that scheme to become operational on 1 January 2021. That's vitally important.

Then finally, in terms of further support that could be brought forward in terms of research and development, there is, obviously, the Swansea bay city deal, and Swansea University has proposals to further develop steel expertise in Wales through the city deal. And in terms of the phone call, I am not aware that that phone call has taken place yet, but I will inform Members as and when it happens.

Minister, I was very pleased to hear you open with comments on the skills base of the steel industry in Wales. I think people overlook the fact that it's a constantly modernising industry and that's why it's such an important player in those institutions such as the Swansea bay city deal that you mentioned and Swansea University. But I'm quite keen to make sure that we don't overlook the opportunities for apprenticeships in this as well. Tata's a huge contributor in that particular field, and I'd be grateful to know what reassurances you've had about the opportunities for apprenticeships during this nervous time. Thank you.

Can I thank Suzy Davies for her question? And she's absolutely right: people employed by Tata are amongst the most skilled in Europe in terms of the steel sector, and, as a Welsh Government, we've been pleased to be able to invest £11.7 million in terms of skills training funding since 2016. Apprenticeships have played a key role across all of the Tata sites, and our understanding is that Tata remain fully committed to providing apprenticeship opportunities even in these uncertain times, and, of course, the Welsh Government has recently announced an incentive for businesses to take on apprentices, including, importantly, young apprentices. So, for every young apprentice aged under 25 that a business takes on, they'll receive an incentive of £3,000, and this could prove hugely important to larger employers like Tata in retaining or taking on apprentices during the course of the pandemic and then the recovery. But I'll happily write to Members with further details of Tata's plans for their apprenticeship provision.

Can I thank the Minister for his statement? And can I also pay tribute to the workforce at Shotton steelworks, including my fellow Community and Unite union members? Their hard work and skill really does produce the best steel, making the Shotton site actually profitable.

Minister, you've already commented on the offsite logistics hub, which I've been a long-standing supporter of, and you've just commented on the apprenticeship programme at Tata; I look forward to receiving more information on that. Perhaps today you could comment on the wider training of staff, which is something that Welsh Government provides funding for, and also the opportunity to use the world's best steel and most sustainable steel as part of a green manufacturing recovery from COVID, especially as the Shotton site is looking to transition towards being carbon neutral.

Now, I must say, Deputy Llywydd, finally, this support from this Welsh Labour Government and the support they've offered in the past is in stark contrast to the UK Conservative Government, who have been far too often missing, and I must say—. I hear tutting, but I must say my community—my community—is still devastated from what happened during the Thatcher Government, and it is long, long from forgotten. So, Minister, could you update the Chamber on how confident you are that UK Ministers get the need to provide urgent support for Welsh sustainable steel, and have a strategy in place to do so?

Can I thank Jack Sargeant for his questions, and can I just recognise, put on record, my thanks to Jack Sargeant for the enormous amount of work that he's done in supporting the Shotton Tata facility in developing the plans for a logistics hub? And my officials have been working with Tata Shotton in developing that master plan, but I know how much work Jack has contributed to this particular agenda, and I thank him for it. I'm also grateful for the acknowledgement of the support that Welsh Government has given to Tata over many years, and I would say that, looking to the future, let's describe this as an opportunity for the UK Government to demonstrate—very soon, actually—that it is fully committed to levelling up the UK, by providing that vital support that Tata require in order to undergo the transformation that it wishes to proceed with, and to ensure that it becomes more competitive.

In terms of what could be produced at the Shotton site, well, we know that its products are amongst the highest quality in the market, and that they're already contributing to energy efficiency schemes, particularly in the construction centre. But, obviously, given the recyclability of steel, it will become an even more prominent feature of our aspiration to reuse and to renew as we seek a green recovery. So, I am in no doubt that the 760 employees at the Shotton site can feel proud and can feel optimistic that they will be contributing, as an industry of tomorrow, to a greener economy.

The Minister talks about steel being endlessly recyclable and the need to support your low-carbon aspirations, but doesn't that imply the use of arc furnaces, rather than the current production method with blast furnaces at Port Talbot? Isn't there an inevitable tension between decarbonising the electricity supply, including ways of preventing use of cheaper ways of producing electricity, albeit there have been some improvements? And there's a question as to whether the consumer or the taxpayer pays that higher price and what that proportion is, but isn't there that tension? And does Welsh Government support UK Government with its reported proposals to pay £500 million, or thereabouts, towards converting production to arc furnaces? Is that something that he supports, or does he prefer to stay with the blast furnaces, notwithstanding any carbon implications of that? And isn't it about time we recognised that the reason we're in this problem is, last summer, the European Commission vetoed the merger of Thyssenkrupp's European interests with Tata Steel, which would have allowed Dutch and Port Talbot plants to work together, and instead they're having to be separated in response to that European Commission decision?

Well, on that final point—and can I thank Mark Reckless for his questions—on that final point, the merger would not have addressed the challenge that UK steel operations currently face. They would have remained, and those challenges can only be answered through collaboration with UK Government.

In terms of the tension that exists, I would acknowledge fully that that tension is there, it is problematic, but the fact of the matter is that currently, at present, blast furnace generated steel is about the only steel that can be used in certain sectors, for example, in the automotive sector. And that is why Tata Steel in the UK provides steel to about a third of the demand of the automotive sector. Now, over time, new technology could be developed, refined and finessed to provide that grade of steel but, at the moment, it is simply not there. Now, I'm not going to be drawn on the type of technology that could be used in the future, whether it be based on hydrogen or electric arc furnace, a combination, whether there's a hybrid model that could be adopted. All I would say is that whatever transition takes place should happen over a period of time that secures the workforce, and secures all of the Tata Steel operations in Wales. And we will support, not just Tata, but the UK Government and the unions, in working together to that end goal.

Minister, amongst the strong areas in Wales in terms of steel tradition is Newport, of course, with Llanwern—excuse me—and Liberty Steel. We did have Orb, but, sadly, that's now gone, and there's a host of smaller players. So, I would like some reassurance today that that steel tradition and those steel sites will have a strong part in the future of steel in Wales and the UK. There are a lot of skills and experience in the area, currently employed and recently made redundant, that could be utilised. And, of course, Liberty Steel, for example, has some very clear ideas on green steel and how that might be taken forward, as well as some ideas on the energy aspects.

You have already referred, Minister, to—if we are going to have a distinct Tata Steel operation in the UK—the need for some of the existing functions, such as research and development, procurement, sales and, indeed, some of the digital aspects, to be part of that distinct UK operation. Some of that has been concentrated in the Netherlands. Llanwern has hosted some of those functions. I'm just wondering if you could say a little bit about the role that Llanwern might play in hosting those functions again, and about some of the implications for training in the area, and the role that organisations like Coleg Gwent and the University of South Wales might play.

Can I thank John Griffiths for his questions and also recognise the incredible interest that he has shown in steel-making facilities in the Newport area and the wider region over many, many years? He is a great supporter of the sector.

Llanwern employs currently around 960 highly skilled individuals, providing steel for the automotive sector and, therefore, relying clearly on Port Talbot. Tata were at pains—they were at pains—to express their determination to secure UK operations when I spoke with them on Friday. We now look to see those functions that John Griffiths and others have identified to be re-established, or to be returned, back to Wales. We may well see a return of those jobs here from the Netherlands. If not, then I would expect new capabilities to be established here in Wales.

I don't think that it would be for me to speculate over exactly which functions might be based in which of the steel facilities. But, I would imagine that, given the prominent role that the Llanwern site plays in terms of the automotive sector, there may be an opportunity there to develop some of the sales functions. Obviously, we will be working with Tata to look at how we can support the re-establishment of those facilities and capabilities here in Wales. We want to capture as many job opportunities as possible. But, as I have said, we will look very, very soon at those functions, once Tata begin the process of re-establishing them or returning them here to Wales, and we will support them in any way that we can.

Thank you very much, Minister.

Item 4 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Deputy Minister for Economy and Transport on 'Llwybr Newydd—a new Wales transport strategy'. I call on the Deputy Minister, Lee Waters.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. The coronavirus pandemic has reminded us that there are many things that we once took for granted that we now no longer do. The ability to easily go places, to see family, to work, or to socialise, are things that none of us need reminding of the importance of as 2020 comes to an end. Despite huge advances in using digital communications, there's nothing like connecting with people face to face. And, as we begin to look to the other side of the pandemic, the future shape of the transport system is very much in our minds.

Today we are launching the consultation for a new Wales transport strategy: a vision for transport in Wales that shows how we can rebuild connections between people in the short term, while reshaping our transport networks to respond to the challenges of climate change. This time next year, the Welsh Government will need to produce the next iteration of a low-carbon plan. It will need to set out how we will achieve the ambitious targets that this Senedd has committed ourselves to, to significantly reduce carbon emissions.

Transport has a big role to play in getting us onto a lower carbon path, and our new strategy will need to have modal shift at its centre: fewer car journeys and a much greater share of trips by sustainable forms of transport. Now, that is easier to say than it is to do, and this consultation needs to focus all our minds on how each of us can make a contribution to our shared challenge.

We have made a start. The early development plans for reliable and affordable regional metro systems across Wales have helped us imagine the future that we need. The steps that we have taken in recent times to bring our Wales and borders rail network back into public ownership, and to take greater control over planning the nation's bus network, and the work that we are doing to invest in networks for active forms of travel are all important long-term steps that have contributed.

We are also setting targets to encourage people to work flexibly and remotely to reduce the need to travel in the first place. And, in the spirit and of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, we have made hard decisions too, taking the time to rethink the need for an M4 relief road, in recognition that when the facts change, actions have to change too. We look forward, next week, to the final report of the South East Wales Transport Commission, under Lord Burns's chairmanship, for detailed recommendations of how to address congestion along the M4 around Newport.

The strategy we launch today marks the start of a genuine conversation we all need to have about how our transport networks need to change over the next generation, and when Members read the consultation documents, they will see they are the product of deep engagement with key stakeholders in the spirit of co-production that the future generations Act requires. The next step is an even wider conversation with the people of Wales, because we will only achieve change if people choose to change.

Over the last 50 years, we have created a transport system that has prioritised car use. It has allowed individual freedoms and flexibilities that we all value, but it has also locked in deep inequalities and environmental harms. We have created a culture of car dependency that will not be easy to change. Our draft strategy sets out to achieve accessibility and sustainability: more efficient movement of goods and people by tackling congestion; setting targets for modal shift to free up road space for more attractive public transport; and creating a system that doesn't just cater for those with cars, but also serves the 23 per cent of people in this country who have no access to a car.

Of course, it's not just about changing what we say; the imperative is about changing what we do. This means a fundamental change to the way we make transport decisions and investments. It means embedding a new sustainable transport hierarchy, to put provision for walking, cycling and public transport ahead of provision and investment for private motor vehicles. If that strategy is agreed, then we will need to set out specific projects and interventions in a detailed five-year national transport delivery plan. Today is about the overall direction.

Delivering on the vision we have set out will be challenging. It will require joined-up policies, not only within the Welsh Government, but from partners, too—in particular from local government who, if the Senedd agrees, will have a critical role, through corporate joint committees, to set out regional plans. We have discussed many times in this Chamber that Wales has not seen the level of investment in our rail network that our population and our share of network infrastructure deserve. The UK Government has a role in helping address this, and today I make an offer to work with them constructively as they seek to deliver on their commitment to level up the UK, if they, in turn, commit to respecting the devolution settlement.

We cannot achieve our aims without behaviour change, and that will require difficult political choices and strong leadership—not just at a Government level, but at a local level too. You, as Members of the Senedd, will have a critical role in helping to support some of the tough local decisions needed along the way. There are elements of this that will need to be drawn out in the fundamental, national debate that we now need to have. For example, what role might road user charging play? As we made clear earlier in the year, the Welsh Government has no fixed view on this yet. There is no secret plan in a desk drawer within Government ready for implementing road user charging, but we do have a responsibility to consider how it might be used to effect behaviour change in a fair, just and equitable way.   

As the Chancellor has indicated in recent days, the move away from fuel engines also means a move away from fuel tax, and we now need to work out how we fill the gap that will be left. As a first step in that debate, Dirprwy Lywydd, I am today placing in the Members' Library a report entitled, 'The Independent Review of Road User Charging in Wales', undertaken by Derek Turner. This suggests, as a first step, the development of a national framework for how road user charging decisions can be made, and I look forward to engaging with Members in more detail on this issue as we undertake the consultation.

There are those who say that the future is too uncertain to be making such plans, or that electric cars will solve all our problems, and I believe that such a laissez-faire approach is not an effective transport strategy for the twenty-first century. In fact, it is no strategy at all. It won't solve our congestion problems. It won't solve our air quality issues. It won't solve our obesity crisis. It won't make us a fairer nation. The new Wales transport strategy is a clear signal that, whatever tomorrow holds, the Welsh Government sees integrated and high-quality public transport as a vital and critical part of our future.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we stand at an important moment. Our climate is in crisis. New technology is disrupting the way we think about travel,  and coronavirus is severely testing the financial and economic foundations of public transport models. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to put public transport and sustainable transport at the heart of the Wales that we want to build, to put us on a new path. Diolch.

Minister, can I thank you for the advance copy of your statement and also for the technical briefing yesterday, which was hosted by yourself, to opposition spokespeople? That was very much appreciated.

As this strategy is quite wide-ranging, I'm sure that Members will want to consider it in detail during the forthcoming consultation period. Myself, I certainly think that the transport strategy is well overdue. I do have a number of questions. I would be grateful if you could set out the timescales for the delivery of the transport strategy and the Welsh Government's approach to delivering the strategy. You talked about the national five-year plan. Will that be in association with local government via their local or regional transport plans? And just to have some dates around some of the context of what you talked about today.

The Economy, Infrastructure and Skills Committee has considered the decarbonisation of transport—a report that, as it happens, we'll be debating in this Senedd in a couple of weeks' time. You've outlined today, to an extent, how the Wales transport strategy will support the aims of decarbonising transport, but can I ask in particular: how will you ensure that the freight sector and Cardiff Airport will play a role in addressing the pre-COVID gaps, which were found in the Welsh Government's plans for decarbonisation? And how will you address the findings that high capital costs of investing in electric vehicles are a real barrier for operators and local authorities? I appreciate that you've talked about that particular area not being the be-all and end-all. In your statement, you did mention that

'We have created a culture of car dependency that will not be easy to change.'

To change people's travel preferences, mindsets need to change, because mindsets determine behaviour. I think the EIS committee has recently concluded in its report on decarbonisation that Wales cannot afford to miss the opportunity for a permanent culture shift in the way we travel as lockdown eases. So, I think we're in general agreement on that aspect, but I'm also conscious as well that large parts of the geography of Wales are very rural and people have no alternative but to use cars; there's no alternative for them. Also, there are those who have disabilities who also have no other choice but to travel by car. So, I suspect that we're in agreement, but I'm just conscious that we take that balanced approach, as well, and your comments on that would be appreciated.

How has the Welsh Government incorporated COVID-19 and the recovery from the pandemic into its plans? We've got homeworking and changes in working patterns. Also, as a result of social distancing and the potential long-term reluctance by some people to use public transport again, how have you considered the implications that this could have on the capacity, demand and viability of the network? You've previously told us that you don't want people to be discouraged from using public transport, but how will the Wales transport strategy encourage people back onto public transport when we know that many are turning back to the private car? And I say there as well—. I'll leave that due to time.

The threat of penalising the motorist is certainly not the way forward, in my view. Therefore, how will the draft Wales strategy seek to create an attractive and convenient alternative to the car, which will incentivise the behavioural change that is necessary? The National Infrastructure Commission wasn't mentioned at all, or rather, I couldn't see much mention of the National Infrastructure Commission—I won't say 'at all'; I haven't had time to read it all in detail. But I'm just conscious that that was set up as a body to look at infrastructure for the long term, and I'm just wondering how the National Infrastructure Commission fits into your plans in terms of the strategy and the plans that will follow.

And finally, do you agree that the performance of Wales's road transport network will be a crucial enabler of future sustained productivity and competitiveness? Road transport corridors are the arteries of domestic and international trade and boost the overall competitiveness of the Welsh economy, and I'd welcome your perspective on that statement as well.

Thank you. There was a significant number of questions there. I'll do my best to try and answer them as quickly as I can. In terms of timescales, this is a 20-year vision but it sets out five-year priorities, and then the detailed delivery of that will be delivered through a national delivery plan, supported by regional transport plans, which will be developed by the joint transport committees. So, as I say, the important part of today is setting out—pardon the pun—the direction of travel, and, to weave in your penultimate question, the National Infrastructure Commission has been heavily involved in our consultation with officials to get us to this point, as, indeed, many others have. And the whole point now of the 10-week consultation is to go into a richer conversation to inform the final document that we publish before the end of this term.

There are in fact, for the first time, within the strategy, mini plans for different modes of transport, so the questions that Russell George asks about freight and air travel are indeed covered by discrete mini plans within the strategy that have bespoke approaches to each of those. The question of electric car infrastructure is important and is covered within the overall vision. That's not just the role of the Government to do that; the Government doesn't provide petrol stations and nor should we be expected to provide all the infrastructure. I think, as always, we should look at where we can step in where the market may not act and put our support in where it can have greatest effect.

The point on rural areas and people with disabilities is a point well made, and, in fact, a point reflected in the strategy. In fact, priority 4 makes just the point that many people, including those in rural areas and disabled people, may not have the options that others have. But the premise of this strategy is that we have to do things differently than the way we have been doing things. Even in rural areas, a large number of journeys are within towns and to towns, and there is much that can be done there. We only have to look at our European neighbours to know they too have rural areas and yet have a significantly different approach to sustainable transport than we do. So, it can be done. The way is there; I think the question that remains is whether the will is there across the Chamber. 

And on his final point on the road network as arteries of trade, as he calls it—of course, and maintaining our road infrastructure and adapting it to the challenges of climate change. We saw, at the beginning of this year, the impact flooding has on road and rail infrastructure, and it's crucial that we invest more than we have been on maintaining our road network, precisely for the reason Russell George sets out. But getting congestion off the roads, getting unnecessary car journeys off the roads frees up the road network for those necessary journeys where there aren't alternatives.

I'd like to thank the Deputy Minister for his statement today and for the technical briefing that he provided to us as opposition Members yesterday. I'd also like to thank his officials. It was very helpful and very enlightening. Of course, this is a very wide-ranging set of proposals. I think we all need to take time to consider them properly and to respond to the consultation, but they are ambitious, and we very much, on the Plaid Cymru benches, welcome that. And I'd associate myself with everything the Minister said about we've got to do things differently, and nobody thinks that's going to be easy. There will be challenges and there will be difficult and perhaps unpopular decisions to be made.

The work that's been done to prepare this draft will, in our opinion, provide a strong basis for whoever forms the next Government to move this agenda forward, and it is my impression, Llywydd, that the Deputy Minister will get broad support. We might have a difference of opinion about detail, but he will get broad support across this Chamber, and I think that's important. Because to deliver change on this scale may need many Governments and many terms of Government and maybe Governments of different colours, but I think people in the sector and key partners need to understand that we all understand the importance of decarbonising transport and of making sure that our public transport system works.

I have a few specific questions I'd like to raise with the Deputy Minister today—some about the process and potentially the process going forward, but also some specifics about the content. But if the Deputy Minister doesn't have immediate answers, then these are conversations that we will undoubtedly continue to have.

The Deputy Minister in his statement refers to the spirit of the well-being of future generations Act on a number of occasions. Can he tell us this afternoon the extent to which this legislation has provided the legal underpinning for the preparation of this consultation document and the actions within it? It seems to me that, particularly when there are difficult decisions to be made, a clear legal underpinning for where that's coming from can be of assistance.

The documents themselves and the Minister in his statement make reference to accessibility. That term is used in a number of ways, and I would agree that it's obviously crucially important. Can I specifically ask the Deputy Minister if he agrees with me that physical accessibility is still a real barrier for people accessing public transport, whether that's a parent with a pram or people living with a range of physical impairments? We know, for example, how many of our stations you just can't get into because there are so many steps. Can I ask the Deputy Minister if disabled people have been consulted in the preparation of this draft and how he and his officials will ensure that they're enabled to respond to the consultation?

I agree with the Deputy Minister when he says that electric cars won't solve all our problems, but as Russell George has said, they do have a role to play, and electric vehicles will be important, potentially, in rural communities particularly. I welcome the commitment in the draft to an electric vehicle charging plan, and I hear what the Deputy Minister says about not necessarily providing all the infrastructure, but is it the Deputy Minister's intention that the plan will enable an acceleration of the current roll-out, particularly in rural areas? I would put it to the Deputy Minister that we can't really wait for market failure, because we don't know how long it will take for us to know that the market has failed.

Now, I know the Deputy Minister will agree with me that if we are to facilitate behaviour change, we need real transformations in the way in which the modes of active travel and public transport connect with each other. Does he agree with me that the current proposed draft buses Bill will need to be reviewed and strengthened to ensure that it gives whoever forms the next Welsh Government sufficient power over bus services to ensure that bus companies comply with the need for that effective connectivity of modes?

And finally, does the Deputy Minister agree with me that if we are to convince people to get out of their cars—and we've talked a lot about convenience here, but for some people, it's beyond convenience—we have to ensure that both active travel and public transport modes both are safe and feel safe, particularly to potentially vulnerable users? So, can I ask the Deputy Minister what consideration has been given during the preparation of this draft to the importance of ensuring the safety of potentially vulnerable users of active travel modes and public transport, particularly women and girls? I'm thinking, obviously, here, particularly of night-time travel, people returning from late shifts at work, those kinds of issues, where I know that many women are very reluctant to use our current public transport modes, because whether or not they actually are safe, they don't feel very safe to use.

Thank you very much for those questions and for the offer of broad support, particularly for the principle of decarbonising transport. I agree this is a cross-party agenda and it will take multiple terms of the Senedd to implement, and I welcome her comments.

In terms of the legal underpinning, then, of course, the future generations Act underpins the approach we set out, among other pieces of legislation, but that is one that's been central, certainly to the way we've gone about the consultation about involving, co-operating and thinking long term, and collaborating with users and with others. So, that certainly has infused the approach we've taken.

On the question of physical accessibility and the involvement of disabled people, well, they certainly have been involved. There have been a number of sessions with equalities groups, and I think you will find when you read priority 1 in the consultation that it is very much reflecting the priorities of that sector—less, in a sense, a statement of the Government's position, more, really, a reflection of that. So we've chosen their framing to go out to consultation on. So, I think that does reflect the sincerity of our engagement with the sector.

The issue, really, of physical barriers to public transport does tie in with the question Helen Mary asks about bus connectivity as well, because that is about getting a loosely regulated private market to engage in public goods, which is difficult to do within the current legislative framework, for all the competition laws and impediments that will be very familiar to her and others in this Chamber, which is why we wanted to bring forward legislation in this term to put a strategic footing for public transport, which we haven't been able to because of COVID.

Now, through the terms and conditions we are setting for our bus support grants in responding to COVID—because, in effect, these bus companies would go bust without them—we have given significant financial support and we are requiring co-operation in return, and that includes, for some of those, particularly around the ability for us to co-ordinate. That's work in progress, and we still think there's a role for legislation, and we are preparing a piece of legislation for whoever forms the next Government to take that forward if they wish to. But we think the requirement for that is definitely there.

On her point on electric charging in rural areas, she is right: there is more that needs to be done. The UK Government have set out what they call the ultra-low emission vehicles, which is a decarbonised transport fund for electric vehicles, which is too modest currently, at around £29 million—it needs to be far more than that—and I think that is one of the things that we need to be looking at when it comes to the delivery plan, about how we prioritise our investment for that against other things.

Her final point on the perception of safety and the reality of safety, I think, is a really important one, and it goes to the heart of everything we do here, really, because perceptions of public transport are one of the impediments. We know from research that people think public transport takes longer to get to your destination than it actually does, people perceive it to be less safe than it actually is, and one of the behaviour change devices we need to see to make this work is to change people's perceptions by encouraging them to try public transport, to change their perceptions, and of course, in doing that, you have safety in numbers. The more people use active travel networks or public transport networks, the safer it feels and the safer it becomes. So, in a sense, this is a chicken-and-egg argument, and it's why the whole modal shift movement, which goes beyond decarbonising—we've talked in the past about decarbonising the transport system; well, that's essential, but modal shift goes beyond that, because it's saying, 'We'll have a greener powered electric system, but we need to get more people using it, and fewer people using individual cars.'

I welcome the statement and I'm grateful to the Minister for that. People in Blaenau Gwent want a transport system that provides effective connectivity for all of us, connecting us with people, places, services and jobs. We need a vision for public transport that sees transport as a public service and not simply a failing business that puts profit ahead of public need. We saw, Presiding Officer, how Margaret Thatcher destroyed the bus services that we enjoyed across the whole of the Valleys, and then we saw how John Major destroyed the rail network, and we've seen since then how we have not had the investment in rail that we all require.

But I would like to see this strategy be one that is rooted in people's experience and people's needs. We need the integration of buses and train services. We need the re-regulation of bus services. We need the Williams review of rail investment across the United Kingdom to lead to the devolution of rail infrastructure investment, to enable this Government to ensure that we're able to invest in the services that meet the needs of the people, and services that are integrated with other public transport options.

We need to look into services that serve people in towns. I fear that, all too often, we hear of policy initiatives that work well in cities, but don't deliver for towns. Most people in Wales live in small towns, wherever they may be, whether they're in rural Montgomeryshire, rural Dyfed—perhaps I shouldn't use that term—or the Valleys of south Wales, and it is the towns that will be the acid test for this policy. Can somebody travel from Cwm to Rassau to get to work at 8 o'clock in the morning? Can somebody travel from Sirhowy to the bottom end of town to visit a doctor? How will we visit friends and neighbours who are in the Grange hospital in Cwmbran? These are the tests of a transport strategy, and these are the tests that I will be placing on this transport strategy when it is introduced by the Government. Thank you.

Thank you. I agree with Alun Davies that those are the tests, and I welcome his challenge to make sure that Government meet those tests, because unless we can meet those tests, then public transport will not be a realistic alternative to the car, and, on that basis, our vision and our strategy will fail. So, I completely agree with the aspiration there. Of course, operationalising that within a fragmented, privately owned transport system has been what has devilled us to date, which is why we do need to address the regulation, as he says, and we do need to address the co-ordination. Now, I think the creation of corporate joint committees will help that. I think giving Transport for Wales a greater role as the co-ordinating mind behind our public transport system will address that, as well as creating the capability and the capacity of professionals who are able to operate the networks and plan them and co-ordinate them in that way will be essential to achieving that, too. 

As well as embracing innovations. Alun Davies will know from chairing the Valleys taskforce the aspiration to have a demand-responsive bus service in Blaenau Gwent and in other places that is able to move beyond the timetabled service towards one that responds to consumer demand. And I'm pleased to say, from that work that he began, we now have the flexi service being piloted in five, I think, communities across Wales, coming soon to Blaenau Gwent. It's currently being trialled in Newport and proving very successful. So, I think that partly answers his test about how to get from different places in a flexible way by changing our concept of what buses are and what they look like. And I certainly think that there's much more that we can do about that. 

His point on rail is well made, and this is where the UK Government really does need to play its part. I said in the statement that we want to constructively engage with the UK Government. The Burns report, coming out next week, as we know from its teasers, is going to focus heavily on rail as a solution to congestion around Newport, and that is going to require the UK Government to step up to the plate in a way it hasn't done on the electrification and it hasn't done on overall rail investment. We've seen HS2 pursued to the negative effect on the Welsh economy, and we need to make sure that we do get our share of rail investment to enable us to achieve our ambitions. 

I think we all have to acknowledge that reforming the transport infrastructure in Wales is a very considerable task, but I think we all agree that we do have to have a fundamental shift in our transport usage, especially the need to encourage the public away from the use of the private car. It is a little bit unfortunate that your statement included a hint that you would be considering a charging system for private cars, because after all, it's the UK Government, the Treasury, that will be losing the revenue as we transfer from carbon-using vehicles to electric vehicles. So, can I suggest that, before any charges are introduced, we make sure that we have a first-class public transport system in place in Wales, and that public transport infrastructure is affordable, even for the most economically disadvantaged in our society? I don't want to be negative in any way about this, but I think we all have to acknowledge that, whatever public transport system is in place, there will still be many thousands, particularly in our rural communities, who will not have any other alternative but to use cars to get to work. So, any charging system that you might have will have to take that into account.

I'm sure, actually, reading your statement, Deputy Minister, we welcome the considerable efforts that you'll be making to consult with the general public, and I think that it's fundamental that we bring the general public along with us on this journey. There has to be both the carrot and the stick if we're going to achieve exactly what we want to achieve here. And I think that, across the Chamber, we all accept that we cannot go on in the way that we have over the last decades, because we all suffer from the traffic jams, et cetera, that are happening, and that's a huge economic cost to Wales as well. So, can I ask, in your consultation with the general public, that we can have your assurance that you will take their suggestions and ideas into account, even if they don't accord with the Government aspirations?

Thank you. I think David Rowlands perfectly outlines the dilemma there. He says, on the one hand, 'We need to have a carrot and a stick', but then he bristles at the stick. You do need to have them both together. The point about road-user charging is the current model that we rely on—the Treasury relies on, as you rightly say, to bring in revenue—will fall away as we move to electric charging, because you're not filling up at the pumps, and the whole taxation model we've had for many years disintegrates. So, there does need to be a different way of raising revenue.

Now, I think, in principle, a way that raises revenue based on how often you use your car—bearing in mind that one in four households don't have a car and the system needs to be equitable to them—I think, in principle, makes sense. Now, the Turner review that we've published was set about because, you will remember, that Cardiff council set out plans for road-user charging in Cardiff, and we wanted to make sure that there was a national framework that guided decisions about road-user charging so that we didn't have different councils going off and doing different things. So, the report itself is nothing to get too excited by, frankly. We'll place a copy of it in the Library and publish it. It's quite a conservative analysis of a way of dealing with this issue sensibly. So, I don't think there's anything to get excited about in the review itself, but it does raise the issue that we do need to think differently about how we raise revenue and how, as you say, we can't go on as we have over the last decade. That is right. And what role does a disincentive play alongside an incentive? And you need to have both.

But you're absolutely right: it needs to be done in a way that brings people with us, and in my view, it shouldn't be the first thing we do. We should focus on service improvement first, and then, through disincentives, try to lock in behaviour change, because there's no shortage of people who will look to exploit this, to whip up hostility about what we're trying to do, and we mustn't let them do it, because, done properly, this is a way to get us where we want to go.

I haven't had time to read the document in full, but can the Deputy Minister give us an update in terms of the Government's intentions in terms of reopening the rail line between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth, and then extending along west Wales to Caernarfon and Bangor?

Can you also give us some idea as to your vision on villages? Alun Davies mentioned towns, but I'm particularly thinking of villages in rural areas, particularly in terms of cycle paths, where it isn't possible to use the roads—I know that living in the Towy valley. But there are exciting plans to create a cycle route between Carmarthen and Llandeilo. Does the Government support that?

Four years ago, the Government had pledged to publish a strategy for a metro for Swansea bay and the western Valleys, including the Amman and Gwendraeth valleys. Can you give us an update on that?

And finally, are you still committed to delivering another pledge in terms of creating the Llandeilo bypass, where air pollution and the latest evidence on the impact of that, for example, on intellectual abilities, is causing great concern to people, and parents particularly, in the area?

Thank you very much for the questions.

A number of points there. In terms of connecting villages, I absolutely agree, and as I mentioned to Alun Davies, the flexi system of demand-responsive transport, which is also being piloted in Pembrokeshire in a rural setting at the moment, I think, does offer us a way of being able to supplement the scheduled bus service with a more malleable form of public transport that is able to respond, based, of course, on the Bwcabus service that's been piloted in north Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion for some time. It's that model in a more up-to-date form. So, I think, that, from a public transport point of view, is one of the easiest ways we can achieve those objectives.

Adam Price mentions the Towy valley path in his constituency, which I'm very familiar with. As I've discussed with him previously, one of the challenges we have around active travel is where we focus our investment. Now, active travel is for purposeful, everyday journeys. It's not cycling as a leisure activity, it's cycling to get people from A to B so we achieve modal shift, and I think there is a strong argument for saying we should focus our efforts where we're going to get the maximum impact, especially in the early stages, to show people this is an agenda that can deliver modal shift. So, routes like the Towy Valley one, which have primarily been leisure routes and tourist routes, have great value, especially for getting people to return to cycling as a family activity, but, as a day-to-day activity, tend not to score the highest in terms of return on investment. So, there's a challenge for us, and this is a challenge that I've posed to Dafydd Trystan, who I've established as our independent active travel commissioner, to think where the balance lies between investment for leisure cycling and investment for daily, purposeful cycling, Because I think it is a tricky one, where we put scarce resource to have the greatest climate impact. But I can absolutely recognise the value of the scheme. I've just not been—. I think there are more valuable schemes in his constituency for achieving the objectives of this transport strategy. I'd much rather see urban networks in Ammanford and in Carmarthen and in other villages and towns, rather than primarily leisure routes. But that is a debate I think that we need to keep having, because it's not a straightforward one.

The Swansea bay metro—he is absolutely right; I fully support that. We had left that to the local councils to take the lead on it in the area. We've now brought that into Transport for Wales to take the lead to try and up the pace. It is probably the least developed of the regional metros that we have, and I hope that is something that we can accelerate. The initial scoping has been done and it is part of Transport for Wales's mission to build that metro up in the next period.

And in terms of the Llandeilo bypass, as I mentioned in the statement, today is not about individual schemes; it's about direction of travel. The commitment to the Llandeilo bypass remains as was set out in the summer. We have had disruptions to lots of capital schemes because of COVID, which have delayed things, and there is a WelTAG process that is being gone through, but there is nothing today that suggests any of the schemes we're committed to will be other than we've announced. I think the question will then come for the next Government in the delivery plan as to how the principles that have been set out in this plan, if they're accepted, apply at a scheme level.

Thank you for your statement, Deputy Minister, and, while I know absolutely the emphasis of your statement, it would be remiss of me at this point not to welcome the recent announcement regarding the contract for the A465 Heads of the Valleys improvements. That is a strategic and regionally important decision to ensure safe and well-managed transport infrastructure is delivered, and it shows the importance of both shaping and holding to a long-term vision. And of course, as you recognise, a good-quality road network has to be part of any strategy, because other forms of transport—particularly some active travel options—are not always practical for everyone in some Valleys communities, where topography can make that very, very difficult, although I accept absolutely that that doesn't necessarily mean that we throw decarbonisation out the window—far from it.

But the draft strategy does emphasise one of the key lessons of the pandemic, which is the importance of local transport infrastructure, and there's no doubt that the COVID-19 period has shown us the true value of our local bus network. Now, thankfully, in Merthyr Tydfil, we have the development of the new bus station to reinforce this message, but we do need to move beyond just a new bus station, and, while I think you've already dealt with a number of the questions on this subject, I, like others, regret that we had to lose the buses Bill from this Senedd's legislative programme, although, like others, I hope we'll see it back after the election next year.

But, while I think, as I say, you've already largely dealt with my question to a large degree, I'd like to know how the improvement of the infrastructure of our local bus networks, developing ever smarter and more responsive transport in our communities, will sit within this strategy, and how much of the work of the Valleys taskforce that you referenced in your answers to Alun Davies will form part of your thinking in this respect.

Thank you to Dawn for her question, and I must pay tribute to her as a member of the Valleys taskforce and the chair of the transport subgroup that's been leading the work on the Fflecsi demand-responsive scheme. And as I say, we are trialling it in four or five different areas at the moment and the results are very encouraging. And particularly in Newport, we think there is an early opportunity to try and ramp that up at scale to try and learn lessons to see whether or not it lives up to its early potential. So, certainly, it is our intent, as part of this strategy, Dawn, that schemes like the Fflecsi bus offer a real alternative to car use for everyday journeys in rural and urban areas. It's, as the title suggests, flexy.

She's entirely right, of course, that we're putting significant investment into the Heads of the Valleys road, and one of the things we now need to make sure is that we maximise the return on investment for that and we use it as a lever for economic development across the Heads of the Valleys, and that's something the Valleys taskforce is continuing to look at.

Minister, you say that when the facts changed, actions had to change too, about the M4 relief road, but what's changed? The environmental value of the Gwent levels has been there for centuries and millennia. You talked a lot about climate change in your remarks now, but the 11-page decision notice on the M4 relief road didn't mention climate change, didn't mention a climate crisis. I think the line was that there wasn't enough capital in the budget to do it, yet, when we hear suggestions UK Government might pay for it, you respond with outrage. 

When you say 'setting targets for modal shift to free up road space', does that mean blocking roads off so cars can't use them? You say on the rail nationalisation—you seem to have quite some pride about having nationalised it and made a start and the steps you've taken, but surely that's a crisis response to a collapse in demand and revenue. Now that Transport for Wales is providing services, you're funding them, and now those services are nationalised, how do you deal with the tension of having a substantial amount of borders network that's within England? Should Welsh taxpayers be paying for frequency of service at small stations for people in England going into Birmingham or Shrewsbury—to what extent is that a priority for Welsh taxpayers? And I agree with you there's a tension between having the devolution of the rail services but rail infrastructure not devolved—couldn't that tension be resolved by the UK Government taking back oversight of the rail services?

Well, thank you for those questions. As he said, when the facts change, you change your mind. When he was responsible for writing the UKIP manifesto, he was against the black route, and then the facts changed, he changed parties and he changed his mind. So, you know, I think he's putting that principle into practice there. What did change, to answer the question, is that the costs changed. At the time of the 2016 election, the M4 relief road was priced at around £700 million, and, by the time the First Minister made the decision, it was priced at £2 billion. Now, there's a massive opportunity cost from investing £2 billion in 40 miles of road through protected wetlands, which means you can't spend it on other things. And he's wrong to say that climate change—. Sorry, Deputy Llywydd, he's continuing to heckle; I'm happy to have an informed conversation with him, but it's hard to respond to it when I can't hear what he's muttering away about. There was strongly, in the First Minister's justification, the case around biodiversity loss, which wasn't properly judged in the inspector's inquiry, and that is absolutely intrinsically linked to climate change.

His characterisation of modal shift being about blocking off roads I think signals the sort of politics that we can expect from Mark Reckless. It's not about blocking off roads at all. It's about allocating road space to the sort of modes we want to see. We've seen this during the coronavirus pandemic response, where we have created additional space in town centres for people to be able to socially distance on pavements. We have seen, during the pandemic, people cycling and walking in a way they didn't before, because there was less traffic on the roads. And we want to try and lock in that behaviour, because there's a lot of evidence, if he's interested in it, from the sustainable travel towns in England over a period of years, showing that you can bring about behaviour change, but the way you sustain that behaviour change is by reallocating road space, so you encourage more people to do it. So, it's not about blocking off roads; it's about enabling behaviour change.

And in terms of rail nationalisation, yes, it was something that came out of a crisis, but, in a crisis, we had choices, and those choices were informed by our values. We faced exactly the same crisis as the Department for Transport faced in England. They took a choice to use the operator-of-last-resort mechanism to keep those franchises being run in the private sector for a fee and a profit. We took the choice to bring those within Transport for Wales, an option that they don't have in England, so we don't have profit being taken out by the private sector, but we have it run in the public interest.

Minister, devolution has presented us with tremendous opportunities in respect of developing the integrated transport system. I think that we should actually celebrate that we actually now have, for the first time in decades, an opportunity to completely re-evaluate our public transport sector. Can I say how pleased I am that Pontypridd is going to be the hub of Transport for Wales? The prospect of a train every five minutes going through Pontypridd is not only good, I think, in terms of the Valleys transport system, but also the way that it is actually contributing to the regeneration of the town, the creation of jobs and so on.

Can I also say that the tremendous opportunity that we have, since Beeching, of looking at the reopening of railway lines—? In the Taff-Ely area, as the Member will know, we have some of the largest growth, and planned growth, of housing in any part of Wales. The road network can no longer provide a means of those persons travelling around the area, social engagements and also travelling to work. So, the possibility of reopening some of the railway lines that used to exist many decades ago, where, fortunately, we have still retained most of those lines, really offers a whole new opportunity. I really welcome the £0.5 million that's being invested to look at the business plan for the reopening of the north-west Cardiff corridor, or, as I refer to it, the Cardiff to Llantrisant railway line. I think that we should actually be celebrating that we have now that opportunity to do something really, really unique.

Can I also raise the issue, then, of the bus and taxi transport aspect? I live in Tonyrefail. There is no bus direct into Pontypridd, which is incredible, or from Gilfach Goch into Pontypridd. When you ask the operators, they say, 'Well, there isn't the demand.' Well, of course, these are self-fulfilling prophecies. Until you actually provide the opportunity, the demand doesn't actually exist. So, the opportunity now to actually integrate where people live and work properly, on a service basis as opposed to a short-term profit basis, I think is really exciting. But I wonder if you could comment on your thoughts on the role that taxis might actually play within that. I know that that's an issue that is emerging as one of some importance during COVID.

Can I also make just one point? Because I welcome the fact—  

Can you just wind up as well, please? Thank you.

—that we are going to have the consultation. That is that, in consideration of congestion charging, we have to look at where transport is coming from, and it mustn't be seen as a tax on the Valleys, and I know that that is very much in the Minister's mind. The very final point is: will the Government be campaigning for the revocation of section 25, now, of the Railways Act, so that the issue of public ownership of our transport system isn't one that just has to revert back to old, defunct, out-of-date legislation?

Thank you very much. I completely agree with him that the location of the headquarters of TfW in Pontypridd offers a real opportunity for regeneration of the town, and I think is a really good example of the principle of 'town centre first', which the Government has adopted for public sector location of offices. It's unfortunate that the offices are ready at a time when people aren't using offices, but I think it does show the real potential, once people start returning—and I must pay tribute to him for the way that he has campaigned to take an eyesore of a shopping centre into a really first-class building, which has lifted one of the principal towns in his constituency.

I also similarly applaud his role in campaigning for the reopening of the railway line to Llantrisant. As he said, the study is going on as part of that. It's why we have been really keen to ensure—. One of the reasons why we've brought the rail contract in-house, rather than following the English model, is to try and maintain the development of the metro that's been going on. Even though people are staying away from the railways in the short term, we think it would be remarkably short sighted of us to choke off investment in metro development, which will be there in the years to come, when people do return to the railways. That creates a short-term financial challenge, but it is, I think, a key strategic investment.

He's absolutely right to point to the role that taxis have, and we do set out within the national transport plan a mini plan for taxis and public service vehicles, highlighting that we see taxis as a key part of an integrated transport network. It says in the mini plan that we hope to develop national standards for taxis and for dealing with issues like public hire vehicles, the suitability of applicants, safety vehicle measures, vehicle testing, driver training. There is a huge reform agenda that we had hoped to take forward in legislation this term. We will now look to do it in the next term if we are in the position to form a Government. Simplifying the licensing system is one of the key demands, I know, of taxi drivers and their unions, and that is a key part of what we want to achieve. So, I completely agree with him that taxis form a really important backbone, and we know that taxi drivers are having a really hard time at the moment, as many of their customers are not using their services. There is economic support available to them through the economic resilience fund, but I think more work needs to be done to help them to understand how to access that. I know Ken Skates, the Minister, met with transport unions this morning to discuss what support we can give to the taxi industry in this incredibly difficult time.

And a final couple of points. Road user charging: we absolutely don't want it to be presented as a tax on the Valleys, as he puts it, which is why we have encouraged a regional response, and why, through the publication of this report today, we want to see that as part of a national framework. If this is to be done, it will be done in an orderly and sensible way.

And just a final point on the legislative basis. We anticipate that the rail industry is going to be under emergency measures for some time to come. As I say, this is not just a Welsh situation; this is a UK situation. We do think that the legislation does need to change for us then to put the basis on which we've put the rail industry in the short term on a longer term footing, and that will require legislation at Westminster, and that's something we hope to discuss with the UK Government.

And finally, Jenny Rathbone.

Hello.

Yes, we can hear you. That's fine.

Okay, fine. I was getting mixed messages there. Thank you very much for calling me.

I just want to welcome your hierarchy of priorities. Twenty-five per cent of people in this country have no access to a car, but in many of the communities I represent over half the households do not have a car, and therefore we are very grateful for the bus drivers who've kept going to enable people to get to work and school and to do their shopping. People with disabilities don't necessarily have a car at all. I can think of many of my constituents who have to struggle up the hill with their shopping despite their disabilities. So, we really do need to have a think about those who are least able in our communities, and I want to ask you, Deputy Minister, about this 20-year strategy, because I think we can't wait 20 years for change. For example, we could have more safe zones around schools by closing off or confining roads to the use of pupils getting safely to and from school by bicycle or by walking at the beginning and the end of the school. We could be thinking about road user charging, because we have to think about the impact on the health of people who live on the main artery roads into Cardiff. They don't have any choice about living there. They don't choose to live there. They live there because they have to live there, and we are shortening their lives by not doing more to clean up our air. So, 20 years is far too long to wait.

If we travel by train, we don't expect to travel for free, so why not having to—. Car drivers need to also think about whether they actually need to travel by car when there are other modes of transport available, and there are, within Cardiff, other modes of transport available. Therefore, I think it is right and proper that we do control the use of cars travelling around our city, because otherwise it will be unliveable. So, I wondered how long you think it's going to take before we get that change by having this regional approach. I am extremely concerned that this could mean no change.

Well, I agree with Jenny Rathbone that there is an enormous social justice element to the transport system. The poorest people are more likely to live in an area where they are subjected to higher levels of pollution; the poorest people are more likely to be involved in a collision and hit by a car; and the poorest people are forced to dedicate more of their household incomes towards the cost of running a car, because services are located at places where they have little choice. That's the transport system that we have developed over many decades and that's what needs to change by having a far more equitable transport system that tackles both inequalities and environmental hazards.

So, her suggestion of clean air zones around schools, I think, has considerable merit. This is a consultation exercise and I'd strongly encourage her and others to respond to it with ideas for how we could put the principles that we've laid out in this document into practical effect in as fast a way as possible. I completely agree with her. Twenty years is not—this is not the minimum time we're setting for this strategy; this is the time frame, the horizon we're looking at. The climate doesn't have 20 years. We know from the warnings of every report that the UN panel on climate change has issued that this is an urgent matter, and we simply don't have a long time to turn around our transport system; we have to make changes urgently.

As I said, the low-carbon plan that the next Welsh Government will have to publish next year, of whatever colour, is going to have to meet considerably more demanding climate change targets for transport. This is an attempt to try and get ahead of that, to try and shape thinking of all parties of how we meet those challenges that we've all signed up for. Every party that signed up for those climate targets of a 95 per cent reduction in carbon emissions have all signed up to that pathway of decreasing emissions from all sectors, including transport. And all of us have to put our heads together to come up with ways as to how we're going to do that.

Now, it's not easy. As we've seen in the Chamber today, that can be exploited by people who want to exploit it, but if we do it properly, it'll bring benefits to all parts of society.

Thank you very much, Deputy Minister.

Item 5 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd on the mutual investment model, and I call on the Minister for Finance and Trefnydd, Rebecca Evans.

Thank you. Earlier this year, I welcomed the report of the Finance Committee into sources of capital funding and its recommendations regarding the mutual investment model. A lot has happened since that time. Hard on the heels of a decade of Westminster-imposed austerity, from which our capital budget has barely recovered, a pandemic has struck Wales—twin threats that we must address by delivering projects that will drive forward our economic recovery, creating employment, training and supply chain opportunities. The mutual investment model will help us do just that, accelerating investment in projects that would not otherwise have been affordable.

Our strict approach to the use of MIM remains unchanged. We use conventional capital first to fund public infrastructure and we will we use every penny of it. We'll then use our limited borrowing powers. We have also enabled local authority and housing association borrowing to maximise support for the urgent needs that our communities face. But even that is not enough to cover those urgent needs.

We have developed a carefully designed model to meet those needs in the face of a decade of austerity, which we must remember began with dramatic cuts to capital budgets at a UK level. And so, today, I want to set out how the model will contribute to our economic recovery while delivering stretching community benefits, without putting further strain on our limited capital budgets. I also want to say a few words about how the Development Bank of Wales is acting as the public shareholder in MIM schemes, increasing transparency and improving value for money for the public sector.

I am delighted to report that, at the end of last month, we awarded a contract to the Future Valleys consortium to complete sections 5 and 6 of the A465 dualling project. This scheme will complete the dualling of the A465—a long-standing commitment of the Welsh Government—and ensure that the full range of benefits are realised for the region. It will complete a continuous, high-standard alternative route to the M4, improve the critical northern cross-valley link for the south Wales metro, provide reliable access into the metro hubs and contribute to modal shift. The scheme will improve accessibility to jobs, key public services and facilities for active travel in the region.

The successful completion of this groundbreaking MIM procurement demonstrates what Wales can achieve in difficult times when we address challenges with creativity. Namely, it's the first public-private partnership project of this scale to be signed in the UK since the outbreak of COVID-19. And it's the first PPP project of this scale where negotiations were completed remotely, and these innovations show Wales leading the way.

A wide range of community benefits will also be delivered through the scheme, supporting the objectives of the Valleys taskforce. These benefits include contractual targets for training and jobs for local people, and local supply chain opportunities. An estimated £400 million of project spend will be in Wales, with £170 million within the Heads of the Valleys region, generating a projected value of £675 million for the wider Welsh economy.

Maximising youth employment and skills development is key to our priorities for the reconstruction effort. The A465 re-dualling will provide over 120 apprenticeships, 60 traineeships, over 320 internships and over 1,600 national qualifications, leaving a legacy of improved skills. Our commitment to decarbonisation is also reflected in the contract award. Construction carbon will be offset by planting an additional 30,000 trees. Pre-construction ecological surveys and site clearance will start almost immediately, with construction due to begin in earnest next spring. Construction is due to be completed by mid 2025.

Turning now to our education programme: at the end of September, the Welsh Government established the Welsh Education Partnership Company, known as WEPCo. WEPCo is a joint venture between Meridiam, our private sector delivery partner, and the public sector. WEPCo will be responsible for facilitating the design and delivery of up to £500 million of additional investment in new educational facilities using the standard MIM contract. There are currently around 30 schools and colleges in the programme's pipeline to be delivered over the next seven years—a crucial investment in our future generations in the wake of austerity, delivered during a pandemic that would not have been possible without this funding model. Each project will be competitively tendered by WEPCo, through platforms such as Sell2Wales, providing opportunities for construction contractors and the wider supply chain while maximising job opportunities for people in Wales. WEPCo is contractually required to commit to minimum levels of engagement with the local supply chain on every project.

The WEPCo model will focus on delivery against key Government policies and agendas, including the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, the Curriculum for Wales, and the drive towards carbon neutrality, as well as compliance with the code of practice on ethical employment. WEPCo's performance and objectives are managed and monitored by a strategic partnering board made up of the Welsh Government, local authorities and further education institutions. A full suite of community benefits will also be delivered. WEPCo has already begun working with the University of Wales Trinity St David to introduce the Welsh education partnership academy, an online resource to enhance skills and capability in the sector.

Work has begun on the first MIM school, a new all-through school in Flintshire, which will co-locate two existing schools onto a single site, ensuring the efficient use of public funding alongside the delivery of community benefits. The Welsh Government also continues to support the Velindre NHS University Trust to deliver the new Velindre cancer centre. This clinical model, proposed by the trust for the scheme, is currently subject to independent advice, and the outcome of the advice is expected by the end of November. We will of course keep Members updated on progress.

An important innovation of the MIM is a public sector shareholding of up to 20 per cent of the risk capital in each scheme. This shareholding provides transparency whilst ensuring that the public sector participates in any return on investment. The Development Bank of Wales is using financial instruments to make significant contributions in areas extending beyond business support, including housing, energy and tourism. So, given its expertise, the Welsh Government determined that the Development Bank of Wales would act as the public sector shareholder in MIM schemes, carrying out due diligence on proposed investments and managing the investments over the long term. As the public sector shareholder, the bank will nominate a director to the board of each MIM project company. DBW will monitor the performance of each investment, provide expert oversight and ensure early warning of potential issues that might impact on the recoverability of the investments.

So, to conclude, the successful deployment of the mutual investment model is making an important contribution to our efforts to kick-start the economic recovery. The model will also deliver stretching community benefits, whilst fostering over £1 billion-worth of urgently needed investment in public infrastructure in Wales. In reaching these groundbreaking agreements, Wales is at the forefront of international efforts to modernise the concept of public-private partnership.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement this afternoon and for welcoming the Finance Committee's report regarding the mutual investment model. I did listen to your opening comments, but I think even you would have to admit that what you called 'Westminster-imposed austerity' has certainly come to an end—well, certainly recently this year, when you look at the massive amounts of additional investment that have been coming from Westminster to the Welsh Government to deal with the COVID pandemic crisis.

You mentioned the awarding of the contract to the Future Valleys consortium to complete sections 5 and 6 of the A465 dualling. We are well aware, all of us, of some of the long-standing issues that have plagued the current Clydach gorge section of that project, significantly over budget and over time. Can you give assurances that sections 5 and 6 will be better managed as this MIM scheme proceeds? Also, if you could say a little bit more about the community benefits, as I've been asked by constituents in the Gilwern area about those, and they're eager to know that those benefits do actually come on the ground, within good time and do deliver what is initially promised by contract.

You mentioned decarbonisation in your contribution, and specifically the planting of 30,000 trees. This is great news, by the way—I'm all for the planting of trees, particularly with road projects—but what is the timescale for this planting, and can you give us an estimated carbon recovery from that tree planting? We often talk about the need to input carbon budgeting into the normal budget process, but we don't often then hear the figures about the carbon recovery that's anticipated. So, either if you can give us that today, or if your officers can work it out—I think many Members would agree that carbon sinks are the way ahead. So, we need to see some figures for that.

You mentioned education and the tendering of projects using MIM contracts by WEPCo. This sounds a good opportunity for contractors. Will you be ensuring that there is an even playing field for contractors to bid? Often, in the past, this sounds great on the face of it, and we all see the importance of public sector procurement, but too often, in practice, contractors don't feel that they do have an even playing field to bid on, or the process could be better. It may be a commitment to minimum levels of supply chain engagement, which you talked about, but we want to aim higher than that, don't we? This isn't just about minimum standards, this is about reaching a higher level and, of course, having an ambition. Even if, at the start, that ambition seems too high, it's something that we should be aiming for.

I'm pleased that the future generations Act is included in your statement. Too often, it's seen as an add-on, and something that isn't incorporated into all departments in early parts of the decision-making process. So, I'm pleased to see that there. How are you ensuring that the delivery of that Act is central to the MIM model? I know there were similarities with private finance initiatives, some bad, some good, but I know that MIM does have several advantages over that. But I think if we can incorporate the future generations legislation fully into the MIM process, then that's beneficial to the way we proceed.

You've mentioned online resources. Now, in the past, I think that probably would have been less significant than it is now, but, clearly, at the moment online resources are all-important with the pandemic and lockdowns going on. So, could you tell us more about COVID-19 adaptations of the MIM process, certainly over the next couple of years?

Thanks for the update on the Velindre cancer centre. Please keep us updated on that and when that independent advice will be received. You mentioned the Development Bank of Wales and Welsh Government determining that that would act as a public shareholder in MIM schemes. That sounds eminently sensible to me, but can you give us an assurance that due diligence will be carried and it will be integral to the use of the development bank?

Finally, what safeguards can you give us that due diligence is being properly exercised across all of these potential MIM projects? Because we know what happened with the Heads of the Valleys scheme—a very ambitious scheme, something we all support, but at the end of the day, over time and over budget, and due diligence does seem to have failed there. So, what safeguards are you incorporating into the MIM system to make sure that doesn't happen on the next sections?

Thank you very much to Nick Ramsay for his questions, and also his particular interest in this agenda. Of course, I can't resist referring to Nick Ramsay's first comments about austerity, and the fact that the taps have finally been turned on in terms of investment, but it's unfortunate that it's taken a pandemic for that to happen, and it does show that austerity has been a political choice all along.

But given the helpful nature of Nick's questions, I won't push that any further, and I'll turn now to the question that was about the difference between the previous parts of the A465 and why this scheme is different to what's preceded it. That's because the A465 section 2 scheme, to which he referred, where there have been issues in terms of the timetabling particularly, is not a MIM scheme. That's an early contractor involvement scheme, and so there are some really significant differences between the two, and we shouldn't see those issues that we saw with the section 2 scheme with the MIM, because MIM is essentially a fixed-price contract. Good risk transfer has been achieved contractually, and that means, with a small number of exceptions, the majority of the programme and the cost risk sits fully with Future Valleys. Future Valleys, of course, I referred to in my statement as being the organisation, if you like, with which we have entered into the contract. Future Valleys won't get paid until the service is operational, and that, of course, incentivises them to meet their construction programme. The contract includes strict restrictions on the extent of traffic management and road closures—I know that's a particular concern locally.

There are stringent financial penalties for non-conformity with the contract restrictions, and again, this is all very different to the approach that preceded it. During the tender stage, over £7 million of surveys have been undertaken, and the scope of the investigations was developed jointly by the Welsh Government and the bidders, comprising ground investigations and intrusive structural investigation of the existing structures. Those investigations have enabled Future Valleys to understand better the nature of the site, and therefore to accurately price the risks. So, I think that this scheme is very different to that which preceded it, and it brings with it a number of important benefits as a result.

Nick Ramsay was particularly interested in the community benefits, and especially those that relate to the A465. The contract will provide over 120 apprenticeships, 60 traineeships, over 320 internships and 1,600 national qualifications. That's really delivering on our priority of maximising our contribution to youth employment and skills development, especially at such an important time. The project will also help us redress some of the inequalities that have been exacerbated by the pandemic through providing employment where it's needed most, and it will also, in the construction phase alone, generate the equivalent of 59.6 years of work for those who are in the NEET or long-term unemployed category, and 125 years of work for workers from disadvantaged backgrounds. I think that's really important in terms of those benefits. And over 80 per cent of the total estimated spend on goods, services and overheads during the construction period will be spent on businesses based in Wales. Again, that's something, I think, that we will all want to welcome.

I'm very conscious of the importance of building schemes that are environmentally sustainable, and the MIM scheme will certainly be built with long-term sustainability in mind, in accordance with the well-being of future generations Act. For example, to provide environmental sustainability, key design principles for Velindre cancer centre include the use of natural resources and energy efficiency in all possible areas. The A465, while improving the safety, connectivity and congestion of the local area will also improve the resilience of other Welsh roads by becoming an alternative route during periods of congestion, maintenance or major incidents. And obviously, new learning environments will also be built through the twenty-first century schools programme, and they must achieve the EPC rating of A and the Building Research Establishment environmental assessment method 'excellent'. So these things are very much at the front of our minds as well.

And then, finally, there were questions relating to monitoring our investments and DBW's performance. Well, having a public sector-nominated director on the board of companies delivering the public assets will provide a high degree of transparency. Furthermore, public investment in MIM schemes will also ensure a flow of shareholder information about the performance of the company back to Welsh Ministers. And Welsh Government has entered into a loan agreement with DBW in relation to the MIM investment that requires DBW to provide quarterly reports on the project company's performance, the performance of the investment and any current key risks. I think that that is important in terms of transparency and good management of the projects as well. Thank you. 

Thank you, Minister, for that statement. Let's begin with some positives and areas that we would agree on. I'm pleased to hear you saying that your strict approach to the use of MIM remains unchanged and that conventional capital should be used first, then that you would use limited borrowing powers—'limited' being the operative word—and then, only then, look at the possibility of using MIM. And in that context, I think MIM does have its attractions. It has its drawbacks also, though. It is not PFI. We're very pleased that Wales used PFI less, but it is ultimately another partnership that allows profit on some things that we shouldn't be needing companies to profit from. I'm sure Mike Hedges, when he makes his contribution to the debate later, will be saying some similar things. 

We heard the Minister saying that the successful completion of the groundbreaking MIM procurement demonstration on the Heads of the Valleys road shows what Wales can achieve in difficult times when we address challenges with creativity. Well, no; what it does is it shows what Welsh Government can do when it has no choice, when the UK Treasury decides what can be spent, what can be borrowed and when. Welsh Government is out of step—or Wales, I should say, is out of step—with what's happening in most other countries in going down this MIM route, and I'm sure the Minister would have to agree that, for example, an independent Wales would be able to finance through more conventional means, through borrowing at record low levels. So that's what we should be celebrating, but in the context that we are in, this is a slightly better option than PFI that can be useful. 

Transparency, though, is a word that the Minister used. Heads of the Valleys—yes, we absolutely need to have robustness in that road across the Heads of the Valleys. I'm told it will cost about £550 million, but for the sake of transparency, can we just have a figure from the Minister today as to how much we will actually pay from Welsh Government coffers over the decades for that project?

Moving on to schools, I'm deeply uncomfortable about Wales being a nation that is unable to finance new schools through conventional means. I'm sure Meridiam is a fine company with a global record, as it does, but to be working with an international company on the delivery of schools here in Wales is something, as I say, that I'm uncomfortable about. Surely this is something that should be able to happen from conventional borrowing, except we're not allowed to, of course. It should be able to happen from current budgets, too. But, again, on transparency, will the Minister provide a link to where the final agreement entered into with Meridiam as part of the new WEPCo vehicle may be found? That's a question asked by Adam Price earlier this month. The answer from the Minister for Education:

'The agreement was signed on 30 September 2020. As it contains commercially sensitive information we would not look to publish the document.'

Where is the transparency on the agreements that we are entering into?

And on another project that I'm very, very supportive of, a new Velindre hospital, I am very, very aware of concerns over whether the right clinical model is being pursued for the delivery of a new hospital. Can I ask, whilst that investigation is going on into the appropriateness of the choice of that clinical model, whether the finance Minister has looked at ensuring that decisions on the clinical model are not clouded, not influenced in any way, by which would be the best commercial deal or the best property deal for the partners involved—partners that are looking to make a profit out of this, otherwise they wouldn't be a part of it? Thank you.

Well, I'm grateful to Rhun ap Iorwerth for raising those issues, and we've talked several times before about the Welsh Government's approach to investment in public infrastructure and maximising the publicly available sources of capital funding and the least expensive forms of capital before we use these more complex and more expensive forms of investment. And I know this is something that the Finance Committee has signalled its approval of in terms of a way forward in the past.

Rhun is correct that MIM is not PFI, and I think that's really important to recognise. It incorporates the best of the Scottish non-profit distributing model, such as optimum-risk allocation, whole-of-life costings and performance-based payments, whilst also ensuring that the new investment is classified to the private sector. And private partners, as I've said to Nick Ramsay, will be obligated to help the Government deliver on our objectives in the well-being of future generations Act. So, they'll need to deliver those stretching community benefits, and there will be penalties for the non-delivery of those benefits. They'll also need to commit to the Welsh Government's ethical employment code, and I think that that is very important as well, as well as building with long-term sustainability and environmental efficiency in mind. And MIM differs from the traditional PFI projects also because it won't be used to finance soft services, such as cleaning and catering, which, obviously, were things which led to expensive and inflexible contracts in the historic PFI model, nor will it be used for the financing of capital equipment.

It's also different because the Welsh Government will invest a small amount of risk capital in each scheme, ensuring then that the public sector will participate in any return on investment. And also different again because the public-sector-appointed director will manage the public shareholdings and promote the public interest more widely on those discussions on the board. And the post of a public-sector-appointed director ensures that there's transparency about costs and the performance of private partners as well. But MIM, I think, differs most profoundly and clearly in its active promotion of well-being, value for money and transparency, and it's really instructive, I think, that the United Nations, which has its own agenda for the promotion of people-first PPPs, has included the MIM in its compendium of such schemes, promoting what we're doing here in Wales across the world.

Rhun also talked about profits. Well, of course, there's always an element of profit when we procure infrastructure, however that infrastructure is procured. However, the precise amount of profit will be determined by the performance of the company over the life of the contract. We've run robust procurement processes, and contracts have been awarded to the most advantageous tenders. Furthermore, appropriate allocation of risk, alongside good contract management, will ensure that any profit generated is reasonable. And we're also investing, as I've mentioned, that proportion of risk capital in those MIM schemes to ensure that we can also benefit, on equal terms with private equity investors, on any returns on those investments.

Rhun also asked for some figures, in terms of how much. So, in terms of the A465 scheme, the construction cost value of the A465 scheme is £550 million, excluding non-recoverable VAT. The annual service payment will be in the region of £38 million a year at current prices, excluding that non-recoverable VAT, for 30 years following construction. And this payment is linked to performance, with deductions levied should Future Valleys fail to meet the contract performance requirements. And, of course, the Development Bank of Wales has invested 15 per cent of the required risk capital on equal terms with the other investors, and in due course then will earn a commensurate return, which will then be, of course, reinvested in public services here in Wales.

Can I also thank the Minister for her statement? Can I just explain to Rhun ap Iorwerth that borrowing rates are low in Britain, they're not low in the rest of the world? In Armenia, it's over 6 per cent; in Egypt, it's over 10 per cent; in Argentina, it's over 30 per cent. So, although we have low interest rates, it's not low all over the world, because the British economy is considered to be quite stable.

Can I start off by saying I'm sceptical of the mutual investment model, especially its revenue cost down the line? I have some general comments on MIM. To quote from a private briefing, the only difference financially between MIM and PFI is there's no facilities management portion of the contract. Companies will borrow at best at 1.5 per cent to 2 per cent above the base rate. Some will borrow at 5 per cent or more above base rate. They will also add a profit, I would suggest, of 5 per cent or 10 per cent of the minimum required. This is adding cost. While the aim is to pass risk onto the private sector, what will happen is that a single-purpose minimum investment company will be formed, and, if there is a problem with the contract, it will liquidate it and the expenditure incurred for the work done will be claimed by the liquidator. The community benefits are factored into the cost. We're actually paying for them—or the Welsh Government are paying for them. The question I've got is: when will the Wales Audit Office be able to look at these contracts and report back?   

I thank Mike Hedges for raising those issues. And of course I'm familiar with Mike's scepticism over the MIM approach, and I think it is helpful to have that level of challenge, because we've had some excellent discussions in Finance Committee particularly, but also several times here in the Senedd, when we've explored the MIM model.

There was a particular question regarding borrowing and why Welsh Government—not a question, really; a comment as to borrowing. And some people have asked, 'Well, why doesn't Welsh Government borrow to deliver the A465 or more of these school schemes?' Well, as Mike's aware, the borrowing limit is very modest, only £150 million a year, and, obviously, we've already got really ambitious investment plans: housing, health, other parts of our school agenda, the metro, responding to the Burns report, which is due next week as well. So, borrowing really is necessary to ensure that we can deliver on these, and this is one of the reasons I'm grateful for the cross-party support and the support of the Finance Committee in terms of our efforts to extend or expand our borrowing capability and get that agreement from the UK Government.

Just a couple of words on the cost of the projects from the school side—so, we've committed to delivering new schools and colleges with a capital value of up to £500 million through the Welsh education partnership. Total annual service payment for that won't yet be known until the projects are in operation, and we do expect those projects to be delivered over the next seven years. So, when we've agreed our contracts with Meridian, what we haven't done is entered into a contract for one partner to deliver the project, but one partner to assemble the project. So, there will be the opportunity then for local contractors to bid for those projects. We'll be advertising on Sell2Wales, and of course we want local businesses to come together as partners and as groups in which to bid for those projects if they are too small players to bid on their own for those. I think that's important as well.

And the Development Bank of Wales will be a shareholder in each of the project companies established for the schools and colleges project. And we intend to—well, we have provided a very modest working capital facility to establish WEPCo, equating to 20 per cent of the latter's working capital needs. So, that's putting the situation on the record as it is at the moment, but of course there'll be opportunities in due course, once things have progressed further, for that in-depth level of scrutiny.

Thank you very much, Minister.

Item 6 on the agenda this afternoon is a statement by the Deputy Minister and Chief Whip on marking Interfaith Week, and I call on the Deputy Minister and the Chief Whip, Jane Hutt. Jane.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Interfaith Week celebrates the contribution people of faith across this country have made to their communities. It's hard to imagine when than in the recent history of the COVID-19 pandemic this contribution has been more necessary or more appreciated by so many, and it is at times like this, times of adversity, that care and compassion in people and communities of faith and no faith shine through. It's no surprise that a great many of those who have come forward have been from our faith communities.

In Wales, we have a unique opportunity to bring our faiths together in the interfaith council, which co-exists alongside our interfaith forum, which has played a vital role in the collective response to the pandemic.

In February, communities were devastated by storm Dennis, Ciara and Jorge, and, just a few weeks later, we moved into a national lockdown that brought unprecedented and extraordinary restrictions on every aspect of our lives. The critical need for such restrictions has never diminished, however difficult they have been. As we know, the virus is cruel, spreading from loved one to loved one, through our most human need to see family and friends, as well as the spiritual needs so clearly expressed by our faith communities. So little of our lives has been left untouched, including those of faith communities, who were asked for a long period not to congregate, not to open their places of worship, not to mark their important festivals in the way they usually would. No Member here would underestimate how great an ask that was, neither will any Member be surprised to know that these restrictions did not diminish the efforts and spirit of our faiths in Wales. And while the physical doors were shut, the work did not stop. In fact—and I speak directly to the faith community now— your resourcefulness and energy to find ways to keep in touch with your own worshippers has been remarkable. You've reached out to the wider community, and you hold both the gratitude and the admiration of this Government and the Senedd as a whole.

This response to adversity is reflected at times of crisis. After the February flooding in Pontypridd, the churches of Castle Square and St David's Uniting helped to clean up the local area and raised over £2,000 for local flood victims. Community House, Newport, has been bringing people together from all ages, backgrounds, races and religions for over half a century. It provides a home for many groups and activities, including a Caribbean church, an Ethiopian church and two east European churches. And many of the people who attend Community House are from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, experiencing the profound and disproportionate impact of coronavirus. Community House has arranged regular Zoom meetings to get community leaders in touch with people who are in need of help. They've provided food parcels, computers and internet access for children, in partnership with the Ethnic Minorities and Youth Support Team Wales, 'With Me In Mind', and a community connector. I urge faith groups to take the opportunity to apply for the funding I've made available from the COVID-19 third sector response fund and through the community facilities programme. And I hope this will help them to provide continued support to their communities.

Food banks across Wales, often hosted by places of worship, have continued to share food with those in need, and new ones have opened. Churches like Gateway in Abergavenny have provided hot meals for children while the school was closed, and also provided a hot meal for NHS staff for 11 weeks through lockdown—around 1,200 cooked meals. They've also given school bags and stationery to children as they return to school. I've heard of many examples of support being given over the phone, with members being encouraged to ring each other, contact those in care homes, and providing opportunities to pray by phone. 

Each year, Interfaith Week is usually marked by gatherings, a walk and a concert, last year featuring the interfaith choir. This year, I joined a virtual 'Music and the Spoken Word' event, organised by the Interfaith Council for Wales. I was delighted to see the interfaith council's suggestions for personal and social daily exchanges through Interfaith Week, from planting something, doing a kind deed for someone, and to write three things that make us feel grateful. It was also an opportunity to hear directly from people about how they're coping through the pandemic. 

During these past months, the interfaith council has supported the project run by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to donate 11,300 hygiene bags to the patients of the hospitals and care homes across Wales, so that people had access to basic essentials when their family members, friends and neighbours were not able to visit them. Deputy Llywydd, these are just a few of the examples from our communities across Wales.

During Interfaith Week, there was an LGBT+ event hosted by the Swansea Unitarian Church and the university faith team. The virtual gathering gave people an opportunity to share, connect and make friends. I'm also aware of the work by faith groups to stand in solidarity with Black Lives Matter and against the scourge of racism. And during a time when key festivals such as Eid, Easter, Hanukkah, the Jewish new year, and, more recently, the Feasts of All Saints and the Feast of All Souls, will or have been disrupted, you've worked to ensure people can still mark these occasions. This year, we marked Diwali with inspiring online events. I'm pleased that the Hindu and Sikh faith communities in Wales who celebrate Diwali participated in the events that the Welsh Government organised to mark Diwali, such as the digital Diwali celebrations from 9-13 November.

Fundraising for good causes has continued. Outreach has not stopped, and the support for some of the most vulnerable people across our country has been kept strong. During national volunteering week, I met with people who told me about their volunteering work during Ramadan, helping those around their community during these difficult times, with food parcels and care for the elderly throughout this pandemic.

The way the Government and the faith communities have been able to work together during the past months is testimony to the strength and importance of the faith communities forum. It reflects the long-standing, multicultural and multifaith traditions that are deeply rooted in communities across Wales, and has enabled us to keep an open and constructive dialogue. So, I'd like to thank all volunteers in every village, town and city across Wales for your tireless work. I don't underestimate the magnitude of your task, comforting others and supporting vulnerable people, and I hope that all Members will join me in marking Interfaith Week and celebrating the outstanding work of our communities of faith and no faith in this extraordinary year.

Thank you, Deputy Minister. I welcome this statement today on Interfaith Week, which aims to build on good relationships and working partnerships between people of different faiths and beliefs. Over generations, we have built a successful, multiracial, multifaith democracy. This week provides a focal point for interfaith activity, so that more people are aware of its importance and are able to take part. Each year, Interfaith Week begins on Remembrance Sunday. This is significant, as we should always remember the contribution of people who came from countries that now form part of the Commonwealth to fight for us. One and a half million volunteers came from the Indian sub-continent, 15,000 volunteers from the West Indies, 5,000 men from Africa.

In these days of increasing racial prejudice and discrimination, it is right to take the time to reflect on this fact. In cemeteries across the world are the graves of people of all races and faiths, or no faith, who fought side by side to defend the freedoms that we enjoy today. Interfaith Week celebrates and builds on the contribution that distinct faith communities continue to make to their neighbourhoods and to wider society. Progress is definitely being made. In the latest national survey for Wales, 75 per cent agreed that they now belonged to their area—they feel like they belong to their area—and that people from different backgrounds get on well with each other, treating each other with respect. This is up from 52 per cent the previous year.

But problems still remain. Hate crime is an increasing problem in the UK, and sadly Wales is no exception. Police forces in England and Wales recorded a 3 per cent increase in recorded religious hate crime incidents in 2018-19. Although the majority of religious hate crimes are conducted against Muslims, the rise of antisemitism is a major concern, with the number of reported incidents against Jews doubling from 2018 to 2019. While it is likely that the increase in hate crime has been driven by improvements in recording by police and a growing awareness of hate crime, there is no doubt that the problem is escalating.

Interfaith Week is an essential part of increasing understanding between people of religious and non-religious beliefs. Faith groups have been brought together to meet the challenge presented by the coronavirus pandemic. They have reached out to help the elderly and those most at risk, such as pregnant women and people with chronic conditions within our communities. By doing so, they provide much needed support to the vulnerable, whilst tackling the loneliness and isolation that lockdown regulations entail. An amazing example of this that I went to visit was Feed Newport in Pill in Newport. It was well worth a visit, Deputy Minister, for what they're doing. They're not just providing food to people; there are so many other services that they've incorporated in that. It's something definitely worth looking at and something to roll out across Wales.

Bringing communities together is a key part of Interfaith Week, and I fully support its intention to promote greater understanding and better relationships between faith communities in Wales. We will all be stronger if we work together, play together and live together. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Laura Anne Jones, for those very positive comments and contributions, acknowledging the importance of Interfaith Week. I'm glad you mentioned the fact that Interfaith Week actually coincides and starts with Remembrance Day, and in fact I was very privileged, and I'm sure that everyone was aware of the fact that Race Council Cymru, for the second year running, organised a memorial service in Alexandra gardens in Cathays for ethnic minority servicemen and women. We laid wreaths on that Saturday. It was the second year, and we were particularly pleased that we had very socially distanced representation there across all the faiths who attended. So, wreaths were laid by the Muslim Council of Wales, the Hindu Council of Wales, the Jewish community, the Christian community—they were all there expressing their faith and their support for Remembrance Day. And people can see that all-important plaque that was placed there last year, supported by the Royal British Legion as well.

I also feel that it's very important that you recognise that attitudes are changing, and you see that through the surveys in terms of the views of the people of Wales, through our national surveys, but we know that we can't take that for granted.

Now, I mentioned the virtual event that I attended on Thursday that the Interfaith Council for Wales organised, and what was very interesting, again, were the views that came from all of the different faiths represented. One participant from the Hindu faith said that people of faith are right out at the front in terms of the response to the coronavirus pandemic. The temple closing was such a shock—these were two young Hindus who used to meet every week—but they said, 'We've now learnt new skills to keep our faith alive online, and also to look out to the community to see how we could share. We closed our doors, but this led to the opening of our hearts. We grow a lot and we've grown closer together'. Of course, that also is very connected with the Sikh participant at the event who said, 'Faith has taught me to trust. I taught myself to put others before myself. We are all one'. And there were many other expressions of that kind at that event, which, of course, I would have liked many more to have been part of that. It was very revealing in terms of that commitment.

I think we also have to face the fact that there is hate crime. Only a few weeks ago, we had the Hate Crime Awareness Week, and it was very important that we looked at the statistics. I had a statement here today in the Chamber, and, following the statement that I made, I met with ambassadors of Victim Support Cymru who launched their hate crime charter, focusing on the rights of victims of hate crime. We signed up, as a Welsh Government, to the charter, showing our commitment to playing our part in tackling hate crime, also recognising that we looked at statistics from the past year and there was actually a decrease in religious hate crime. But we know that it is also about people coming forward, feeling that they're confident to report. I made the point that no person in Wales should have to tolerate prejudice or hate crime, and everyone has the right to respect and should be able to go through their lives without being insulted, harassed or attacked.

So, we have to use Interfaith Week as an opportunity to really share and embrace how people are working together, coming together and learning together, and the project in Pill, I'm sure, will be just one of the many examples we could give today.

May I first of all thank Jane Hutt, the Deputy Minister, for a wonderful statement? I join with her in her welcoming words. We're here noting Interfaith Week, but as the Deputy Minister has already said, we're not only noting but celebrating the contributions made by our faith communities, particularly during the pandemic over these past few months when congregations haven't been able to come together in their traditional way, be that in a chapel, church, mosque or other place of worship; we have been meeting online, of course.

As one who is a lay preacher, I do see all of the hard work that is done on a voluntary basis, and I'm astonished by it, I have to say, as the Deputy Minister has already outlined. And it's not just in our Christian chapels and churches, but it's also the vital contributions from other faith backgrounds, as we all come together in our towns and cities, and the voluntary work that happens on the ground is truly astonishing. And given the response to the pandemic, it has gone up to another level that we've never seen before, and also in response to the flooding that the Deputy Minister mentioned. The hard work done on the ground deserves celebrating, and that's why I welcome this statement so enthusiastically today. Providing food to food banks, providing food parcels to individuals and families who are vulnerable, the response has been quite staggering; providing furniture, clothes, dry carpets, toys for children, everything you can think of.

And, of course, during lockdown, we couldn't hold services in our churches, chapels or mosques, as I've already mentioned. And, of course, there were strict restrictions in terms of weddings and funerals, but despite that, there was great collaboration happening. I had my first experience of being a lay preacher on Zoom, before returning to the pulpit just last Sunday. Following this recent lockdown, our chapels and churches have reopened, and they have been disinfected in a way that has never been seen before. There is incredible work happening. The red and white tape is keeping everyone 2m apart in the pews in our chapels, with hand sanitiser at the door, everyone wearing masks, no singing of hymns, with test and trace in place, both in written form and through the COVID-19 app, where you scan your phone at the door as you enter the chapel or church. These changes have been quite incredible, as has the ongoing cleaning as various community organisations use our vestries and halls during the week. The challenges have been immense, indeed, as the Deputy Minister has already said.

And I also want to thank the Deputy Minister for what she said about the funding available to our communities of faith to deliver more at a local level to support our most vulnerable people, because such pots of money haven't always been available to faith organisations. So, can I just ask you how many such organisations have made applications under the scheme that you've outlined this afternoon?

But, to conclude, Deputy Presiding Officer, in this important week, we've all been paying numerous, well-deserved tributes to NHS workers, workers in social care and local government staff, as well as carers, and we occasionally forget to mention our faith communities and all the voluntary work that happens on the ground, quietly and behind the scenes, without anyone realising it. And I would also like to thank those who have no faith background who also help our communities. So, I thank the Minister, and I thank everyone for their hard work—it is a cause for celebration indeed.

Diolch yn fawr, Dai Lloyd, and thank you so much for your very positive, enthusiastic and sincere response to this statement, and I know how much it means to you personally as a lay preacher, a Senedd Member, a long-standing colleague, and recognising over the years how important the development of the Interfaith Council for Wales has been for Wales. In fact, I just wonder, Dai Lloyd, whether you were able to watch S4C's Dechrau Canu, Dechrau Canmol on Sunday night? It was about Interfaith Week, and there was a very interesting discussion about the links between devolution and interfaith communities. Many will have seen Aled Edwards, of course, speaking on these points, but also recognising how the interfaith council is celebrating Wales as a multi-ethnic country, and the asylum seeker Joseph Gnabo coming to Wales as an asylum seeker, making Wales his home and saying in Welsh on the programme, 'I feel safe here in Wales.' That programme is worth watching, if anyone hasn't had the opportunity to see it.

But I think it's important if I just say one word of thanks to the Faith Communities Forum and the reopening places of worship task and finish group. Because, very quickly, we convened the Faith Communities Forum, which I co-chair with the First Minister, and we've met four times in 2020—we don't usually meet so regularly. It's a valuable opportunity to see the concerns of different communities, because you have talked about the challenges for churches, chapels, mosques and temples, as we have done in those arenas in the Faith Communities Forum. So, the reopening places of worship task and finish group is a sub-group. They worked very closely with officials to help plan the safe reopening of places of worship. They've provided advice on the development of Welsh Government's guidance for places of worship. In fact, I met them during the recent firebreak lockdown, and it has been about hearing their concerns, but seeking the advice and guidance as we move and ease out of the restrictions. I think it has been formidable, the engagement and the learning from each other, from Muslim to Hindu to Christian to Jewish across that interfaith forum.

I will finally say that funding for faith groups is available through our third sector resilience fund. We have had a great many applications for this resilience fund, and the emergency fund as well, but also lots of councils' voluntary services at a council level—for you, it would be Swansea—have also had funding from the Welsh Government to help local groups as well. So, it's cascaded down through Welsh Government to the local level. But I have worked particularly hard to ensure that the communities facilities programme, that's that capital—and many of you know those capital grants are very much sought after for conversions of chapels, churches—I have opened this up to make sure that mosques and temples and non-Christian faith venues can access this. But they have particularly been looking at purchasing ICT equipment to allow staff and volunteers to work remotely to continue to deliver services and to, obviously, provide some of those kinds of equipment such as video-conferencing facilities. But I would be very happy, again, to give a bit more of an outline on how that funding, both revenue and capital, has reached our faith and non-faith groups in those community settings.

Can I thank the Deputy Minister for her statement and can I say you'll be pleased to know I'm not going to repeat anything that Dai Lloyd said, but I generally agree with everything he just said? As the Deputy Minister said, Interfaith Week celebrates the contribution people of faith across the country have made to our communities and the importance of some of the work done by our faith communities who don't make a fuss about it. They go out there and they do it. But the generosity of the faith community is phenomenal, and I just think of how much the small chapel I attend has collected for the foodbank, how much will be collected for Mr X in the next couple of weeks, how much is collected every time there's a call for money. It's phenomenal. These are not rich people, but these are people of faith who care about their fellow human being.

Will the Minister join with me in thanking those people in all the faith communities within Swansea East for their running of and support for foodbanks, without which many people would go hungry, and their support for schemes like Mr X in Swansea, which provides presents for children at Christmas who otherwise would not have anything at all? But the faith community stepped up to the plate, provides food, provides presents and helps people who are less fortunate than themselves, and in many cases, the people helping people less fortunate themselves are not amongst the most fortunate in society.

Thank you very much indeed, Mike Hedges, and I would like to say thank you for the generosity of all those in Swansea East, from your local chapel to all the other faith communities who have shown their generosity of faith, as you have said, in terms of responding to the coronavirus. We've had other examples of that in response to the flooding, as well, pre COVID—so often it was the churches and chapels who opened up their doors. I saw it in Llanhilleth, just on the terrible flooding before the lockdown. But I specifically want to just thank the people of Swansea East, because that's just one constituency, one area of Wales where we know that can be replicated across Wales. I particularly thank the people of your community, your chapel, not just for raising the money and the goods for foodbanks—and often, as you say, the ones who don't have the greatest resources are the ones who give first—but also for the scheme to provide presents for children at Christmas.

Caroline Jones.

Can I thank you also, Minister, for your statement—

No, Caroline Jones, sorry, not Darren Millar. Caroline Jones.

Pardon me. It asked me to unmute. I couldn't hear properly.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for your statement, Deputy Minister. Interfaith Week provides us with the opportunity to increase understanding between the faiths, and also with those with no religious beliefs at all. Deputy Minister, do you agree that interfaith disputes have been the root cause of the majority of armed conflicts, and increasing understanding is absolutely vital to avoiding conflict and loss of life? What role do you envision the Welsh Government playing in promoting understanding and awareness between the faiths as well as those in secular society? With a number of different faiths running in schools in Wales, how will the Welsh Government ensure that interfaith awareness will play a part of the religious teaching at those schools throughout the year? And finally, Deputy Minister, Interfaith Week is a great introduction to interfaith understanding and co-operation, but how will the Welsh Government ensure that this happens every week of the year, and not just one week in November? I too would like to give thanks to the faith community for always being there, not just as COVID has taken many lives and has been needed more than ever, but for coming together with the flooding and the foodbanks. Thank you so much to the faith community for always being there, particularly now. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much, Caroline Jones, for your support for Interfaith Week, which is not just for the week, as you say, it is for 365, the whole of the year. And we do embrace those principles and those values of understanding, sharing, tackling hate crime and raising awareness of the strength of our faith communities. I think what is very important is that we look to this when we start with our children and young people. In fact, I'll just say—very rarely do I say a personal thing, but my granddaughter, who is only two, was actually last week apparently listening to hear about Diwali, and that is at nursery level. It's early years through. We have a wonderful opportunity, of course, with our new curriculum to ensure that that celebration and understanding and awareness raising is embedded in our curriculum. But of course, it is about how we work together to ensure that we can see that this is the real opportunity, and the collective view and values of Wales. I think that will of course help us to address conflict, prejudice and particularly the issues that we are concerned about, with the impact of coronavirus, where so many have lost their opportunities, perhaps, in terms of faith gatherings, but actually have turned to each other and turned to the volunteers who come with faith and no faith to their doors to support them.

Thank you. And now Darren Millar.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I thank you, Minister, for your statement? I'm absolutely delighted that you're making a statement to mark Interfaith Week, and I very much hope that this will become an annual fixture on the Welsh Government's business in Plenary. As you've said, there has been significant disruption to faith communities during the pandemic, and the inability to meet in a place of worship has obviously caused significant hardship for many individuals who rely very much on that communication with other people in their congregations for their own spiritual strength. Clearly, it's been a very difficult time, but I'm glad that our places of worship are now back open and I very much have enjoyed being part of online services, but there's nothing like being back in a place of worship, being able to see people in the flesh in the same way that we're able to see people in the flesh in other walks of life. 

I think I just wanted to ask you, if I may: can you continue to assure the Senedd of the Welsh Government's ongoing support for chaplaincy—publicly funded chaplaincy services? We've seen, obviously, significant numbers of people who have experienced bereavement as a result of the coronavirus and, because of the pandemic, many people haven't even had the opportunity to say their final goodbyes to many of their relatives at the bedside in the way that they might have been able to at other times. So, clearly, bereavement services in particular are something that many hospital chaplains are able to provide to people, as first responders in many respects. And I would very much appreciate—I've always appreciated the support that the Welsh Government has given to NHS chaplaincy services, but I wonder whether you could just put on record today and join me in thanking those chaplains across Wales who have done such important work at what I'm sure has been a very difficult time for them and those that they've been supporting. 

In addition to that, you've made reference to the interfaith councils and the interfaith forum, and I also want to recognise them for their significant contribution to the faith communities and to the social life of Wales. But will you also join me in thanking those individuals who are also participating in the cross-party group on faith, who work so hard to ensure that topics that are of interest to the faith community are on the agenda for all of us in the Senedd, and to really make sure that we listen to that diversity of voices that comes from the faith community? It's been a pleasure to chair that cross-party group over the past 12 years, I think it is now. It never ceases to amaze or encourage me the way that people with very diverse opinions are able to get on and work together collaboratively in the interests of the people of Wales on that group. So I hope that you'll join me in thanking them for the contribution that they make. 

And one final question, if I may. The interfaith forum, which has been such a successful forum that's able to engage directly with the Welsh Government, I think would benefit greatly from an additional member, if I may say so, and that is in the form of a representative of Wales's pentecostal denominations. There are over 120 pentecostal churches from the three main pentecostal denominations here in Wales. They have over 17,000 people attending those congregations each year, and many of them do a great deal of good work in their local communities. I wonder, Minister, whether it's time now for the Welsh Government to recognise the significant contribution of the pentecostal denominations by affording them a seat at the table on the interfaith forum so that they can make a positive contribution in the way that they do in their communities to the nation of Wales and the good work that you and the Welsh Government are doing to improve faith relationships. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Darren Millar. Can I start by thanking you for the work that you do in chairing the cross-party group on faith? I also just recall that wonderful event that we had in the Senedd last year, a Holocaust Memorial Day event, where we all came, with the cross-party group very much leading that event, as you have done. I think it is important to just look at some of these difficult decisions that have been made with the restrictions. From 22 June, places of worship were able to open. Over the summer, restrictions were relaxed and types of activities were allowed to increase. But during the firebreak, of course, they were closed again for communal worship, but open for funerals, weddings and for broadcasting of services. As you say, so many are so pleased now that they're back open for communal worship, ceremonies including funerals and marriages, and supervised children's activities.394

You make an important point about bereavement services and the role of chaplains, which I'm sure has come to the fore in terms of our health service, and we need to look at that contribution. But I would like to mention the ceremonies group. This has been playing a very key part. It's a new name for a group that's looking at faith, burials and cremations, and it has now additional focus on weddings and similar events. And they've come together, again looking with faith leaders within Wales, and representatives of those of no faith, and community representatives, looking at the key issues in relation to the impact of coronavirus. And they have also looked, of course—they have been a sub-group of the COVID-19 moral and ethical advisory group.

You do make an important point about our faith communities forum, on which, actually, we were having a membership review just before the impact of the pandemic, and there are other parts of other faiths as well who are interested in coming. You've mentioned Pentecostal—and there are others who are interested in joining that. It is a very vibrant and sincere and close-knit group, and the interfaith forum feeds into our faith communities forum, which I chair.

But I want to just say that it's not just us as Ministers meeting them. Officials have met with members of the task and finish group regularly over the past six months, and they held online question and answer sessions, attracting up to 125 people to each, with faith leaders, and volunteers asking questions about practical issues that have been mentioned, about reopening buildings, cleaning and safe environments. So, I think there's a whole new understanding and awareness that has come as a result of not just the infrastructure we already had, that close working relationship, but how our faith communities, and those of no faith, and their communities and interests, have responded to the coronavirus.

I just have to finally say that it's just one of the ways in which we come back to some of the words that were said to me last week. In fact, this was from a Muslim, who said, 'With hardship comes ease, and with this comes unity'.

I thank the Deputy Minister. 

That brings us to item 7, the Representation of the People (Election Expenses Exclusion) (Wales) (Amendment) Order 2020, and I call on the Minister for Housing and Local Government to move the motion—Julie James. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm very pleased to bring this Order before you today, which will exclude from elections expenses costs that relate to a candidate's disability and Welsh translation of campaign materials.

Currently, any expenses incurred by a candidate, or a political party, as a result of reasonable adjustments relating to an impairment, such as the need for the provision of a British Sign Language interpreter, are included in either the candidate's expenses or the political party's overall campaign expenditure limits. By introducing this Order for Senedd and local government elections in Wales, disabled candidates will no longer be disadvantaged by having to declare the costs of their necessary support against their expense limits. The Order will also exclude from the expenses regime the cost of translating campaign materials to or from Welsh for candidates or political parties campaigning in devolved elections in Wales. This will support existing Welsh language legislation in ensuring that English and Welsh are treated equally.

The Welsh Government has considered many different sources of evidence in developing this policy, including its own Diversity in Democracy programme, the Senedd Commission's consultation paper 'Creating a Parliament for Wales' and UK and Scottish Government funding schemes for disabled candidates. Alongside our recently announced pilot access to elected office fund, which will support disabled candidates in Wales to stand for election, this Order will facilitate a more diverse democratic representation. More disabled candidates may be inclined to stand for election if spending on reasonable adjustments does not have to be included within their expenses limits.

This Order contributes to the well-being of future generations in Wales. It promotes equality, ensuring that elected representatives can reflect the diversity of the area that they serve. It supports the goal of a thriving Welsh language, by ensuring that translation costs are no longer a barrier to candidacy and bilingual campaigning. So I'm very pleased to bring this Order before you today, so that we might better support disabled candidates, improve democratic representation in the future, and facilitate the use of Welsh in the democratic process. Since laying the Order, we have been made aware of a minor non-operative correction that is required. Assuming the Order is passed today, the correction will be carried out before the Order is made. Therefore, it will not be incorrect when put into effect. I look forward to hearing the views of Members. Diolch.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Mick Antoniw. Can the microphone be unmuted? Yes. There you go.

There was a delay in the sign coming up. Diolch, Llywydd. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee considered the Order at our meeting on 19 October and our report contains only one merits point. As the Minister has outlined, the Order makes amendments to three items of election-related legislation. The amendments being made have the effect of exempting expenses relating to a candidate's disability, as she indicated, from a candidate's election expenses, for local government and for Senedd elections. The amendments also have the effect of excluding the costs incurred by or attributable to the translation of anything from English to Welsh, or vice versa, from both the candidate's expenses and a political party's campaign expenditure limits. This is in accordance with the principle that Welsh should be treated no less favourably than English, as provided by the Welsh Language Act 1993. Our merits point, a reporting point, noted the range of consultation undertaken by the Welsh Government on this Order, in particular the Government's consultation with the Electoral Commission. Diolch, Llywydd.

I have no other speakers on this item. Does the Minister wish to respond?

No.

Okay. The proposal is we agree the motion. Does any Member object? I see no objections, and therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 8 is our next item, and that is the LCM on the Non-Domestic Rating (Public Lavatories) Bill. I call on the Minister for finance to move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. I welcome this opportunity to explain the background for this legislative consent motion. I'm grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for considering the LCM, and for the report that it's produced. The committee considers there is no impediment to the Senedd agreeing to the legislative consent motion.

The UK Government introduced the Non-Domestic Rating (Public Lavatories) Bill on 18 March. A similar Bill was introduced in June 2019, and the legislative consent motion for that Bill was agreed in Plenary in July last year. That Bill fell when Parliament was prorogued. The new Bill is a short, single-purpose Bill, which will reduce the rates liability for stand-alone public lavatories to zero, from 1 April 2020. Due to the timing of the Bill, the changes it introduced will be applied retrospectively.

The provisions apply to all stand-alone public lavatories made available for public use, irrespective of who owns or operates the facilities. The Bill will also provide public health benefits, by reducing running costs and therefore reducing the risk of public toilets being closed. Closures could adversely affect groups such as older people, disabled people and people with young children. As this will contribute to our public health objectives in Wales, provisions for Wales were included in the Bill on introduction.

I believe these provisions fall within the legislative competence of the Senedd. However, as no suitable legislative vehicle is available to make these changes in Wales for implementation from April 2020, I'm content that these provisions should be made in a Bill covering England and Wales. I therefore move the motion and ask the Senedd to approve it.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Mick Antoniw.

Diolch, Llywydd. Another short report from the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. We considered this LCM at our meetings on 8 and 15 June, and subsequently laid our report on 17 June. Our report noted the Welsh Government's assessment of the provisions in the Bill that require Senedd consent and the Welsh Government's reasons as to why, in its view, making provision for Wales in the Bill is appropriate. We also noted the retrospective effect of the Bill as, once enacted, the legislation will have effect in relation to financial years beginning on or after 1 April 2020. Diolch, Llywydd.

I have no speakers in this item. I don't know whether the Minister wants to respond.

I'll just reiterate my thanks, Llywydd, to the committee for their work.

Okay. Thank you for doing that.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? I see no objections, and it's therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36. 

The next item is the debate on the second supplementary budget for 2020-21 and I call on the Minister for finance to move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

Due to the exceptional circumstances of this financial year as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, I published this interim supplementary budget to provide an update on the Welsh Government's fiscal position. It ensures that the Welsh Government's financial position remains transparent. I'd like to thank the Finance Committee for its consideration of this budget and for the publication of its report and I'm pleased to note that it welcomes the transparency afforded to the Senedd in bringing forward this additional supplementary budget. I will provide a detailed response to each of the committee's recommendations in due course.

The purpose of this supplementary budget is to reflect the changes that have arisen as a result of the measures taken to respond to the immediate impact of the pandemic since the first supplementary budget was published in May. It includes allocations from reserves agreed since the first supplementary budget that relate to the acute end of the crisis, consequentials due as a result of UK Government announcements in respect of COVID interventions including the funding guarantee, and revisions to the land transaction tax forecast and block grant adjustment for stamp duty land tax, arising from the temporary changes to these taxes.

This supplementary budget increases the overall Welsh resources by £2.5 billion. This is a further 11 per cent increase on the position set out in the first supplementary budget some five months ago. Since the final budget was approved in March 2020, Welsh resources fro 2020-21 have increased by more than 22 per cent. In response to the immediate impact of the coronavirus pandemic, this supplementary budget allocates over £1.5 billion, including £800 million for an NHS stabilisation package to help the Welsh NHS to continue to respond to the impact of COVID-19.

We recognise the massive and unprecedented challenges the pandemic is having on our health service here in Wales. This funding will support NHS organisations across Wales to prepare for the anticipated challenges that winter will bring, responding to a second wave of the virus alongside normal winter pressures whilst continuing to further increase access to essential services. This funding takes the total amount of Welsh Government COVID-19 support for NHS organisations to more than £1.3 billion and £264 million has been allocated to support local authorities for the remainder of this financial year. This will meet the ongoing need for additional support in response to the pandemic, covering the additional costs, loss of income and the general financial position of local authorities.

Fifty-three million pounds has been provided for the cultural recovery fund to help support and sustain the sector during the ongoing challenges resulting from the pandemic, £113 million has been allocated to ensure train services continue to operate on the Wales and borders network for key workers and others who rely on the train to travel, and £50 million to support Welsh university and college students to provide skills and learning in response to the economic impact of the virus.

The focus of this budget is to ensure that the Welsh Government's financial position is transparent. Whilst we continue to respond to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic, it is right that I bring an update in the form of this supplementary budget before the Senedd at this time. We are the only Government within the UK to have published a second update to our in-year budget and to provide transparency of our funding decisions in this way. 

Of course, the fiscal position continues to change. On 6 October, I announced a further substantial package of funding, totalling £320 million, to help people and businesses to survive the challenging times ahead, when, only a few weeks ago, the UK Government announced a further increase of £600 million to the additional funding guaranteed for this year. I continue to carefully monitor our financial position, and will table a third supplementary budget, reflecting all of these changes, later in the year, and I ask Members to support this motion. 

Chair of the Finance Committee, Llyr Gruffydd. 

Thank you, Llywydd, and I'm pleased to contribute to this debate today on behalf of the committee. The committee met on 2 November to discuss the Welsh Government’s second supplementary budget for 2020-21. One of the things we do is to recognise that this supplementary budget is unusual in its timing, but, of course, as the Minister has already mentioned, we do welcome the transparency afforded to us in the Senedd by bringing forward this additional budget.

Many of our recommendations cover the issue of transparency. The UK Government, of course, has offered a funding guarantee. But when the UK Government makes new announcements, it's not clear whether these will lead to additional funding for Wales. Whilst there are clearly transparency issues with UK Government funding, we've also called for greater transparency from the Welsh Government, and have sought further details on a few specifics. First of all, more detail on funding for decommissioning the Dragon’s Heart Hospital; second, we've asked for breakdowns of funding provided to NHS organisations and claimed by local authorities; we've also requested details on the level of funding accessed by transport providers and expectations for further funding for the sector; and, fourthly, further details on the Welsh Government’s reserves to support COVID recovery and the end of the EU transition period.

Now, clearly, battling COVID is the immediate priority, but the end of the EU transition period is nearly upon us, and we must focus on this too. We need certainty over funding and we have pressed the Welsh Government to try and obtain details on the shared prosperity fund, and to have those details as a matter of urgency. 

Finally, the Minister stressed the need for end-of-year flexibility, and we fully support this request. We cannot predict the path COVID will take, and having flexibility, in terms of borrowing limits and reserves, would help the Welsh Government in its planning. Thank you. 

Thank you, Gweinidog, for your statement. The second supplementary budget allocates over £1.5 billion and sets out £1 billion of unallocated funding, as we saw on the Finance Committee. We do, of course, welcome—I know you've recognised—additional funding from the UK Government. Given your comments in Plenary on 6 October, that there did remain uncertainty over that level of funding, I wonder if you can confirm to us, Minister, whether there's greater clarity on that funding now, particularly in relation to the guarantee and particularly in relation to additional allocations for the pandemic.

We welcome recommendation 3 of the report, which asks for a breakdown of the £1.3 billion provided to NHS organisations for COVID-19 and a breakdown of the stabilisation package that you mentioned. You've previously said, or perhaps it's the health Minister who said, that the write-off of the NHS health boards' debt was dependent on them breaking even this year. I think I'm right in saying that. So, I wonder if you could confirm that we are on course for, at least this year, breaking even.

Can I ask you about the guarantee of funding for Wales? You said previously that it lacked transparency, but you were expecting some more details from the UK Government and the Treasury. Have you had any of those details yet? I'm pleased that the Treasury is now trying to help provide you with a bit more certainty. That was certainly welcomed and recognised as important by the Finance Committee, and I did like, to quote your phrase, that,

'the guarantee is a better problem than the one we had previously'

which is a good way of putting it. I know that the guarantee does answer many questions, but, of course, it raises questions as well.

Turning to the biggest slice of the budget—health—the first supplementary budget increased allocations by £481.2 million compared to the final budget. I understand that this budget increases allocations by £901.5 million. I'd be grateful if you could confirm this. You're working with the health service, you say, to better understand the requirements for personal protective equipment. This is, obviously, with the pandemic, a very important aspect of the health budget at the moment. Do you have any specific figures? I know you're liaising with health boards, but do you have any specific figures about the allocations which are being provided for PPE at this time?

In terms of local government, on 17 August, the Minister announced additional funding of £264 million. There's now a further £306.6 million for the local authority hardship fund. How are you ensuring that this is fairly distributed and will be well spent by local authorities? I think that's an important thing for us to see.

And just finally, Presiding Officer, moving on to the issue raised previously about funding flexibility, and in response to the £1.2 billion UK Government guarantee. I appreciate the Treasury has not provided some of the budget flexibilities that you required, but you have received considerable amounts of funding, and I know that your requirement now to want to veer over capital and revenue funding isn't so necessary because of that additional support that has been received from the UK Government. You also have a range of fiscal tools at your disposal, more than ever before in Wales. Key to that is tax-raising powers. This does give you a certain amount of flexibility. So, do you recognise that, with powers does come accountability and responsibility, and flexibility isn't just something that needs to be provided at the other end of the M4 by the Treasury—it's also something that should be at the heart of the Welsh Government's budget-setting process? We are living in new times, with the pandemic and with greater powers. Let's look more at the flexibility that we have here in Wales to deal with some of the issues that we're faced with here. Diolch.

Thank you to the Minister for this afternoon's statement. This is an unprecedented year, of course, and I do realise and understand the pressures on Ministers and officials in dealing with fiscal issues in very difficult circumstances. May I also thank the Finance Committee for its report? I'm happy to endorse the recommendations made by the committee. Many of them are extremely important, including the need to improve the way in which information is shared on the budget at a time when the fact that the picture is changing so very rapidly and significantly can make it difficult to assess what's sometimes going on in terms of budget allocations. The committee is seeking clarity and a better analysis of a number of areas of expenditure from funding to local authorities, to funding to transport companies, and so on.

But there is also encouragement for the Government to continue to push for more freedom and fiscal flexibility and, as I've done on a number of other occasions, would give my support to the Minister in pursuing this issue further with the UK Government and the Treasury. This is something that I and Plaid Cymru have been emphasising regularly because we do believe that any normal nation should have that kind of flexibility, and I referred to it earlier today in my response to the statement on the mutual investment model. I don't think Wales as an independent nation, with the freedoms provided to independent nations, would need to use such a fiscal model at the moment given the favourable circumstances in terms of borrowing.

But to return to the present and this pandemic, having greater flexibility in terms of borrowing limits and in terms of using reserves is more important than ever now in terms of the ability to respond to the pandemic itself, but also to plan the recovery and the major investment that will be required for that recovery in time to come. And, of course, that lack of flexibility is reflected in the amount of unallocated funding included in the second supplementary budget.

What we have here is a Government that is uncertain in terms of its budget in future years, doesn't have flexibility to make its own decisions, and has to keep significant reserves, and if the Government knew that they had the ability to borrow, to carry funds over from year to year, then they could take a different approach to reserves in that scenario.

A few specific points on what's included, or rather what's not included: there are still sectors of business who cannot access support, particular pressures on businesses that can't operate at all and still face significant standing costs, and I would encourage the use of budgets to very carefully target those companies that are slipping through the net at the moment, including a number of hospitality companies who have a high rateable value, and are considered to be large companies, but in fact, they're relatively small, local companies, who haven't been able to access support to date.

To other issues not related to COVID—well, this is a COVID issue, actually—but there's no change in the allocation for the fuel poverty programme despite the fact that people will still have to self-isolate at home with the potential of seeing increased bills. Is this something that the Government has considered?

And one that isn't related to COVID: there is no additional funding for Natural Resources Wales for flood management specifically. We've suffered flooding in my constituency over recent years, and a number of other areas of Wales have suffered very badly over the last 12 months, including Rhondda Cynon Taff, and Conwy. Is there any intention to increase expenditure in that area in such a challenging year? I think people do need to know that the Government is doing everything it can to try and prevent those additional pressures on their communities that could emerge as a failure to manage flooding.

Can I thank the Minister for her statement? My second supplementary budget speeches for the last nine years have up until now been very similar, and also very short. The second supplementary budget traditionally dealt with small in-year changes, and very little has happened. That is definitely not the case this year.

Some general comments. I do not underestimate the difficulty in dealing with a budget in these difficult times. Not only for the Welsh Government, but also health boards, councils, and other public bodies like Natural Resources Wales. I welcome the transparency afforded to the Senedd in bringing forward this additional supplementary budget, and believe the approach of additional supplementary budgets in extraordinary years needs to continue. I am pleased that the Finance Minister was able to confirm in the Finance Committee that the money announced by the Westminster Government equated to the money expected by the Welsh Government, because we had some concerns initially that the Welsh Government and the Westminster Government were not talking about the same sums, but that has apparently now ended, and we are talking about the same amounts. That was obviously a cause for concern, because Westminster announcements need to be partly the same as the receipts by the Welsh Government. The agreement now makes budgeting much easier.

One thing I'm not convinced of is the Welsh Government having two reserves: the general uncommitted expenditure and the health reserve held by the health Minister. I would urge the Welsh Government to hold all uncommitted expenditure centrally. This is not about taking money out of health, or giving money to health; it's about transparency and knowing where money is and how it's being taken out. I remember those Members in budget debates in previous Senedd budget meetings, who would urge councils to use their reserves when they were needed. This is the bad time. I would argue now is the time reserves are needed in the councils, which ignored the previous advice, made the right decision. If they thought that was a bad time, I'm not sure what this is, but this would be an extremely very bad time.

Welsh Government needs to provide a breakdown of the funding claimed by each local authority against the additional funding the Welsh Government has made available. Also, a report on council projected reserves, excluding schools' delegated budgets, would be helpful, and an update on schools' delegated budgets and the number projected to go into deficit this year would also be helpful. And this is only anecdotal, but I know a number of schools in my own constituency who have concerns about going into a budget deficit during this year, because of all sorts of things that have happened over which they've had no control. I believe we will need of a third supplementary budget in the new year, possibly a fourth, to deal with things such as further details on any subsequent funding for track, trace and protect, particularly the protect element of the strategy, as well as further business support payments. It would be helpful to have a table of how reserves have been earmarked, in terms of what has been allocated to the COVID-19 reserve, what the unallocated reserves are, when they are likely to be allocated, and where the money is expected to be spent—e.g. is it on health, by health boards, or on economic support, or in other areas?

And what is available for the end of the EU transition period, and what has been considered to be the priority for this expenditure? A 'no deal' Brexit could cause serious problems to some areas of the Welsh economy, such as sheep farming. If farmers have European Union tariffs, that will have a huge effect on sheep farmers—tariffs would vary between about 30 and 60 per cent, so they would have very little European market. China, which is the biggest sheep market, as I mentioned last week—they have already got free-trade agreements with New Zealand and Australia, so we may well have serious problems with that.

And—it was mentioned earlier by Rhun ap Iorwerth—what reserves are in place in the event of another winter producing the flooding that we had this year? We are seeing climate change, we're seeing additional flooding. We've probably seen more flooding in the first 20 years of this century than in the first 50 or 60 years of the last century. We are seeing substantial flooding, so these will need to be dealt with.

These are difficult times, and I know there are always more claims than there are financial resources available—that's why we have a Minister for Finance. COVID has just made this all the more difficult. I support the supplementary budget, but, as I say, I don't expect it to be the last supplementary budget in this financial year, and I commend the Minister on the openness of bringing these supplementary budgets to us.

The Minister to respond to the debate—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. This second supplementary budget is an important part of the budget process, but, as Mike Hedges says, it is a very, very different supplementary budget to the one that we would normally bring forward in a more regular year.

Following scrutiny, approval of this supplementary budget will authorise the revised spending plans of the Welsh Government and, crucially, it will allow cash to be drawn down from the Welsh consolidated fund to support that spending, so I thank Members for their contributions and for their support today. Some of the comments that I'd like to respond directly to relate to the supplementary budget and the fact that this is the second—.

Sorry, I can't concentrate, Llywydd, with the discussions going on on the—

Yes, I'm sorry.

—Conservative benches.

Two-metre distancing and chit-chatting doesn't work in the Chamber, so if you can refrain from doing so. Sorry.

Thank you, Llywydd. 

Minister.

Okay. So, as I was saying, of course, this supplementary budget looks back at the spending that has been undertaken. And I'm very keen to bring forward that third supplementary budget, to which some colleagues have referred, in order to be very clear about the additional spending that will take place throughout the rest of the financial year. However, we have a really important opportunity next week, when we have the spending review reporting on 25 November, to have those discussions about thinking forward for the budget for the future year as well, and certainly some of the contributions were very much along the lines of spend that we would like to see, and colleagues would like to see, happen in the next financial year. 

There were a number of comments and questions regarding our unallocated resources. The figures published in our extraordinary supplementary budget stand at levels before the announcement of the £320 million reconstruction package and the actions that we're taking for the firebreak. And I think this really does reflect the significant pace and scale of the changes that we're facing in responding to the pandemic and, alongside the decisions that we need to take in response to that on a very frequent and fast-paced basis, I'll be providing formal details on those in our third supplementary budget.

But responding to the point on provision of any further funding from reserves for other items of spend, for example, we've made some provision, should a further firebreak be needed, to be able to support businesses to a similar level. And of the £1.6 billion that has been unallocated, £924 million is held in the reserve that is created for the pandemic response, and, of that, we've already allocated £240 million, including funding for the firebreak, and the remaining balance is set aside for future costs associated with the pandemic. We have a further £280 million set aside for other revenue costs outside of the current plans, and our capital reserves within that £1.6 billion total £250 million, but, of course, we have already committed that balance to the pandemic recovery projects in the remainder of the year, and you will remember that I issued a statement on this fairly recently, and my colleague the Minister with responsibility for European transition has also made some comments on this in terms of the work he was doing on the reconstruction effort across Government.

So, just turning to some of the specific areas where there is a high degree of interest, one is the £800 million package of support for the NHS in order to help it stabilise and prepare for the anticipated challenges that the next few months will bring. You'll see that reflected in this supplementary budget, alongside £45 million for the COVID-19 contact tracing workforce, £22 million to meet adult care social providers' costs in relation to healthcare that they provide for the second six months of the year, and also funding to support unpaid carers, funding to support the childcare offer, and funding to support the new Cardiff and Vale COVID-19 facility to manage any potential increases there over the course of the winter.

And of course, all of that is reflected in the supplementary budget, alongside the additional funding for housing and local government, where I know there's also a great deal of interest. So, that includes £264 million for local authorities to support them for the remainder of this financial year, and it includes funding for, again, adult social care providers, funding to ensure that the local government hardship fund is able to meet the needs of local authorities, and funding to ensure that local authorities are not badly impacted by the impact of COVID-19 on council tax applications and the extension of the council tax reduction scheme to people who haven't previously been claiming for it.

So, those are several of the things that are reflected in this particular supplementary budget. This year, undoubtedly, is one of uncertainty, and the extra funding that we've received from the UK Government has been essential to help us deal with the immediate response to the crisis, but we do need consistent and sustained investment above existing pre-COVID levels to deal with the long-term impacts of the pandemic on services, businesses and individuals, and the UK Government will have the opportunity to provide that in the comprehensive spending review next week.

I've been really clear as well that our response to the pandemic is not just an immediate response to the direct health harms caused by the pandemic itself, but it's also about alleviating the wider impacts caused by the unprecedented social and economic measures that we've taken to protect people's lives and reduce the spread of the virus. A significant focus of the action that we've taken has been on preventing harm to the most disadvantaged and preventing wider negative impacts on the people of Wales and the wider economy. We've evolved and collaborated across the public services, the private sector and the third sector at pace in developing and delivering the interventions to respond to this pandemic.

The First Minister has also outlined, given the speed at which things can change and the nature of the virus that we face, that we can't offer any kind of guarantee as to what the future might hold. But what we can say is that the economy is now in one of the deepest recessions in living memory, with uncertainty over the shape and the pace of the economic recovery and a lack of clarity over future trading relations with the European Union impacting on people and businesses. Public services in Wales are still responding to the pandemic, as well as now facing longer term impacts, so it's really imperative that the UK Government continues its substantive fiscal and economic interventions using its macro-economic levers, including welfare benefits, taxation and support schemes. The UK Government should continue to borrow while interest rates are lower than before the crisis, and are actually lower than the rate of inflation, because it's the only way to protect the economy's capacity to produce the goods and services that we need to emerge from the crisis.

So, Llywydd, the measures in this supplementary budget are by no means the end of the story. As I said, last month I announced an investment package of £320 million for projects and schemes over the next six months to maximise the impact of our available resources this financial year to support our recovery, and those, of course, include our support for young people, who were so badly affected by the lockdown, including additional catch-up support for learners in years 11, 12 and 13; capital investment, for example in low-carbon housing, schools and primary care, to create and safeguard jobs, deliver homes and better public services; and tackling inequalities, particularly in respect of BAME people who have been severely impacted by COVID-19. So, we will continue to closely monitor and assess the position in Wales, and I will bring forward that third supplementary budget before the Senedd before the end of the financial year.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections, and I will therefore defer voting until voting time.

We will now take a short break whilst there are changeovers in the Chamber, and we will recommence in a few moments.

So, we move to the proposal under Standing Order 12.24 to debate agenda items 10 and 11 together, but with separate voting. In accordance with Standing Order 12.24, that's what I propose. I don't see any objections. Does any Member have any objection? No. Therefore, we will, as I say, debate the two regulations but vote separately.

Can I now call on the Minister for Health and Social Services to move the regulations? Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the motions before us for the relevant sets of regulations.

We introduced the firebreak as we believed that we had to act early and decisively in the face of a real and increasing public health threat from a virus that was spreading across our nation and threatening to overwhelm our NHS. We won’t see the full impact of the firebreak for another week or two, but there are encouraging signs that it has broken chains of transmission, leading to falling numbers of positive new cases. That is particularly clear in areas of high incidence, such as Rhondda Cynon Taf, Blaenau Gwent and Merthyr Tydfil.

We made a promise to the people of Wales that this firebreak was going to be sharp but short, and that is a promise that we kept. We also promised that we would come out of the firebreak with a new set of national measures that would be as simple, fair and clear as possible. National restrictions are simpler and easier for people to follow, but, as we have seen, coronavirus can flare up rapidly in a local area, and, if it does, there are a range of local actions that could be taken in those areas.

However, more important than any rules, regulations or guidance is the way that each one of us responds to the virus. Our new laws will only be successful if we all do our best to reduce our exposure to the virus by keeping the contacts we have with other people to a minimum at home, in work and when we go out. There is only so much that any Government can do. Our communications effort will continue to focus on asking people to think carefully about their choices and actions and the consequences that those will have.

As with the first lockdown, we have taken a cautious approach, relaxing restrictions gradually. None of us should want to lose the hard-won gains that we are now starting to see reflected from the firebreak. We continue to try to take a balanced and equitable approach to rules on meeting people indoors, tightening where we have to do, relaxing where we can, so that people in different personal circumstances can benefit. This is not easy and it cannot fit neatly with every situation. Two households can now form an extended household or bubble. We know that there is a high risk of transmission when people are at their most relaxed and at home. We listened to people, especially young people, who told us that the rules on household bubbles didn't always work for them and that meeting people outside their homes is important for their well-being. We have therefore enabled up to four people from different households to meet outdoors in regulated places like pubs, bars, cafes and restaurants. At the same time, we all have to remember that this is a legal maximum not a target number. As I said, we're relying on the choices that people make and asking people to consider the risks and meet as few as possible and, if possible, to meet the same people each time.

In relation to organised activity, up to 15 people can take part in indoor activity and up to 30 outdoors, as long as all COVID safety measures are followed. This should help people who are unable to take part in activities remotely. The word 'organised' is key here, as activities can only take place if a responsible body such as a management committee of a community centre has done a risk assessment and put in place all of the appropriate mitigating measures.

Another change is there are no longer any travel restrictions inside Wales as infection has ceded across the nation. But during the month-long lockdown in England, travel will not be permitted outside Wales without a reasonable excuse. Members will be aware that, in June, the Welsh Government made provisions in the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel) (Wales) Regulations 2020 to ensure that travellers entering Wales from certain countries and territories must isolate for 14 days and provide their contact details. Since then, we have, together with other UK nations, reviewed and amended the list of exempt countries and territories every week, and we review the regulations themselves every 28 days. The most stringent restriction is on people from Denmark, who are now refused entry into Wales and the UK following the discovery of a new mutated strain of coronavirus in mink. As a precautionary measure, we took the most restrictive approach within the UK—isolation requirements for people who came back from Denmark before the ban.

Moving away from travel to education, all schools, colleges and universities have reopened. We've provided schools with further guidance and support on blended and online learning provision for classes or groups required to self-isolate. Businesses, sports facilities, museums and cinemas have all reopened, as did local authority services and places of worship. It is hugely important, though, that people work from home where it is possible.

We recognise the terrible impact that this virus is continuing to have on the Welsh economy. The latest unemployment and GDP statistics, published last week, are stark. That is why we mobilised a significant package for businesses during the firebreak. However, what would help them most and what we and they can all help to achieve is a period of stability where businesses can trade up to Christmas. If we can achieve this, we will see fewer people falling ill and fewer families losing loved ones. Nobody can guarantee that tighter restrictions won't be necessary in the future. However, if we all play our part and reduce our contacts, we will give ourselves the best chance for a positive festive season. The news about the vaccine is encouraging, but it is not a magic bullet. We will have many months before we're able to deploy a vaccine successfully across the whole population. Coronavirus is still with us; now is not the time for us to go back to normal and undo all the hard work that we have achieved together during the firebreak. I ask Members to support the motions before us.

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

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. In respect of items 10 and 11 taken together, as Members will know, the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 3) (Wales) Regulations 2020 expired on 8 November. From 9 November, the No. 4 regulations impose the restrictions and requirements in response to public health risks arising from coronavirus. And Members will also be aware that the No. 4 regulations must be reviewed by 19 November, at least once between 20 November and 3 December, then again at least one time between 4 December and 17 December, followed by at least once every 21 days after that. The No. 4 regulations will expire on 19 February 2021, unless revoked before that date.

The committee considered the No. 4 regulations at our meeting yesterday and our report identified four merits points. The first three noted the justification for any potential interference with human rights, that there has been no formal consultation on the regulations and that only a summary integrated impact assessment has been prepared. Our fourth merits point asked the Welsh Government to set out the evidence that showed that restrictions and requirements should be imposed on a pan-Wales basis. In particular, we asked for evidence to show why areas of Wales with the highest prevalence of COVID-19 should be subject to the easing of restrictions and requirements upon the expiry of the No. 3 regulations. For example, according to data published by Public Health Wales, the number of cases per 100,000 population for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhondda Cynon Taf were the highest in Wales on 9 November. We note the Welsh Government's response to this point, which was received yesterday after we met. It advises that the evidence for adopting a national approach included data, coupled with advice from the chief medical officer, showing that COVID-19 infections in Wales are geographically widespread, with the majority of local authority areas experiencing increasing trends in confirmed case incidents and percentage of positive testing episodes for COVID-19.

I turn now to the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel and Restrictions) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2020, which we also considered and reported on yesterday. These regulations extend the existing restrictions relating to persons travelling to Wales from Denmark. Members will be aware that, from 4 a.m. on 7 November, both the returning traveller and any member of their household will now be required to isolate for 14 days.

Our report identified four technical points relating to defective drafting and inconsistency between the meaning of the English and the Welsh texts. We note the Welsh Government's response to these points, which was received after we met. It advises of the drafting errors that have been rectified and notes that this is being achieved through the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel and Restrictions) (Amendment) (No. 2) (Wales) Regulations 2020, which were made and laid before the Senedd on 13 November 2020. The Welsh Government's response also advises that there has been no need for recourse to the relevant enforcement powers nor the criminal offence provisions prior to the corrections being made.

Our two merits points on the No. 4 regulations noted the lack of consultation on the regulations and raised an issue on human rights. On this point, we noted that the regulations prescribed a more limited set of circumstances in which persons may temporarily leave isolation than are applicable to persons required to isolate other than by reason of having arrived in Wales from Denmark. We therefore ask the Welsh Government to explain the reasoning for this increased interference with individual rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European charter of fundamental rights. In its response, the Welsh Government said that the health risks presented by the possibility of importing a new strain of coronavirus into Wales are, in the Welsh Government's opinion, so severe that the increased interference in the rights of a very small cohort of individuals is proportionate in pursuit of the legitimate aim of protecting public health in Wales, and we just draw these comments to the attention of the Senedd. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

On the regulations this afternoon, from the Conservative point of view, we will be abstaining on the first set of regulations that are covered in agenda item 10, and we will be supporting agenda item 11 with the travel restrictions when it comes to Denmark. If I could trouble the Minister, maybe, to give us an update on the Denmark situation. As the Chair of the constitution and legal affairs committee highlighted, the troubling news coming from Denmark some two weeks ago that gave rise to these restrictions was that there was potential for a new strain of COVID-19 to be developing in Denmark. Since these restrictions have come in, I can't recall much mention of how progress is going on to contain the new strain, and I think it would be a matter of public interest if the Minister did have information, so that he could update us on that situation in respect of the restrictions that have been put in place for Denmark.

In respect of agenda item 10, which is the undoing of the lockdown, firebreak—call it what you will—obviously, we did not support the original restrictions that were put in place, but we do have concerns in relation to the lifting of those restrictions, namely the travel restrictions that are contained and which do not allow extended households to stay with each other if they go on holiday, for example, yet they can stay in each other's homes if they're part of the extended household. This seems to be contradictory advice, and I'd be grateful to understand why the Minister has sought to keep this regulation given the damage that it is continuing to do to the Welsh tourism sector, when we talk about the economic damage that has been done by some of these restrictions that have been brought forward earlier by the Welsh Government.

Secondly, our concern that leads us to abstain on these regulations is in relation to the national travel guidance that is now available—that people can move from high infection rates to low infection rates—when, at least since the end of August, the beginning of September, all Government advice has been supposedly led by the science, which has brought localised measures in to restrict travel movements. This seems to fly contrary to all the advice that the Government has been giving out since the start of the pandemic, and I'd be grateful again to understand what scientific advice the First Minister, or indeed the health Minister, has when introducing these national guidelines around travel, considering now it is appropriate for people, with infection rates in the hundreds per 100,000, to travel anywhere within Wales to lower infection rates. This does seem to be contrary to everything that's gone on prior to these new regulations being laid, and so I'd be grateful, in his response, if the Minister could come forward with the scientific advice that supports these regulations. Thank you.

I will start with agendum 11. I have no further comments to make on it, other than to say that we will be supporting that sensible change to the regulations.

In turning now to item 10, we will also vote in favour of these regulations, because I do believe they put in place a reasonable set of fundamental rules—the minimum that we could expect anyone to face in Wales at the moment, given that we are still living through a very dangerous pandemic. Nobody, at this moment in time, should be looking forward to normal life within days; it will be months before that can happen. Despite the positive news on a vaccine, it’s some time until we can deliver that.

So, in these regulations, yes, there are some reasonable rules that apply to everyone, but I still can’t see the other regulations that I would wish to see the Government presenting to us, explaining what that higher level would be in areas where we know that prevalence is far greater. We know where those areas are—many are in the south Wales Valleys. What we’re asking for is a higher level of support for those areas in order for them to help themselves by ensuring that there is additional support available to enable people to isolate when they need to do so, and that they are given financial support to do so, where there is support for people through the introduction of swifter testing, where there is universal testing happening across those areas too. So, that’s what’s missing, to my mind, and I am still seeking that, although, as I have said, we will be supporting these regulations because, in terms of their application across Wales, they are quite right.

The one thing I would note is that these regulations will be in place until February unless amended. Can I also seek an assurance again, although the Minister’s made reference to this on a number of occasions, that different regulations will be in place over Christmas that will allow families, hopefully, to be able to come together at that time, because it is so very important to well-being? There are many layers to the dangers of this pandemic, and one, of course, is the very real health risks of the virus, but there are also risks arising from well-being and loneliness issues as people continue to be apart. Over Christmas, people need that support of coming together.

Minister, you said that one single set of national regulations was easier for people to understand and increased compliance. How much more that would be true if it were a single national UK set of regulations, rather than one specifically for Wales intended to divide Wales from England. You exploit devolution, described by the Prime Minister as one of his predecessor’s worst mistakes, to state build. The most obvious example of that in these regulations, set four, is the imposition of a border, and enforcement of that, between Wales and England without reference to public health considerations or the level of prevalence of the virus. Constituents from Merthyr can go to Monmouth without any restrictions, despite the very high, still, I’m afraid, level of prevalence of the virus within Merthyr. However, people from Ross-on-Wye cannot go to Monmouth, despite the far lower level of prevalence there. Similarly, people from Monmouth cannot go to Hereford or Ross-on-Wye, because they’re in England and we’re in Wales and because these regulations use that to try to enforce difference, to try to state build and to try to separate more and more Wales from England by using—[Interruption.] Because I believe in the United Kingdom.

Having said that, may I say, for the international travel regulations, I would like to congratulate Ministers on this one, because there seems to be a huge improvement in how these have been set out? There used to be different announcements on the same day or the following day from three or four different administrations with very, very slightly different rules for different countries around the world, all inspected, judged and assessed independently and in a conflicting way, and then announced through the media, confusing everyone and reducing compliance. That has greatly improved with this new process of a 28-day review and all countries deciding together, such that the nations decide on a UK basis, which I think is a great improvement. Similarly, I trust you’re able to deliver a similar approach to Christmas regulations in the way that’s been suggested. Thank you.

Thank you. I have no Members who have requested to make an intervention, despite the fact that there have been mutterings from certain quarters of the Chamber, which is unfair to those people who are on virtually, and this is supposed to be an equality Senedd. So I will ask you just to think about that. So I now call on the Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate. Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I won’t trouble myself with the deliberately offensive comments of the last speaker, and the factually incorrect comments.

I thank the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their scrutiny and for the summary of that scrutiny in his contributions. We continue to take seriously the points they raise and it does lead to changes in drafting. I think it’s a good thing that we do then respond to the merits points that they raise. Even if we don’t always agree there is, I think, a clear explanation of the differing positions, and I think that’s important.

I note the agreement from the Welsh Conservatives on the restrictions in respect of Denmark. The four Governments within the United Kingdom have met again. I participated in those meetings. We’ve had conversations between our respective chief medical officer departments. We’ve agreed to maintain and review the position in Denmark in another two weeks’ time. That’s because we should then have more evidence about how successful those restrictions in Denmark have been, but also to have more evidence on the epidemiology and the sharing of information. I should say the Government of Denmark, I think, have been responsible and very good partners in identifying the issue and acting promptly and working with us and other countries.

I find myself in an odd position with Conservatives who were originally opposed to travel restrictions but who are now concerned over the lifting of the restrictions that they opposed in the first place. But, as Andrew R.T. Davies knows, we set out previously and indeed in my contribution again today that coronavirus is seeded across the country. We said that before the firebreak, when that was doubted by Conservatives. We then saw rates increase in every county of the country despite the stay at home measures that people observed.

The national measures are easy to follow. That's the advice we had from our scientific committee, the technical advisory cell. That was set out in the report beforehand, but also in the regular summaries that we're providing each week as well. That also set out that local restrictions had made a difference, but that a network of different local measures were no longer coherent, and people were finding it more difficult to follow the guidance. And, again, we need to move away from a wholly rules-based approach and actually get to where people behave, and encourage people to think differently and behave differently, because that is going to be essential to us in terms of our combating of the virus before, in the months ahead—and it is months ahead—we do expect to get a vaccine.

On Rhun ap Iorwerth's points, a number of points he made are really policy questions in terms of the support. Of course, we're having a debate tomorrow with a range of suggestions, but the £500 payment applications have started this week. They're going to be backdated to the start of the firebreak, 23 October, so progress is being made. I expect to make more progress on testing policy over the next week or so, and I'll confirm that in a statement to Members. Now, that, of course, doesn't require a change in the regulations; that's actually a policy and implementation matter.

In terms of the longer term challenges, we do need to see—. We said before that it'll take two to three weeks from the end of the firebreak to understand where we are, and then to see if we do need to take additional measures in any other part of Wales. And I tried to set that out again in opening today. So, it's not a matter that we have simply put from our minds. It's always possible we'll need to come back to this. And that brings me back to Christmas. And, again, I note what Rhun ap Iorwerth said in his contribution, that this is a dangerous pandemic. This is indeed a dangerous pandemic. It's a highly infectious virus that is taking lives in every single community across the country. The vaccine is in the future. It is not in the here and now. The choices we make in the here and now will come back to us in the next few weeks. So, the choices we make about the people we see and the contact we have with them, the time we spend with them, make a huge difference. The vaccine is not a cause to loosen our grip and throw away the gains that we've made. And our foresight, and looking ahead to the festive season at the end of the year, should make us all think about what we're prepared to do, because if we can't collectively do the right thing together, then, actually, we may find ourselves in a position that, before we get to the middle of December, the virus may have taken off again and caused such harm that there may be a need to intervene further. That is not what the Government wants to see happen. We want to see people take responsibility and to think about their choices, to measure their own risk and the risk they present to other people, because if we can't do that together, then we will be faced and potentially forced into making really difficult and unpleasant choices. And I do not want to intervene in people's lives any more than I have to to keep the country safe.

So, I thank Members for their contributions in today's debate. I commend both sets of regulations to Members and ask you to support them. 

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion under item 10. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I see an objection. Okay, thank you. Therefore, we defer voting under this item until voting time. 

The proposal is to agree the motion under item 11. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I do see an objection to item 11. Therefore, we defer that voting until voting time. 

Item 12 on the agenda is the Statutory Instrument Consent Memorandum on the European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, and I call on the Counsel General and the Minister for European Transition to move the motion. Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome this opportunity to explain the background to this statutory instrument consent motion relating to the European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020. I’d also like to thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their scrutiny work on this issue and for the report published on 12 November.

The memorandum laid before the Senedd on 2 November, along with the written statement, summarises the provisions of the regulations and notes changes to primary legislation that we seek consent for. This is a very technical statutory instrument without any policy implication. The aim is to ensure that the UK statute book works coherently and effectively following the end of the transition period. It clarifies how certain terms, including EU-related definitions, should be interpreted in domestic legislation after the end of the transition period.

These regulations include amendments to primary legislation that are within the legislative competence of the Senedd. They amend the Interpretation Act 1978 and the Legislation (Wales) Act 2019, in relation to the interpretation of references to relevant separation agreement law.

This is a new body of law, defined by section 7(c) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. It captures domestic law created by the withdrawal agreement with the EU, the related EEA EFTA separation agreement, and the Swiss citizens' rights agreement, under domestic implementation of those agreements. The amendment to the Interpretation Act sets out how references in domestic legislation to an instrument that has effect as relevant separation agreement law are to be interpreted. After the end of the transition period, references to instruments that have effect as relevant separation agreement law are to be interpreted as those instruments that are applied and have effect under the terms of the withdrawal agreement or the EEA EFTA separation agreement, or the Swiss citizens' rights agreement.

The regulations also make equivalent amendment to the Interpretation and Legislative Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 and the Interpretation Act (Northern Ireland) 1954. The Ministers of devolved Governments do not have equivalent powers to UK Ministers to make the relevant consequential amendments. As the amendments need to be made by the end of the transition period, a United Kingdom statutory instrument is the only realistic way to make the necessary amendment. There is no divergence between the Welsh Government and the UK Government on the amendments. Furthermore, making the necessary consequential amendments in one instrument helps to promote the accessibility of the law during this period of substantial change.

It is on this basis that the statutory instrument consent motion is placed before you for approval, and I move the motion.

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

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. The committee considered the statutory instrument consent memorandum for the European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 at our meeting on 9 November, and we laid our report on 12 November. We noted that the objective of the regulations is to ensure that the UK statute book works coherently and effectively, following the end of the transition period. The regulations, as has been stated, aim to achieve this objective by amending the Interpretation Act 1978 and the equivalent interpretation Acts passed by the devolved legislatures, including the Legislation (Wales) Act 2019, passed by the Senedd last year, in relation to the interpretation of references to relevant separation agreement law.

The regulations also amend the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, to provide for how existing references to EU instruments that form part of relevant separation agreement law and existing non-ambulatory references to direct EU legislation should be read following the end of the transition period. The regulations also make new interpretation provisions in the light of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, to remove uncertainty about which version of an EU instrument applies. In addition, they make consequential amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (Consequential Modifications and Repeals and Revocations) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019.

Now, Members may appreciate that this sounds a complex task, and it is. On this point, and before closing, I would like to add a note of caution and concern regarding how complicated the interpretation rules for the Welsh and UK laws have become as a result of these regulations, and as a result of EU exit more generally. This is not a political statement, it's a fact of exiting the EU and disentangling over 40 years of law.

My final comments relate to the approach being taken by the Welsh Government to the Senedd granting consent to the UK Government to make a statutory instrument that amends primary legislation in a devolved area. This is an area that has concerned the committee on a number of occasions now. Our committee has, for more than two years, consistently raised concerns with the Welsh Government about its handling of statutory instrument consent motions. We welcome the Welsh Government's decision to bring forward a motion today in relation to these relevant regulations being made by the UK Government. However, the Welsh Government is choosing which instruments are to be subject to the consent process and those that are not. This means that in many cases, the Welsh Ministers are agreeing to the UK Government amending primary legislation in devolved areas and consent for that decision is not being provided by the Senedd. In the vast majority of cases, we are finding ourselves in the position where the Welsh Government is saying that the only way consent from the Senedd may be sought is where a Senedd Member intervenes. We again repeat that, in the view of the committee, this is neither appropriate nor within the spirit of Standing Order 30A and it unnecessarily draws the executive into conflict with the legislature. We will be writing on this matter again to the Llywydd to seek a resolution of this important constitutional matter. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Thank you. I have no speakers and I have no Members who wish to make an intervention. Therefore, I call on the Counsel General and Minister for European Transition to reply to the debate. Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I thank Mick Antoniw for his contribution on behalf of the committee. I echo the points he makes about the increasing complexity of Welsh law as a consequence of some of these amendments, which need to be introduced just to make the statute book function effectively. And I know the committee understands that making the amendments in one set of regulations contributes at least to the extent that it's within our control to do so—to keep the complexity to a minimum. 

I acknowledge the point that he makes about the introduction of opportunity for Members to debate motions on consent. It is of course open to Members to bring those motions in the usual way. The alternative to the mechanism that we are proposing here, of course, in the absence of Ministers' powers to make these amendments ourselves in Wales, would, in practical terms, have been primary legislation on a comparatively narrow issue here for the statute book in Wales. But I commend the motion to the Senedd, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? I see no objections. Therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 13 is a debate on the report of the elections planning group, and I call on the First Minister to move the motion—Mark Drakeford.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Senedd elections in 2021 would have been historic anyway. This is the first election held under laws made here in Wales. For the first time in Wales, young people of 16 and 17 years of age and qualifying foreign nationals will have a democratic right to vote on their future. But, the coronavirus pandemic has posed major challenges in terms of the safety and accuracy of the election, and to make the situation yet more complex, the UK Government has postponed elections for police and crime commissioners and so they will be held on the same day as the Senedd elections. I would like to take this opportunity to say once again that it’s the Government’s clear intention to hold the elections on 6 May next year. Later this month, we will be bringing forward legislation to make business-as-usual changes to the conduct Order, which notes the rules and regulations for the elections.

In light of the pandemic, in June, the elections planning group was established to consider the impact of the coronavirus and specifically what legislative changes could be necessary. The group included a number of partners as well as representatives of political parties, and I would like to thank all group members for their thoughtful and constructive contributions. I have had useful conversations with leaders of the political parties on the group in order to discuss some of these issues in greater detail. The Welsh Government Cabinet has also discussed the report. I’m pleased that the group was able to reach consensus on a number of important issues. They agreed with the Welsh Government that the continuing aim should still be for the Senedd elections to be held on 6 May and that, in order to achieve this, consideration should be given to making election operations more flexible and resilient following the public health advice on how best to protect the safety and well-being of everyone participating.

Ministers have asked officials to work with partners in order to implement the steps that the group came to consensus on, namely: encouraging vulnerable voters to consider a postal vote, to encourage others, also, to consider a postal vote, and to make an early application wherever possible; more flexibility in terms of nominees, postal voting and voting via delegate; and also ensuring that coronavirus regulations don’t create barriers to voting. We are also continuing to consider the timing of the notice of elections. The group suggested that it could be brought forward sooner, possibly. The group also considered how polling stations and counting halls could work safely and effectively. The Welsh Government will do everything within its power to help returning officers make the necessary arrangements.

Deputy Presiding Officer, we are focused on enabling the elections to happen as planned, but it would be irresponsible of us not to make plans in case the pandemic is so serious in May of next year where it wouldn’t be safe to hold an election. Yesterday, the Scottish Government introduced a Bill that would enable the Speaker of the Scottish Parliament to postpone the election if necessary because of coronavirus. I can confirm that we, too, are preparing to draft a Bill in order to make similar provision. This will allow us to bring forward legislation to the Senedd if the situation after Christmas suggests that we will need to do this as a final resort. We are planning to have the Bill ready to be presented to the Llywydd by the beginning of January.

I realise that providing powers to the Llywydd to postpone the elections for up to six months will be a major constitutional step, and therefore, if necessary, we will consider measures to safeguard the situation. These could include requirements for consultation in order to ensure that the Llywydd receives the most recent advice and information on public health issues, and also confirmation from the Senedd through a supermajority vote—a two-thirds majority vote—before that power could be exercised. I also anticipate that if we need to make use of the Bill, it would relate only to next year’s elections. We are also considering the benefits of reducing the dissolution period. This will enable the Senedd to continue to carry out its crucial role in responding to the pandemic for as long as possible. It will also enable to Llywydd to exercise her powers as close as possible to the date of voting.

The Senedd must meet for the first time within 14 days of the election and we would like to ensure that that is safeguarded. Members voted to extend this period from seven days very recently in the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Act 2020, which received Royal Assent in January. The period of 14 days is counted from the day of polling, which anticipates that counts can be held overnight. In our view, this should be amended to recognise the fact that counting could be delayed because of the social distancing requirements.

Finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, I’d like to emphasise that we are determined to do everything that we can to ensure that people can vote when the election is held. I am particularly concerned that people could be eager to vote, but may be fearful of going to a polling station on election day. Much communications work has been planned in order to encourage postal voting and to emphasise that polling stations will be safe.

The Minister for Housing and Local Government is also writing to returning officers, the Electoral Commission and the Association of Electoral Administrators in order to inform them that we are considering the establishment of early voting centres. These would be established in civic buildings in order to allow people to vote in the days prior to the election. This would provide more options and reduce the chance of queues forming in polling stations. This approach works successfully in other parts of the world and, in these unusual times, I want Wales also to have this option if that is practical. I know that this will place another responsibility on electoral teams that already have a great deal to deal with, but I do believe that we must look at all options in order to enable people to use their democratic rights in the face of coronavirus.

Many constitutional and practical considerations are entailed in what I have outlined today and I look forward to hearing the views of Members on these important issues. Thank you.

On behalf of the Welsh Conservatives, I'd also like to thank the Members of the elections planning group for their vital work on this very important matter. From the report, it is clear that there was consensus on a range of issues. Crucially, there is agreement that the elections should take place on 6 May next year. There's no reason why the elections can't take place on 6 May given that Spain, Poland, France and South Korea held some elections safely during this pandemic. In some of these areas that have held elections, virus transmission rates did not go up, but, of course, I accept that, here in Wales, we need to put measures in place to ensure that these elections are safe and secure.

Whilst there have been two UK general elections in the last few years, it will have been five years since voters were able to have their say on the Welsh Government and us as their representatives. Therefore, it's crucial that action is being taken to ensure that voting next year can go ahead safely, and I'd be grateful if the First Minister could perhaps update us in his response to this debate on the action that his officials are currently considering. It would also be useful to have detailed information on how the Government plans to implement some of the areas of consensus in the report, and how it intends to work with others to deliver some of the proposals in the report.

The report refers to encouraging people who were shielding to sign up for a postal vote, which makes absolute sense. Perhaps the First Minister can confirm in his reply when the programme will begin to encourage those that have been shielding in the past to sign up for a postal vote and who will be responsible for this, and how many people in each area may likely sign up. As the Welsh Conservatives made clear in our written evidence to the planning group, whilst we welcome some of the flexibilities in the report around postal and proxy voting, it's essential that the correct checks and balances are in place to ensure that voters and those participating in the election have confidence in the process. And so, I hope the First Minister will take the opportunity to make it clear that the Welsh Government does not endorse any plans to extend proxy voting to enable a non-family member to act as a proxy for more than two people, even if an entire household is self-isolating, so that there is no potential abuse of the system.

Of course, the second half of the report focuses on the areas where the planning group could not reach a consensus. These areas are fundamental to the running of elections and to ensure clarity to voters. Firstly, we have made it very clear that no legislation should be introduced in this place to enable the date of the election to be changed, because we believe that the election should take place on 6 May. We're all aware that voter turnout in Welsh parliamentary elections has not been higher than 46 per cent in the lifetime of this place. If we are to work as political parties to improve participation and turnout, then we need to know the rules now in order to give the people of Wales certainty going forward. That means not allowing confusion to thrive by further discussing the date of the election or to allow a last-minute change of date. By having a fixed date for the election on 6 May, we can ensure that all aspects of the election process can be as safe and secure as possible. The people of Wales need that guarantee, so I'm extremely concerned that the First Minister is now looking to introduce legislation to potentially postpone next year's elections. Welsh Government officials must not needlessly waste resources looking at legislation, but instead, focus their efforts on providing a safe and secure election process next May. As I said earlier, other countries have managed to hold elections in these challenging circumstances, so I don't see why we here in Wales cannot hold those elections next year.

Now, aside from changing the date of the election, the planning group explored options in changing the times and days that people can vote on. I'm sure the First Minister will agree with me, it's very unlikely that people will be voting at five or six in the morning or as late as 11 or 12 in the evening. There will be also be further confusion if the days that people can vote on are actually separated. I understand the desire to have the most vulnerable to COVID-19, such as the elderly and those with underlying health conditions, vote on one day and everyone else on another day, and that might help towards protecting those most susceptible to the virus, but there will also be a great impact on those participating in the election as well.

The opening up of polling stations on multiple days will also have a detrimental impact on the services being provided by local authorities, who will have to find and pay staff to manage the polling stations for an extended period of time. And there will also be questions around security of the ballots, for example, where will ballot boxes be stored overnight in-between polling days and then the count, and who will be allowed to observe the transfer of those boxes? So, I hope the First Minister will address these valid concerns by committing to ensure that polling will actually take place on 6 May between 7 a.m and 10 p.m? Dirprwy Llywydd, with that, can I again thank the members of the elections planning group for their work on this report? I look forward to working constructively with all parties on this matter over the coming weeks and coming months.

First of all, I'd like to thank the elections planning group for its work. My party was pleased to participate in that work. Despite some of the headlines around this group, it's important to bear in mind that the work of the group, and many of the recommendations in the report that's already been published focus mainly on the arrangements that should be put in place in order to ensure that the election can take place safely.

I do have to say that it's difficult to anticipate a situation where Senedd elections would have to be postponed. Elections around the world have taken place from Belarus to the Basque Country, from Serbia to Singapore, and also in the United States most recently, where we were reminded in powerful terms of the importance of free elections and the power of people to raise their voice and use their vote, as the people of the United States did in choosing a new direction through the dark days of the pandemic. Having said that, as the experience of the past few months has demonstrated to us we can't take anything for granted. 

Therefore, it is reasonable that we should have the ability in Wales to respond to all scenarios that may face us, never mind how unlikely that may be now. The Ministers of Westminster already have those powers, and they were used in the case of local elections in England and in police and crime commissioner elections, which should have taken place in May of this year. And on that note, of course, it is disappointing, but not unexpected perhaps, to see that the UK Government has approached this issue in a non-compliant way, with Minister Chloe Smith writing to all returning officers whilst this planning group continued to meet—with the Conservative Party part of those discussions—to state that police and crime commissioners in Wales would proceed, come what way, without fully recognising the significance of the fact that we had planned a Welsh general election for next year, with the Police and Crime Committee's elections happening to fall on the same date because of the postponement this year. It appears that the UK Government's thinking is entirely different. Following the reluctance of the UK Government to consider any sort of change to police and crime commissioner elections, I understand that that had restricted the possible options considered by the group for introducing early-voting centres, extending the number of days where votes could take place, to facilitate voting for vulnerable groups, which is an idea that election administrators were fully supportive of. So, what's the Government's intention or the Government's view in terms of progressing this in light of the opposition of the UK Government in terms of doing the same with police and crime commissioners elections?

I would like to hear from the First Minister on the possible impact of disagreement between the UK and Welsh Governments on proxy voting. Practically, I think the people of Wales will want us to ensure as much consistency as possible between the two elections, and that it should be as easy possible for people to participate, wherever the power for the franchise lies at the end of the day. It would be very strange, for example, if a proxy could be exercised on behalf of four or five people in Senedd elections, but only for two people in the police and crime commissioner elections.

To conclude, the First Minister mentioned the possibility of legislation in January, which would extend the powers of the Llywydd to postpone the date of Senedd elections from the current month to up to six months. The Scottish Government has introduced similar legislation in the Scottish Parliament. It's appropriate that the Llywydd should continue to hold this power, representing the impartial nature of the function, but it's important that the Senedd has opportunity to fully scrutinise proposed legislation, so the sooner it's introduced to the Senedd, the better, in draft form. Scottish legislation includes provision for postal voting only in order to re-stage an election if the election in May had to be postponed. The report of the group in Wales didn't recommend this, so can the First Minister confirm whether similar provisions will appear in the Welsh Government's draft legislation? I would agree with the suggestion that a two-thirds majority should be required to pass any change, safeguarding the principle that there should be broad-ranging support beyond the party of Government in making any changes to electoral arrangements.

I find myself in a rather curious situation of agreeing with elements of what the First Minister said, but also the leader of Plaid Cymru and the leader of the Conservatives; I think there were some strong points made in all of those opening remarks. I hope that we will be able to find an agreed way forward on this. I don't believe this should be a matter for partisan debate. I think this should be putting our democracy ahead of all other considerations. I hope there is also—and I believe there is—a quiet majority in this place to ensure that we have elections every four years, and not every five years. I've never supported the move to five years, and I hope that before dissolution, we will have the opportunity, Deputy Presiding Officer, to debate this wider matter as well.

I have heard no persuasive argument that we need the powers to delay an election for up to six months. My view is that the election simply must take place in May. This place has sat for too long. It has outlived what I believe should be its term and its mandate. We need an election and the people of Wales have a right to that election, and we should not be seeking different ways of that election not taking place at the proper time. I do not believe it is credible for anyone to argue that we can visit a crowded supermarket or even have a meal in a pub, but that we are unable to visit a polling station. I do not believe that the people of Wales will accept that argument. 

So, we need to look for ways in which this election can take place in a safe and proper manner, and this is where I do take issue with the leader of the opposition, because I do believe there are means and methods for that to happen. I've long believed that the tradition of holding elections on a Thursday is an anachronism that we should look beyond. For me, I would prefer elections to take place, for example, on a weekend, on Saturday and Sunday, to enable people to vote in a way that doesn't feel pressured around work and other family responsibilities, and I believe that we can do that.

I do not share the concerns of the leader of the opposition, but I do recognise his concerns, about the security of the ballot box. We already do, of course, allow voting to take place over a number of weeks with postal votes, and the security of that has never been brought into consideration. And so, I do believe there are means and mechanisms we can use to protect the security of the ballot, and I would like to see voting taking place over a number of days, if that is needed.

I would also like to see—and this is where I agree with the leader of Plaid Cymru—legislation that would enable an all-postal election to take place, if that is required. Now, I recognise that there are some very practical issues with that, and some very practical hurdles, but I do not believe that they are insurmountable. We have seen, in recent weeks, how the advent of a greater number of postal votes has driven turnout in the United States of America, and despite the efforts of Donald Trump and Darren Millar, the election is considered to be one of the most secure elections that's been held in that country's history. So, I do believe that we need to look at ways of doing this.

The final point I'd like to make is that not only do we require a safe election, but we require a clean election. Although this has not been discussed by the election planning group, I am significantly concerned—and I've just debated and discussed this matter with the First Minister in private—about the manipulation of data, the use and misuse of social media, and the dark money that is sometimes used in election campaigns. I do not believe that the way we regulate our elections in Wales and the United Kingdom is secure and provides for the regulation that should be required in a democracy. We're seen a report in today's Western Mail about a rather sleazy organisation called the Centre for Welsh Studies, which is using data in all sorts of different ways. Now, I don't know what is happening there, but I know enough to know that I am deeply, deeply uncomfortable with where we are. So, we need a safe, secure election, but we also need a clean election. But we must have an election. That election must come. This place must be dissolved, and the people must have their say.

Alun Davies made some sensible points about the security of the ballot, but then went into the wider reaches of conspiracy around data and dark money and elections not being under control. Unless he knows the Centre for Welsh Studies and exactly what they're doing with the data, then 'dark forces are risking our democracy'—they're not my accounts. It is frankly ludicrous for the Member to trade in such conspiracies. The election will be secure. There is a consensus around our election systems, and I think that's something that should be supported. I would also like to thank the members of the committee or panel that was working with the First Minister on these issues. I think it came up with a number of sensible ideas to support turnout and a safe election amidst COVID. Some of those are difficult to implement without co-ordination with the UK Government because, of course, we have the police and crime commissioner elections scheduled for the same day. Adam Price said that the UK Government could delay elections—yes, in terms of the police and crime commissioner elections, but of course the House of Commons is constrained by the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 in terms of the five-year term there.

I would like to say I was grateful to the First Minister for the way that he consulted openly around this process and for the time he gave me to discuss these matters with him. I don't consider that he is doing this or proposing potentially to take powers from a partisan perspective, and I make no such suggestion. But the election should go ahead on 6 May next year; it will be five years since the last election.

Now, we had devolution described by the Prime Minister as a disaster, yet these powers to set our own parliamentary term, just have a vote here on the proposal of the Welsh Government or the Llywydd or a 50 per cent or two-thirds majority, whatever we decide—we just extend our own term—was that envisaged when devolution began? Was Boris asleep at the wheel when he was Foreign Secretary and the Wales Act 2017 was agreed? If you don't want to see this term extended and these powers used in this way, why on earth did you devolve them?

I think it is wrong that we should take or use those powers, whatever the precise mechanism. And a two-thirds majority, I guess, is better than not having a two-thirds majority, but, last time, that two-thirds majority, when we renamed this institution, was obtained through the Llywydd and the Deputy Llywydd voting, in my view—well, I note what the Standing Orders say in terms of impartiality, but what happened then. Is it envisaged again that the Llywydd and Deputy Llywydd may again join with Labour and Plaid to give this majority of two thirds? There should be an election on 6 May. There should not be legislation to delay it. It is wrong; we should not do it.

I'll just begin with agreeing with Mark Reckless there that there should, indeed, be an election on 6 May. I think, in many ways, we're all agreed with that. The problem is that it's—what was that phrase by Donald Rumsfeld—the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns as well. We realise that we could be in a situation here where something makes it impossible to hold that election on 6 May. I want it to go ahead; I think everybody here in the Senedd wants that election to go ahead.

I agree with Alun's point, which is that we're at that point where there needs to be a refresh, a renewal and a democratic mandate for a new Welsh Senedd—absolutely right. But I do think we need also to have that belt-and-braces option in the background in case we are in the position where we literally cannot do it safely. Now, I don't anticipate that that will happen. I think there are ways to do this safely and it's been remarked upon already that there are other countries that have been able to do this, even in the midst of the COVID pandemic. But I think, given that option, albeit that it has to be an utter last resort when everything else is exhausted, when it simply cannot be done safely, I think it's probably the sensible thing to do, because wouldn't it be ridiculous to get to that point and find that we haven't given ourselves the tools to take that option if a Senedd supermajority so determined?

But I just want to thank the members of the elections planning group, including the political leaders who engaged with us, because I think it has come forward with a pragmatic set of proposals, most of which I agree with—some, I'd probably suggest, could go a little bit forward. I'm glad, in a pragmatic way, they've looked at giving greater flexibility around applying for postal and proxy voting, whilst putting the safeguards in place. I think that's a sensible way forward to make sure that we can indeed deliver that election on 6 May.

I'm glad, but I'd be interested in the timescale for this, that they're going to look at promoting postal voting in order to take some of the weight off the actual polling day—or polling days, as we now understand—so that, particularly, people with vulnerable health conditions or of a certain age will not have to, if they're worried, march down to a polling station, they can, indeed, vote by post. But I would be interested, as others have said, in when that's going to happen and when that push to persuade people that that is a viable option is going to happen.

But I'd like to touch on a couple of things that the First Minister picked up on. It was interesting that you've touched on, First Minister, the fact that you may look at additional polling days in advance of the actual date of the election. Curiously, I was going to argue, as I've traditionally argued, that we should, as Alun Davies would say, actually look at not doing it simply on one day but on two or three days that would be more convenient for people. Democracy, I think, nowadays, okay it has to be a—it's not just a right, it's a responsibility, but people should be given the options of being able to do this easily, particularly in the middle of COVID. But you've suggested there that you will give additional days in advance of the election date. I think that is really sensible and pragmatic. It does mean that people can make a choice, in order to make this election happen on the date we've already decided and not go for an extension, that they could go in earlier and avoid the fears they might have of standing in a queue or risking their health in any way. So, I think that's really sensible indeed.

The part I'd agree with Alun on is—I am curious as to why we've jettisoned entirely the idea of going even further on the postal votes themselves. Because if we are in a situation where the choice is between actually delaying an election for six months or having actually having gone for encouraging people to sign up en masse to postal voting, I know which one I'd prefer. It's on the basis that we should be carrying this election out on the day we've decided that I'd be pushing even further for more postal voting in advance. But, failing that, I think the backstop is the right one—the backstop of having to come back to the Senedd. What I would ask in that situation, First Minister, is whether, then, a date needs to be put to the Senedd, because it's up to six months. My preference would be it should be the shortest term possible, based on the medical and scientific advice available at that time, based on projections, but that a date would actually be put to the Senedd within that proposal from the Llywydd, if it was to be put.

But, in closing, let me just thank those who've brought this together. This is a difficult one, because it's right that we have to renew our democratic mandate. It's absolutely right that we try and aim for 6 May. Where I would depart from Mark Reckless and also from the Conservative spokesman earlier on, is saying I think we also need to take a backstop here, because we may find ourselves in a position that we cannot actually run the election on 6 May. I don't think it's probable at the moment, but it's possible, and, as such, we need to have a pragmatic step in place that would allow us to get beyond, if necessary. Thanks very much, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Thank you. I have no people who want to intervene, and therefore I will call the First Minister to respond to the debate—Mark Drakeford.

Sorry, Llywydd, the mute wasn't willing to disengage. So, thank you very much to all those who've taken part in the debate. My starting point is the one that I set out in my opening remarks: I want an election on 6 May. I think that is the right thing to do. I think the Senedd badly needs a democratic refresh. I think it is right for people in Wales to be able to choose the representatives they want for the years ahead and to do it in accordance with the normal timetable. That is very much my starting point.

If we are to hold elections in May next year, we will still be holding them under the shadow of coronavirus. It will not have gone away, it will still be playing a very significant role in everybody's life, and that is why we propose to amend the rules for an election in May to give people further opportunities to participate and to exercise their democratic rights, whether that is through postal voting or proxy voting, or through having extended days in which voting can take place. It simply isn't good enough for the leader of the opposition to argue for an election in May of next year and then to ignore the conditions under which it will be held. I couldn't believe the weakness of his argument against extended days of voting. If we have to give up a badminton court for a couple of days in order to allow people in Wales to vote safely, I don't think that is a price that we should shy away from. These things are completely practical in that way.

We know that there are people in Wales who fear for their own health because of coronavirus. I hope they will use a postal vote, but, for some people, going to the polling station and casting your vote in person is a very important part of their contribution to democracy, and I want them to be able to do that in May of next year free of the fear that they may put themselves at risk by doing so, and extended days of being able to vote simply offer people those options to go at quieter times, not to feel that they will be queueing up with lots of other people. It's a very simple—. I think it was probably Huw Irranca-Davies who said it was just a pragmatic extension to making sure that such an election can be conducted safely.

I don't share the leader of the opposition's concerns about extended proxy voting, but he echoes, we know, that voter-suppression theme that his party has adopted from their friends over in America. I am determined that, in holding an election in May of next year, we will do everything we can to make sure that every single Welsh citizen who wishes to participate can do so and can exercise their democratic rights, and that is the side of the argument that the Welsh Government will weigh in on.

Of course, the Welsh Government doesn't run the elections, nor should we. Elections are run by returning officers in the different local authorities, and a number of the questions that have been asked during the debate are not for me. It would be quite improper if they were for me. They are for the people who are responsible, who are not members of any political party and have no interest of that sort in an election, to make those practical decisions. Part of the reason for setting up a group that combined political parties with election administrators is to make sure that those who, in the end, have to conduct our elections do so informed by the views of those of us who take part in the practical business of democracy.

The biggest difference in the discussion is whether or not we need to take the precaution of bringing a Bill before the Senedd, against the maybe remote, but impossible to ignore possibility that circumstances in May of next year may be so difficult that it would not be possible to run a safely and democratically open election. Again, the leader of the opposition says he can see no reason why it couldn't take place, yet his Government, earlier this year, saw every reason why elections for English local authorities, mayors, police and crime commissioners had to be postponed.

All we are saying is that the Senedd should have the same fallback arrangement against the day that it might be necessary. We are barely two weeks out of the firebreak period we had here in Wales, where people were enjoined to stay at home and not to leave their homes other than for a very limited number of reasons. Is it possible for anybody in this Senedd to be so completely confident that they know the course of coronavirus over the months ahead that they can say to us without any doubt at all that we may not face those sorts of difficulties again next year? I absolutely hope that we do not, I absolutely want an election on 6 May, but it would not be responsible—it would simply not be responsible not to come to the Senedd with proposals that would allow our election to take place in a safe way, in an orderly way, and with the best possible chance that people in Wales will feel able to take part in it. Adam Price said we can't take anything for granted, and I just agree with that. I think it is a sensible, responsible precaution to take. We are building safeguards into it, as I suggested in my opening remarks. The Llywydd would have to bring forward proposals, they'd have to secure a two-thirds majority on the floor of the Senedd, and all Members would have an opportunity to have their say at the time, were those circumstances to pertain.

Finally, Llywydd, a number of Members have raised the issue of an all-postal election. It wasn't raised by any political party during the group's considerations, as far as I know. There's certainly nothing about it in the group's report, so it's not a matter where I can advise the Senedd because it hasn't, as far as I know, been considered by the group that was established to give thought to this. I do know that not everybody is willing to vote by post, and, while all-postal elections may have some attractions, I don't think we should make an easy assumption that they are all pluses and no minuses. Certainly I would want to see the advice of returning officers and those people who would have to make a practical reality of that ambition before advising Members here of them.

In the meantime, Members are asked to note the report of the group, and I echo the thanks that others have given both to the representatives of political parties, but particularly to those who are responsible for the safe and proper conduct of elections, for the advice that they are giving to us. We will, I'm sure, return to this issue over the months ahead.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object, therefore we defer voting under this item until voting time.

In accordance with Standing Order 12.18, I will suspend the meeting now before proceeding to voting time, and IT support will be on hand to help with any issues during this time.

The first vote this evening is on the second supplementary budget, and so I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 29, 21 abstentions, four against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (No. 4) (Wales) Regulations 2020, and I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 37, 13 abstentions, four against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

We now move to vote on the Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel and Restrictions) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2020. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 50, three abstentions, one against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The final vote this evening is on the report of the elections planning group, and I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Rebecca Evans. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 47, six abstentions, one against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

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