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 a 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 meeting, and these are noted on your agenda. 

The first item this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Social Justice, and the first question is to be answered by the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership and to be asked by Peredur Owen Griffiths.

The impact of the cost-of-living crisis on the third sector and its workforce was discussed at the most recent meeting of the third sector partnership council. In addition, we are committed to and continuing to work in social partnership and use our wider levers to promote fair pay in the third sector.

Thank you for that answer.

One of the problems the sector is currently having is funding fair pay settlements that reflect rises in the cost of living. This is particularly the case with organisations that have contracts with multiple public sector providers that are adopting different approaches to contract uplifts. One organisation I am aware of has contracts across many local authorities, with roughly a third giving contract uplifts, a third refusing and a third yet to decide. This puts the organisation in an impossible position of having to be fair to all staff whilst not being able to fund fair pay. Will the Welsh Government take a lead in ensuring consistent policy on contract uplifts and ensure the sector can continue to keep its valuable staff and help the most vulnerable in our society?

I thank the Member for his question and, obviously, for recognition of a sector that not only helps some of our most vulnerable in society, but also provides employment for people in communities right across the country. As I said, in the most recent third sector partnership council meeting on the cost-of-living crisis, the impact it's having on fair pay in the sector was raised, and, certainly, I and the Minister for Social Justice are happy to follow up and pick up how we can use our social partnership approach and also all the levers we do have to try and have consistency across the sector and support where support is available.

We have acknowledged some of the challenges that the sector faces in terms of not just funding for the stability of projects, but also for the stability of staff, so it's one of the reasons behind moving for the first time to a three-year grant commitment, which obviously enables better long-term planning whilst retaining staff and skills. I think it's really important, like you said, that these third sector organisations are not only providing crucial support and services, they provide really good opportunities for people to work as well and we need to be conscious of that when we move forward.

The issue that the Member for South Wales East raises is of course an important one. So too is how third sector employees and volunteers are remunerated for additional expenses that occur whilst they're undertaking their roles—for example, fuel costs. Recently, I've been contacted by the Community Transport Association, who are working with a number of charities to campaign for an increase in the approved mileage allowance payment scheme. They state that the recent increase in the cost of fuel is having a negative impact on third sector workers and volunteers, as well as making it more difficult to recruit additional staff. I understand that such an issue is not devolved, however, Minister, what discussions have you had with your counterparts in the UK Government about increasing the AMAP rates in the short term to help alleviate such issues? And what specifically is the Welsh Government doing to support third sector organisations, employees and volunteers with rising costs as well as supporting organisations to recruit and retain more staff and volunteers? Thank you.

Can I thank Peter Fox for his question? You are right to acknowledge the impact that rising fuel costs are having, not just on the third sector, but I actually heard today in a meeting with the Partnership Council for Wales about the impact it's having for people particularly in the social care sector too in travelling between people who they are looking after and caring for, as well. So, I absolutely agree with you in terms of—. I know there are calls to uplift from 45p to 55p, and that's certainly something that we, as a Government, would support and have raised previously with counterparts at a UK Government level. And, actually, it's very prescient, the timing of your question, Peter Fox, because this morning we did actually commit with partners right across local government and across the public sector in Wales, and the third sector as well, to collectively calling for an increase in that to help mitigate some of the cost-of-living impact that it's having on people who provide services that are essential, not just to people but to our communities as well.
 
 

Thank you very much for the question. Well, this item was on the agenda today for the local government partnership council, chaired by my colleague Rebecca Evans. It relates to the anti-racist Wales action plan goal of local government being an exemplar employer, with anti-racist employment and human resources policies, with improvement funding used to drive such best practice, contributing to good governance and performance.

Thank you, Minister. I appreciate all the work that you're doing. Around 35 per cent of medical staff in Wales are from the ethnic minority backgrounds, and, in some hospitals, over 60 per cent of their staff belong to the ethnic minority groups. A recent report on racism in medicine by the British Medical Association found that nearly one third of doctors surveyed have considered leaving the NHS or have already left within the last two years due to persistent and intolerable levels of racism on a personal and institutional level. The survey reveals institutional barriers to career progression, low levels of reporting of racist incidents, and a growing mental health burden on ethnic minority doctors as some of the reasons why they're leaving. The chair of the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin in Wales said that if things don't improve urgently, then the NHS in Wales could face collapse. So, Minister, what discussions have you had with the health Minister to end structural racism in the NHS here in Wales and to rectify the disproportionate outcomes in careers and job satisfaction faced by different ethnic groups, such as by making job applications anonymous to protect the candidates' ethnicity, going forward? Thanks.

Thank you very much, and I do welcome that question. Indeed, if you look at the anti-racist action plan for Wales, it covers every department of the Welsh Government, with actions and goals. So, clearly, that includes not just health but health and social care as well. So, the goals, as far as the Wales NHS are concerned, are that it should be and must be anti-racist, and staff should be able to work in safe, inclusive environments. I have also met with the BMA and also with the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin on a number of occasions, and I attend—as I'm sure you do as well, and colleagues—their annual events. They have contributed to the anti-racist action plan for Wales, and, indeed, the goals and the objectives for the Minister for Health and Social Services are very clear in terms of delivering on those objectives for our Welsh NHS. And can we again thank those who work in the Welsh NHS—we were recognising the anniversary yesterday—and the role that they played during the pandemic, in terms of our black, Asian and minority ethnic professionals and colleagues in the NHS, when they were also disproportionately being affected by the pandemic? So, I'm very grateful for that question, and we will ensure that we will report, because there is an accountability committee, which is co-chaired by the Permanent Secretary and Professor Emmanuel Ogbonna, and, indeed, with representation from the NHS on it.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Joel James.

Thank you, Llywydd. As the Minister will be well aware, the Ugandan President, Yoweri Museveni, has strongly backed Russia in the present Russian-Ukraine conflict, stating that, in the context of the ongoing war, Russia should be viewed as the centre of gravity in eastern Europe. For those who are unfamiliar with this military phrasing, what the President is saying is that Russia is the source of power that provides moral and physical strength in that region, and, as such, has the freedom of action to enforce that moral and physical strength. President Museveni's son, Lieutenant General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the commander of the land forces of the Uganda People's Defence Force, and the person expected to succeed the President, has strongly asserted that most Africans support Russia and has remarked that, and I quote:

'The majority of mankind that are non-white support Russia's stand in Ukraine, and Putin is absolutely right in his attempted conquest.'

Given Uganda's public support of Russia, who has with this conflict caused immense human suffering, a high number of civilian deaths and a refugee crisis in Europe not seen since the end of the second world war, do you, Minister, believe that it is morally wrong and hypocritical for Wales to be both a supersponsor of refugees and to continue to support and send aid to Uganda, no matter how small, who believe that Russia is right in carrying out this conflict? And if the Minister does believe it is right to continue to provide aid in Uganda, what justification can she give for this to those refugees who are fleeing for their lives? Thank you. 

Of course, the money that does go through the Wales and Africa programme goes to communities in Uganda. It goes to communities that we're working closely with and have done for many years. And, also, of course, in the whole of Wales there are partnerships in communities, and, as you know, in your region as well—partnerships between local people in our towns and cities and villages. Indeed, PONT is one that you will know very well, and indeed across Wales, with communities, with non-governmental organisations in Uganda, to work as part of our Wales and Africa programme.

Clearly, it is abhorrent when we hear these views—any views—and when those views are expressed, we condemn them in terms of the leaders of governments, and that is happening across the world. But let's look at what we do and what the outcomes are for our Wales and Africa programme in terms of our commitment to those communities that we've worked with, and which citizens across Wales are working with day-in, day-out in order to support them.

Thank you, Minister. Oh, I nearly swore then—two secs, Llywydd—[Inaudible.]—came apart then. [Laughter.]

Thank you, Minister, for your condemnation of those remarks, and I support that condemnation. I would urge, going forward, that we look carefully at where that aid's going and how it's being used. As you know, the Welsh Government's flagship Wales and Africa grant scheme was created to enable community groups and organisations in Wales to access funding for small-scale projects that contribute to Wales's delivery of the UN sustainable development goals, and to deliver benefits for people living in both Wales and Africa. You will be aware that the total funding of this scheme is in the region of £150,000 per year, and the NHS contribution to ensure that some projects are dedicated to health activities is £50,000 per year, and these figures have remained at that level for the past 15 years. When you consider the size of the NHS budget in Wales, this amount is relatively small, and, given the long-term effects of COVID in sub-Saharan Africa, I'm keen to know why you are funding your flagship initiative with such meagre sums. Firstly, Minister, can you comment on whether the lack of an uplift in the NHS contribution over the past 15 years is an oversight on this Government's part, or is this stagnation of funding part of the Welsh Government's vision for delivery of the Wales and Africa programme's long-term goals? And, secondly, with such small sums involved, how do you measure whether there has been any long-term benefit of this programme, both in Wales and in Africa?

Well, the Wales and Africa small grants scheme, which actually was contracted to the Wales Council for Voluntary Action to deliver, did end on 31 March. But, a procurement exercise put the contract back out to tender earlier this year, and the WCVA will continue to implement and to manage that small grants scheme. It's now open, round 1 of the 2022-25 Wales and Africa small grants scheme, and the application deadline is 24 July. 

The importance of those small grants is that, although they may sound a small amount of money, in terms of our priorities in the Welsh Government and the pressures on our budget, we still believe it is important to invest in Wales and Africa. And these small sums of money can make a huge difference, working with partners on projects relating to health, climate change, environment, lifelong learning and sustainable livelihoods. And these are projects that are led, as I said, by African partners, by those NGOs, working with many groups across Wales. And I think what's important is that we have worked to support many communities during the pandemic. We've devoted millions of pounds-worth of PPE to Namibia via the Phoenix Project. I seem to remember there were some adverse comments from your party about the fact that we were doing that. We believe very strongly that we should do that. Also, we support projects in Zambia, Zimbabwe, Liberia, Lesotho, Ghana, Nigeria and Uganda, and these are all projects where the outcomes are clearly having a huge impact on those communities. 

Thank you, Minister, for that response, and I'd like to reiterate, unless we have that actual assessment of the impact of this money going to Africa, we wonder what sort of benefit it's bringing to the Welsh taxpayer.

If I move on to the next question, one of the touted benefits of the Wales and Africa programme is that diaspora communities can bring to Wales knowledge and experience that is otherwise difficult to obtain here. Setting up the health partnership under the Wales and Africa umbrella also allows Welsh NHS workers to experience for themselves some of the challenges faced by sub-Saharan communities and establish mutual knowledge transfer that enables African communities to improve health education and to upskill health professionals and other workers in partner nations. Sub-Saharan countries bear 24 per cent of the world's disease burden, but employ only 3 per cent of the world's health workers. I can see that there is an unprecedented need to develop health partnerships and provide training. I am aware that relatively few Welsh health professionals are involved in health partnership schemes, and it's likely that they know very little about what the health partnerships can achieve for sub-Saharan nations and to what extent they or the Welsh NHS can benefit. With this in mind, Minister, what impact assessment has this Government made of the benefits that health partnerships have made here in Wales and in Africa, particularly to the Welsh NHS, and how is this Government examining the role that health partnerships can play in supporting the careers of Welsh health professionals going forward? Thank you.

I presume and I hope that you've met with the Wales and Africa Health Links Network, which is a very dynamic organisation led principally by people in the Welsh NHS. It's one of the most important networks that has been developed within the NHS, so that you have partnerships between health boards, between hospitals, between communities in Wales and Africa. I hope, if you haven't met them, that you will be meeting them, because they come under the umbrella of Hub Cymru Africa.

It is important that we are relaunching our international learning opportunities programme. That was relaunched in April after two years of not being able to send people on placements due to COVID. It's a really important way in which people in Wales can actually contribute to UN sustainable development goals, by having a placement of up to eight weeks in either Lesotho, Namibia or Uganda. That's funded by the Wales and Africa programme. These exchanges are also taking place with NHS workers. Actually, we've enabled people in the NHS to have time off in order to undertake this kind of experience. 

In terms of outcomes, the money that we made available, £3.1 million since March 2020, looking at response and adaptations to the pandemic, is helping children get back to school, providing clean water and soap stations and essential PPE, raising awareness about the impact of COVID-19, dispelling fake information, stressing the importance of receiving vaccinations, helping people get digital access and assistance in areas that could not previously provide it. That is the outcome of our investment in Africa.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Sioned Williams.

Diolch, Llywydd. Prynhawn da, Weinidog. We know that families with children are among the poorest households in our nation. Following the success of the baby box scheme in Scotland, a scheme was piloted in the Swansea Bay University Health Board area to provide baby bundles to 200 families to reduce the need for expenditure on newborn essentials. The pilot appeared to be successful, according to the evaluation published by the Welsh Government. So, could I ask what developments have followed the conclusion of this pilot? Given the success of the pilot, why has the Welsh Government not yet implemented a baby bundle scheme? Of course, if we had more powers over welfare, we could develop a cash support scheme, which is called for by anti-poverty campaigners as the best way to support families with children, similar to that of the Best Start scheme in Scotland. We could help parents during the cost-of-living crisis and assist in pulling families out of poverty. So, could the Minister update us on the commitment made in the co-operation agreement to progress the devolution of the administration of welfare?

Thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr, Sioned. I will start with the baby bundles, because, as you say, we've piloted them for families across Wales. It's going to really help in terms of the cost-of-living crisis for parents in Wales. It's those key items that are essential to their new baby's development and well-being. I want to recognise Julie Morgan, the Deputy Minister for Social Services, who actually took this idea forward and helped get this pilot launched, very much learning from the Scottish Government and further from our pilot as well. I know the Deputy Minister for Social Services is going to be making announcements later this year, but we're very much seeing this as a key part of our package of support for tackling the cost-of-living crisis.

Yes, it is important that we move forward in terms of our commitment in the co-operation agreement in relation to the devolution of the administration of welfare benefits. I was extremely disappointed to hear today that the UK Government has rejected fairly sensible and decent recommendations from the Welsh Affairs Committee, which did an inquiry into the interaction in Wales of welfare benefits, social security and relations with the Welsh Government. They actually recommended that there should be work done and a committee formed between the UK Government and the Welsh Government to look at the interaction, because there's a great deal that could be done now, before we move further, in terms of much stronger take-up campaigns, the UK Government Department for Work and Pensions failing to engage with us on our 'Claim what's yours' campaign, pension credit—after all, a UK Government responsibility—and so many of the benefits that people need during this cost-of-living crisis.

Again, we move forward in terms of looking at the way forward with the devolution of the administration of benefits, but I fear, from that UK Government response, that we're going to have a difficult time to move it forward. But let's get the evidence and let's get the backing, as we have with our co-operation agreement. Also, I'm meeting my colleague in the Scottish Government to learn from them how they have been able to progress this and what that has meant in terms of beneficial impacts.

Diolch, Weinidog. It's good to hear that there will be an announcement on the baby bundles. As we brace for a serious worsening of the cost-of-living crisis as the autumn and winter months begin to loom over an already grim horizon, I was wondering whether the Minister could update the Senedd on how effectively the current financial support being provided by the Welsh Government is being delivered and consider the steps needed to improve this to enhance current schemes, and to think about what we can improve before introducing any new schemes in order to ensure that what has been committed to is actually being accessed by those who most need support, and whether the measures are having the desired impact.

In theory, much of what we have in place should provide a good foundation to help some of the most vulnerable households in Wales this winter, or at least what we can put in place within our devolved competencies. Do we need to improve take-up, delivery and awareness of the current support? Would the Minister consider merging schemes as a kind of one-stop shop, for example, to improve access? 

I thank you for that really useful question as well. In fact, the Minister for Finance and Local Government and I were at the partnership council this morning with all of the new leaders of local government in Wales, and we had an item on the cost-of-living crisis. Indeed, I thanked local government for the role that they've played, because they are delivering not only the cost-of-living payments that have been made available as part of the £385 million package, but they were able to manage and deliver on the winter fuel support scheme. We got clear feedback there in terms of take-up.

I will be, on Monday, chairing another follow-up cost-of-living crisis summit, again with the Minister for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Climate Change. A hundred and twenty stakeholders have signed up for that. We will have a presentation as part of it from a leader from local government as well, because we need to work with them to ensure that not only is there 'Claim what's yours' to claim what we're putting out in terms of our benefits like the winter fuel support scheme, but that there is adequate engagement with our single advice fund-givers, because Citizens Advice are, obviously, mainly delivering on single advice, and they're the ones who are working on the Advicelink to 'Claim what's yours'.

But, on streamlining—I raised this this morning—there are opportunities to passport and streamline all of our benefits. I feel that the responsibilities we've got at the moment are to make what we have in terms of our responsibilities for social security, which is what I believe it should be seen as, as robust, as streamlined and as passported as possible to reach people in these dire times. But, I hope, also, that we can recognise that every time someone goes to a foodbank they get signposted, now, that they're going to actually be able to access—people on prepayment meters—the fuel vouchers. There are so many opportunities when people do come forward who are vulnerable and in need for all of our agencies to work together, and I'm sure we'll be discussing that on Monday.

Thank you for that question. The Welsh Government works closely with the police, police and crime commissioners, and with the health service, not only in north Wales but across Wales as a whole. I have regular meetings and discussions with our partners about a wide range of policing issues.

Thank you for that initial response, Minister. Last month, I had the pleasure of joining North Wales Police on one of their shifts, and had the privilege, also, of seeing the fantastic work that they carry out for us in our communities. This is time I spent with them following 10 years previously when I'd gone on shift with the North Wales Police just to observe the work that they do. One of the things that I observed about the difference between 10 years ago and now is the increased difficulties of health service pressures on our police officers and on the police force. This increase in pressures has seen police officers dealing with defibrillators, tied up in A&E for hours on end, at times, waiting for those they may have arrested to be seen, along with assisting with mental health issues—all of which is needed, of course, but I would argue is probably not a good use of police resource and police expertise. It's clear to me that the health service pressures are taking time away from police officers in their usual role, and of course this could lead to our police forces being overrun away from their traditional work. In light of this, Minister, what assessment have you made of the increasing pressures on police officers, and what discussions have you had with the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding this increased pressure?

Thank you very much, Sam Rowlands, for bringing this to our attention today and congratulations on joining the shift. I think, across the Chamber, there will be people who have already done that or who will take up that opportunity, because it shows you what life is like on the front line, doesn't it, for our police officers and all those who they engage with, not just the citizens that they're engaging with but of course all of the other people at the sharp end, whether it's the ambulance service, accident and emergency—all the emergency care system working together. 

The place where these issues are raised is at our policing partnership board, which I or the First Minister chair. We work with policing colleagues, so the chief constables, the police and crime commissioners, and indeed the Secretary of State for Wales joins us, so it's devolved and non-devolved. We're looking at strategic issues. In the last meeting we had, we looked at homelessness and we looked at substance misuse. We regularly look at the pressures of the health service, which policing now have to engage with, and I would say that this policing partnership board is an ideal way of ensuring that we can work, as we do, at a devolved level, in terms of the services. And of course it includes local government, as well as health boards and the police themselves.

But let's also recognise the hard work that's undertaken by our police people across Wales. I am certainly looking forward to joining the anniversary of our PCSOs in a couple of weeks' time, to recognise the work that they do at the sharp end, as well.

We work in social partnership and are embedding social partnership in public bodies through the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill to drive improvements in public services and well-being. This builds on existing arrangements with, for example, NHS, local government and the cross-public services forum, the workforce partnership council.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Weinidog. The Llywydd will certainly be aware that I'll have to declare an interest here as a proud member of two trade unions. [Interruption.] They did know, I believe.

But sadly, Llywydd, we have seen countless examples over the years of bad practice when it does come to supporting workers, and the steps and threats taken by the UK Government recently, not just to undermine devolution but to undermine public sector workers striking for a fair wage, is just the latest in a long line of Tory attacks on workers. But we do do different things in Wales, and it's more important that we continue to work collaboratively with workers and strengthen the relationships with our trade union partners. Can I ask the Minister if she could outline how this could be achieved and whether she agrees with me that the best way for private and public sector workers to protect their interests and their livelihoods and to have a voice to be heard is by joining a trade union?

Can I thank the Member for his question? It'll come as no surprise to others in the Chamber that I wholeheartedly agree with the points that Jack Sargeant made there. I think the approach of the UK Government when it comes to trade unions and workers' rights in particular, and particularly their hidden-away, almost, announcement of their intention to try and repeal the Trade Union (Wales) Act, and their copious attacks across the UK in terms of trying to roll back workers' rights, shows a disregard not just for workers, but a disrespect for devolution as well. And instead of attempting to attack workers who are the backbone of our public services, who are feeling the pinch themselves of the cost-of-living crisis, they should actually go back and re-enact their commitment to an employment Bill, to actually improve the support for people in work and improve their rights.

I agree with you that strong and effective trade unions are not just in the best interests of workers and communities, but our country as a whole, and despite some of the rhetoric we might hear from some of our colleagues—not always in this place, but maybe elsewhere and in the right-wing media—actually, a positive view of trade unions is one that is reflected by much of the public in Wales, as we can see that trade union membership levels increased in Wales by 33,000 between 2020 and 2021; the only nation in the UK to see an increase. And when we talk about social partnership, it's not just about talking the talk, it's about walking the walk. Social partnership working goes beyond legislation; it's about a value-based approach of working together for the common interest and shared purpose, and it has a huge potential to drive change not just for individuals but collectively for our communities.

I want to thank Jack Sargeant for bringing this very important question here today. Few people in this Chamber know I was actually a member of Unison once upon a time, so I actually do care about the interests of our public sector workers across Wales.

This Senedd passed the Trade Union (Wales) Act in 2017 under conferred powers, and since the 2017 Wales Act, the devolved competency was reserved back to the UK Government. I respect devolution and the laws that are passed in this Senedd, even if I don’t sometimes fundamentally agree with them.

Minister, there are dispute resolution process frameworks in place to try and work out disputes between Governments, so I’d like to know whether this is something that will be put into the dispute resolution process to try and work through to find a solution to this programme. Because I think we need to find a way through this impasse to make sure that devolution and constitutional settlements right across the United Kingdom are respected, because we are elected here in our own right to make laws for the people of Wales.

Can I genuinely thank the Member for his thoughtful and considered contribution there? I want to start off by saying, James, I'm sure you'd be very welcome to rejoin Unison, but I think there was a ripple—[Interruption.]—there was a ripple of shock waves from the benches next to you with your revelation of being a former trade union member. But trade unions are for everybody, and as we said, it's the best way to represent and protect yourself within the workplace and work together.

I know there's a series of questions on the same issue that you raised for my colleague the Counsel General coming up after this, and I'm sure the points that you take on board are ones that are very prescient, and I'm sure the Counsel General will be very happy to pick that up and take it forward, and I thank you for your contribution.

Diolch yn fawr. Up to 45 per cent of all Welsh households could be in fuel poverty following the price cap increase of April 2022, using the Welsh fuel poverty measure. The last estimates collected for Ynys Môn in 2018 estimated a rate of fuel poverty higher than the Welsh national average at the time.

Thank you for that answer, and it is astonishing, isn't it, and we see how costs in terms of energy and fuel, as part of the cost-of-living crisis more broadly, are deepening from day to day, nearly, and the financial hardship that some of my most vulnerable constituents are seeing. We see it in the increasing demand for foodbank services. We've see this week Ynys Môn council, in partnership with Elfennau Gwyllt-Wild Elements, leading on a new project to provide fruit and vegetables to Ynys Môn foodbank, Amlwch foodbank and Bwyd Da Môn-Môn Good Food, and I congratulate everyone who's part of that scheme—and I'm sure the Minister will join me in that—but it is shameful that we need that.

There is an expectation for fuel prices to rise again, as the cap rises further later in the year. And my question is: what steps is the Welsh Government taking now to consider the options for providing additional support to my most vulnerable constituents when that heavier blow arrives later in the year?

Diolch yn fawr, Rhun ap Iorwerth. A very important question and, indeed, we discussed the cost-of-living crisis with the council leaders in the partnership council this morning. Council leaders were also raising these concerns, but also raising positive examples of how communities are coming together, the foodbanks and food pantries; FareShare, the charity working across Wales; Lesley Griffiths liaising with the supermarkets; and also agricultural farmers. Everyone's playing their part to try and support the most vulnerable. I said that we are going to—. In terms of our 'Claim what's yours', we're getting people to claim what they can, and we've got our new fuel vouchers, which are really important for pre-payment households, but also people off-grid in terms of the heat fund. The next iteration of our fuel support scheme will start to be paid earlier. We'll be announcing that in the next couple of weeks.

But I do think this does also need a response from the UK Government. They have the powers. We have asked consistently, and I hope you will join us in backing this, that the UK Government should lower the price cap for lower income households to ensure they can meet the costs of their energy needs and remove all social environment policy costs from household energy bills. They do that in the rest of Europe; why isn't the UK Government doing that? Meet those costs for general taxation, restore the £20 uplift in universal credit, uprate benefits from 2022-23 to match inflation. A 3.1 per cent benefit uplift—look at inflation at 9 per cent. So, we will do what we can. The fuel support scheme, the fuel foundation vouchers and, indeed, following on with the cost-of-living payments that have been made, the £150, with which more than £1.4 million paid so far. But also, please, let's work together to get the UK Government to address these issues and, indeed, address them as we're holding a second cost-of-living summit on Monday.

I'm grateful to you for agreeing to attend next Monday's meeting of the cross-party on fuel poverty and energy efficiency, which will have a particular focus on vulnerable rural households, including those in rural Ynys Môn and across north Wales. Amongst these, tenants who have their gas and electric included in their rent are likely to have missed out in the last round of the Welsh Government's winter fuel support scheme, as they were not the named energy bill payer at their address. What action, therefore, is the Welsh Government considering to address that for the next round?

I look forward, Mark Isherwood, to joining you, as I have every time I've had this invitation to the cross-party group, and, indeed, also, it'll be just alongside our summit as well. We'll certainly look at this issue in terms of making sure that our bespoke Welsh fuel support scheme reaches those tenants who need it most.

Thank you for your very important question, Jane.

The national approach to statutory advocacy, established in 2017, addresses the issue of access, availability and provision of advocacy for all children and young people, including those in residential care settings. The national approach is monitored by the national forum that oversees accessibility of advocacy provision across Wales. 

Diolch, Gweinidog. Thank you firstly for the Welsh Government's different approach to that of the UK Conservative Government in relation to removing profit from the care of children looked after. It's an important step forward, and I'm grateful to the Welsh Government for their support on this issue. As you say, Minister, in 2017 the Welsh Government committed themselves to ensuring that every child has access to an independent advocate. And yet, an independent report commissioned by Tros Gynnal Plant, which you know about, of course—Wales's leading children's rights charity—estimates that the majority of private providers of children's care have no provision of residential visiting advocacy and that most, for example organisations like Stepping Stones and Priory, do not have residential visiting advocacy at all. Given what we know of how we can engage with children, residential visiting advocacy is the most effective as it builds trust with children. So, my question, Minister, is: what could you be doing to accelerate and work harder to ensure that every single child who is looked after has that right to access independent advocacy? Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Diolch yn fawr, Jane. Can I just say, again—I want to put on the record, and the Deputy Minister for Social Services would say it with me, as we do as a Welsh Government—that removing profit from the care of looked-after children is a key component of our wider vision for the reform of children's social services. And progress is being made; a multi-agency programme board, chaired by the chief social care officer, is now moving forward in terms of governance impact assessments and working collaboratively with our stakeholders. And I think that that is the response to the question that you raise about how we can have consistency and co-ordination of services across the six regions of Wales with a national approach to statutory advocacy. In fact, the Deputy Minister will shortly be issuing a statement about this, and the national forum, of course, has looked at this national approach to statutory advocacy, and, indeed, looking at all of this for improving outcomes for looked-after children. And I know that, in the work of Tros Gynnal Plant, they've looked at this and, of course, the point for the Minister now is to come forward with her written statement, which is due imminently, on the approach resulting from the national approach to statutory advocacy task and finish group's legacy. 

It's disappointing to see that the Welsh Government is continuing to abolish private children's provision here in Wales, given that it makes up, indeed, 80 per cent of the sector. What the Government should be focusing on is getting the number of children in care out of the system into stable homes. Can the Minister outline what process is in place to meet with the private children's residential care sector and what the timeline is for the Government's plans? In terms of advocacy, what confidence does the Minister have that the newly appointed children's commissioner will stand up for children in care, considering her historical social media content?

No, I think I shall disagree with every point. It's hard to answer, isn't it, a question like that? Well, it's not questions, it's comments—it's comments, which I won't be responding to in terms of your last point at all. We have an independent children's commissioner who was appointed by a cross-party panel, and we wish her well in her post.

But can I say that this, of course, is a commitment from this Welsh Government, in our programme for government, supported, I know, by Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Liberal Democrats, that we remove, we eliminate, private profit from the care of looked-after children and that we progress with it. And of course that involves working with stakeholders as we progress that. Of course, it's collaborative work with our stakeholders and it's about transitioning to not-for-profit provisioning. The transition is key and the support for our looked-after children—the First Minister answered this in full yesterday afternoon—I think is robust in terms of our commitment to ensuring that we're not just caring for our looked-after children, but also that we ensure that fewer children have to come into the looked-after care system.

Thank you, Huw Irranca-Davies. The Welsh Government did not see the bill before it was introduced. It requires and is now receiving careful consideration, and we certainly continue to hold fundamental concerns about its potential regressive impact on human rights in the UK and on our positive agenda in Wales.

So, Minister, thank you for the answer, and apologies for a slight diversion into history, but we know that it was in the shadow of world war two that Churchill and Mitterrand and others backed a convention, supported by 100 parliamentarians from the 12 member states of the Council of Europe, to draft this charter of human rights and establish a court to enforce it. The British MP and lawyer Sir David Maxwell Fyfe was one of the leading members who guided the drafting of the convention, but, as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials, he had first-hand knowledge of how international justice could be applied effectively.

The UK Government has now decided, in its wisdom, it can do the job better. We will see. But the European Court of Human Rights have made it clear that the competence of Welsh institutions could be changed, depending on the scope of this brave new bill of rights, and this might materially affect the breadth and nature of our devolved competences. Our recent experience with the UK Government in this respect has not been good, so do you have confidence, Minister, that the views of Wales and the rights of people in Wales will be protected in the drafting of this UK bill of rights?

Well, thank you for that supplementary question. We made clear our fundamental opposition to the proposals in the Bill of Rights Bill during consultation at the start of the year, and you know the Counsel General and I issued a written statement on 22 June, reinforcing our concerns. Last week, we had an excellent cross-party group, chaired by Sioned Williams, on human rights. The voice from civil society was so strong, as well as cross-party representation, making clear their concerns about the Bill, and, of course, that spreads well beyond Government—absolute rejection of all the consultation responses that came out against the so-called bill of rights. We also now are setting up a human rights advisory group. It's meeting later this month; we'll be discussing the Bill. We want to take forward a positive and progressive plan of action to strengthen and advance equality and human rights for all the people of Wales. The situation now in terms of the UK Government: let's call on them again today to change direction while it's still possible to do so. Perhaps some of those who resigned might join us in that call today.

Diolch yn fawr, Rhys ab Owen. National milestones are an important part of Shaping Wales' Future. We're delivering the national milestones in two waves. The first wave was laid before the Senedd in December 2021 and the consultation on wave 2 was published in June. This autumn's 'Wellbeing of Wales' report will include a progress update on the national milestones.

Diolch yn fawr, Weinidog. You'll be aware that I'm concerned about the lack of enforceability powers behind the well-being goals. What would be the consequences of not achieving the national milestones?

Well, it's vital in terms of enforceability. It's about delivering our goals, isn't it, our national milestones. So, we've got agreed national milestone values, which do represent that shared vision for Wales. And we did develop those in collaboration with public bodies and stakeholders. But we have to recognise, in terms of the national milestones, that all public bodies that are captured in the Act have to outline what steps they're taking to contribute to their success. And, indeed, you have to hold us to account, as you do, and, indeed, we hold those public bodies to account as well. And this is crucial in terms of the work that's being undertaken as well by the Equality and Social Justice Committee in terms of looking at the efficacy of the Act as well as a post-legislative review.

I thank the Minister.

The next item is questions to the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution, and the first question is from Sarah Murphy.

Thank you for the question. Court closures in Wales, restrictions on sitting days, a dwindling supply of barristers willing to enter or remain working in a chronically underfunded profession, together with court backlogs, all contribute to making the criminal justice system perilously close to not being able to function effectively at all.

Thank you, Minister—sorry, thank you, Counsel General. I agree with what you've said: barristers in Wales are facing the brunt of the UK Conservative Government's underfunding of the justice system in Wales. This does not only impact barristers working in the industry—the lack of investment and support for them by the UK Government impacts the entire justice system and this inevitably affects those seeking justice in our communities. Welsh barristers and our nation deserve more than this. Counsel General, what does this mean for attracting people into the profession and the justice system in Wales under the Tory Government?

Thank you for those supplementary points and question. Our view is that the whole justice system, and legal aid in particular, has been chronically underfunded for some time, and Wales is suffering, in fact, disproportionately. We have had, of course, the Bellamy review. I met with Lord Bellamy, and we discussed the improvements that he is proposing in respect of criminal legal aid. Some improvements have been not only recommended, but it has been indicated by the UK Government that they will be implemented. Of course, Lord Bellamy is now a justice Minister, but it's profoundly disappointing that the UK Government has done so little and refused to move on so many of the recommendations, but also potential recommendations that could be made.

The reality is—and we begin to see this in Wales ourselves, particularly within the criminal area, but in many other areas where legal aid is no longer available—that we are seeing fewer and fewer young solicitors and young barristers coming into the profession to do legal aid work, to do criminal legal aid work. We already have a problem with advice deserts and there are very significant intrinsic and now institutionalised issues that undermine the future in respect of access to justice and the ability to get access to proper legal representation.

Thank you for the question. None. 

Good. [Laughter.] Our union of four nations is currently undergoing a monumental task in safeguarding our children's future from invading Russian forces in Ukraine. The gravity of the war has been felt in every single home here in Wales and will continue to do so until Putin is removed from office. The results of the war have perpetuated a cost-of-living crisis and a food security dilemma. Now is the time for us all to be discussing ways in which we can support our agricultural and food production industries here in Wales, not by hypothesising about ripping up our union in the name of a Welsh nationalist agenda that has no electoral mandate. It is for Scotland and the UK Government to determine the constitutional arrangements of their own between each other, but can the Counsel General confirm, if the Supreme Court grants Scotland a legal basis for a second independence referendum, that the Welsh Government will certainly not seek equal provisions for a Welsh independence referendum?

Well, I can help the Member by saying that a referendum for independence is a matter that is clearly important to the Scottish Government and was raised by them during the last Scottish Parliament elections. The reference by the Lord Advocate was served on me as a fellow law officer on 28 June 2022. The Supreme Court issued an order on 29 June, providing details of when the law officers should file an acknowledgement of service and case if they wished to participate. I will now consider carefully the matters included in the reference, including any implications for Wales. Once I've had the opportunity to do that, I will then determine if I should participate in the reference or take any further steps in relation to this issue, and the Member can be assured that I will, of course, keep Members of the Senedd updated as this matter progresses.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. Although there is no absolute doctrine of separation of powers in the UK, the concept of separation of powers between the legislature, i.e. Senedd, Executive, i.e. Welsh Government, and the judiciary has long applied in and across the UK to prevent the concentration of power by providing checks and balances—[Interruption.] I'm sorry. I didn't hear you very clearly.

You don't need to hear him. Carry on with your question.

Last September, referring to the Law Commission consultation paper on devolved tribunals in Wales to help shape the tribunal Bill for Wales, designed to regulate a single system for tribunals, I asked you for your initial response to the consultation paper's proposals to reform the Welsh Tribunals unit, the part of the Welsh Government that currently administers most devolved tribunals, into a non-ministerial department.

Last December, the Law Commission published its final report on devolved tribunals in Wales, which included that

'we are persuaded that the non-ministerial department model is the one that should be adopted for the future administration of the system of devolved tribunals in Wales'.

Although this also stated:

'The tribunals service should be operationally independent from the Welsh Government',

your subsequent written statement on devolved tribunals in Wales only states that:

'The Welsh Government strongly endorses the fundamental principle of the Law Commission’s recommendations for a unified, single structurally independent system of tribunals in Wales.'

What conclusions have you therefore now reached after considering the Law Commission's findings regarding this specific point?

Well, thank you for the question. You do raise a very serious and a very important point, and again I'd say very constructively. We dealt with some of the issues arising from the reform of tribunals in, of course, our 'Delivering Justice for Wales' paper. Consideration is being given now to what the structure of a tribunals Bill might look like, what the legislation might look like, how we might implement the recommendations of the Law Commission.

Perhaps the best assurance I can give to the Member at this stage is this: my views are very firmly that what we would be effectively creating is the embryonic structure of a Welsh devolved justice system. We would be using that part of the justice system that is already devolved and extending it further to create an appellate structure. So, the points that the Member raises are absolutely fundamental, and that is that that part of the justice system has to be independent of Government, not only seen to be, but, equally so, I think, administratively separate from Government. Of course, there are relationships, as you have with the justice system and with the Government and in respect of that funding, but it has to be a model that ensures the independent operation of the Welsh Tribunals unit, of that part of the justice system, and that the appointments to it, and in addition, importantly, the president of Welsh Tribunals and the functions that that person would carry out, are again those that have the full underlying principles of the rule of law requiring the independence of judiciary and those who participate within it.

Diolch. Well, I hope that means, as they said, that that will deliver operational independence from politicians, especially.

But, as I said here in March 2019 on a different subject, the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru White Paper, 'Securing Wales' Future', which called for continued membership of the EU single market, would mean no control of our borders, our trade and our laws, and would therefore be Brexit in name only. 

Speaking here last week, the First Minister extolled the virtues of Wales and the UK being inside the single market, although he appeared to back-pedal on this yesterday after Keir Starmer's statement that Labour has ruled out rejoining the single market as party policy, but claimed that he could remove trade and travel barriers nonetheless. What advice would you therefore give as Counsel General to both the First Minister and Mr Starmer about the legal barriers applying to this?

Well, the first bit of advice I'd give is to maintain the importance of international law and the rule of law. The second bit of advice I'd give is to oppose and not to support any bits of legislation that undermine those principles, one of them would be to, obviously, oppose the direction of the bill of rights, which, in fact, is transferring legal rights to citizens from UK courts to the European Court of Human Rights, so it's actually moving away the rights of people, and would be essentially to underpin those principles in all legislation that we have to ensure that they are entrenched constitutionally and to actually support those steps that are necessary to enable the devolved nations—the devolved Parliaments of the United Kingdom—to be able to ensure that they’re also entrenched within their own legal systems.

Thank you—an interesting response. Of course, the court of human rights is outside the EU structure completely and, as you know, the UK played an integral part in establishing it, but there we are.

Well, of course, the UK Government has been seeking to negotiate an agreement to tackle the barriers that do exist in order to maximise opportunities for low-friction trade and safeguard the integrity of the UK single market—something that any UK Government would encounter barriers with. In the meantime, is it not the case in law that, although the job is not finished and the UK needs to go further and faster to deliver the opportunities of Brexit for the entire UK, because of Brexit the UK Government has been able to deliver the fastest vaccine roll-out anywhere in Europe, cut VAT and red tape, strike 73 trade deals and announce the delivery of new free ports, including an initial one in Wales? And further is it not also the case that the UK has topped the chart in attracting the most fintech investment across Europe, that the UK has reclaimed the top spot in Europe and the second place internationally after the US in the global soft power index, and, brilliantly, that Welsh food and drink exports hit a record high in 2021, including a £51 million increase to the EU?

Of course, I met recently with the Minister Jacob Rees-Mogg in order to talk about the issue of retained EU law, which I think your question was beginning to identify. And of course, the Minister for Brexit opportunities, and if a book were written about that, it would be certainly a very short book indeed—. A number of the points that you raised, I think, really relate to other portfolios, but are very, very questionable. The overwhelming number of the trade deals that have been struck are effectively just the rebadging of deals that had already come into place in connection with the European Union in any event.

What I will say is this: firstly, in respect of retained EU laws, clearly, there is going to be a very significant amount of work that has to be undertaken there. I have been given assurances that devolution will be respected. I am monitoring that very closely to ensure that, when it comes to devolved areas, all of the 2,000-or-so laws that have been identified so far, those ones that relate to devolved issues are ones that are dealt with in this place and are the responsibility of this place and do not result in the undermining of the devolution settlement. Now, I believe I have been given an assurance to some degree. We’ll wait and see how that is implemented. This is also an issue that I raised recently at the Interministerial Standing Committee, chaired by Michael Gove, and I, of course, will not only be monitoring this, but obviously I’m sure it will be scrutinised by the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. But, of course, any significant developments will be reported back to this Senedd.

Questions now from the Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhys ab Owen. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Cwnsler Cyffredinol, in a recent article for The National newspaper, a leading Welsh academic, Richard Wyn Jones, said that the debate about the future of Wales's constitution lacked realism. He said that, despite there being a strong consensus in Wales for further powers, there's obviously no appetite for it in the Westminster Government and he said that there's no evidence from Keir Starmer that he supports further powers for the Senedd. In fact, if I remember correctly, he said in an ITV interview that he wasn't pressured at all to give further powers to this Senedd. Therefore, how certain can you be, if or when they come into power, that Keir Starmer and the Labour Party in Westminster will grant the Senedd further powers?

Well, the first thing, many of those changes are dependent on a change in Government. I suppose I can say that that is looking increasingly likely day by day, and I look forward to working with the next Labour Government sooner rather than later—perhaps imminently, I might even say—to actually talk about constitutional reform.

As far as the leader of the Labour Party is concerned, well, of course, he has empowered Gordon Brown to prepare a constitutional commission. There is a report that is awaited there that will obviously be of considerable interest, I think, to all of us within Wales, in terms of the issue of constitutional reform. But it is also the case that constitutional reform doesn't come from what is decided in Westminster or within the UK, and that is why we have our own independent commission, and that is to actually be able to assess ourselves what the future of Wales should look like, and also to put that then to the people of Wales. Because any significant constitutional change of that type ultimately is something that belongs to the ownership of or belongs to the people of Wales, and is ultimately decided by the people of Wales through our own elections.

I agree with you there, Cwnsler Cyffredinol: the answer is here in Wales. And I was rather concerned when the First Minister, last week, seemed to suggest that the answer was a Labour Government in Westminster. Now, Brexit is totally incompatible with the Good Friday agreement and it's leading toward the reunification of Ireland. The leader of the Labour Party won't admit that Brexit is a disaster. The Westminster Government and the Westminster Labour Party won't allow self-determination for the Scottish people. The Westminster Government is trying to repeal Welsh primary legislation, whilst the Labour leader in Westminster bans his shadow Cabinet members from supporting workers. Cwnsler Cyffredinol, are you a member of Labour for Indy yet? [Laughter.]

Well, thank you for that very pejorative question, and I will give a perhaps less pejorative answer to it. The points you make about Brexit, I don't think there's any real dispute for fair-minded, fair-thinking people that Brexit has not been good for Wales, it has not been good for the United Kingdom, and it has not been good for Europe. The constitutional question is how do we actually develop frictionless trade with Europe, which is something we all want to see, and, of course, the First Minister dealt with that very thoroughly yesterday.

In terms of those who are entitled to attend picket lines, well, I was very pleased to join the Member not so long ago, at Cardiff station, supporting those people in the railway network who were taking industrial action against Network Rail, the rail companies, and, effectively, against the UK Government, but not against the Welsh Government.

Thank you for the question. The UK Government’s announcement of its intention to repeal the Trade Union (Wales) Act 2017 is yet another example of its contempt for the devolution settlement, its disrespect for this democratically elected Senedd, and its flagrant disregard for the rights of workers in Wales.

I thank the Counsel General for that response. This legislature is supposed to be sovereign in specific areas. Rightly or wrongly, it should be our choice in our national Senedd to legislate and to make some rules and regulations. I'm pleased that our Senedd did pass legislation to protect our trade union members, but of course, like with any other Welsh legislation, the continuation of this legislation is reliant on the goodwill of Westminster, and, as we've seen, there isn't much goodwill to be seen there.

Whilst I don't doubt the sincerity of your First Minister and party in bringing forward the legislation, don't you think that it's unsustainable to say that the only way of ensuring the continuation of this Act, and others, is to wait until Labour are in power once again in Westminster? The Conservatives have been in power in Westminster for 70 years out of the last 100, and so, statistically, there isn't much assurance there. Wouldn't it be better to push for independence for Wales, in order to guarantee these rights and to secure further rights for the workforce of Wales?

Thank you for the question, and part of it I certainly agree with. The legislation that we passed—the Trade Union (Wales) Act 2017—of course went through all the correct processes in this Chamber. And of course, once legislation is passed here, it has to be endorsed, or there is a time period within which the UK Government can challenge its competence. Now, the UK Government, we had a letter from the Solicitor General at that time, which basically said the UK Government did not intend to challenge the competence of it. So, the UK Government was clearly accepting that when that legislation was passed, it was within our competence. I do not think it is appropriate at all then, when there have been further constitutional changes when the Government of Wales Act 2017 came into force, to somehow see that that is a mandate to actually trawl through and to overturn democratically passed legislation that has had the endorsement and consent of Her Majesty the Queen.

Now, at the moment, the regulations that are proposed to be tabled imminently by the UK Government with regard to agency workers do not overturn our legislation and cannot overturn it. The supremacy of our primary legislation is beyond that. What has happened is that there has been an indication that they would want to do that to ensure that the legislation in England is the same as in Wales. Well, if that happens, then the Welsh Government would firmly resist any attempt to do so. To bring forward primary legislation in this way, without giving us any notification that that was the intention—and we've dealt with the disrespect part of it—you would need to actually show there was some purpose to that primary legislation and all the costs that were involved. In fact, there is no evidential base whatsoever that would justify overturning that legislation. In fact, all the evidential information that we do have is that it would actually damage social partnership; it would undermine good relations and the social partnership policy that we have, and, therefore, would serve no purpose whatsoever.

I do welcome the comments that were made earlier. This is a matter that, I think, perhaps when taken out of the political arena, when wiser heads think about it, they would come to the view that this really serves no purpose whatsoever. It would achieve absolutely nothing; in fact, it would probably be damaging, and I really do wonder whether it is a matter that the UK Government really would want to proceed with. 

As you said, it's a choice, isn't it? It's a choice of the Tory Government, which is now in disarray—it can't even agree with itself—to disallow those things within the Wales TUC Act that we currently allow. And one of those things, of course, that is permitted, is the paid-for facility time, which is advantageous to both those people being represented and those companies who employ people. It very often results in very early resolutions rather than escalation of issues that people feel that they need representation on. And, very often, very simple things that can be resolved at an early stage—things like health and safety, pay negotiations. In other words, talking to each other and representing both sides. 

We've seen, by what the UK Government haven't done with regards the latest round of industrial action that has happened with train drivers, they've actually driven it the other way. Now, we don't want to see that sort of outcome here in Wales, which is why we've put it—

Joyce, can you ask your question, please?

My question is, to you, Counsel General: therefore, do you think that it would be unwise for the UK Government to try and take that action here in Wales and cause all that mayhem?

Well, listen, I agree with all the points that you've made. And I'd make this point as well: much of the legislation that has come into place, which is to do with facility time, is legislation that is agreed to be sound and purposeful across political parties. There have been many Conservative spokespersons who've recongised the importance of that. And if you think about it with an employer, in terms of when you have a large number of employees that you have to engage with, having representatives who can speak on behalf of the workforce, who can deal with the issues, the disciplinary issues and so on, who can deal with all the complexities of health and safety, and who can deal with all the various negotiations that take place, if you don't have that, you actually have quite a dysfunctional company. My concern is that the move to the legislation would not only undermine social partnership, but would actually contribute to that dysfunction within workplaces. It is not a good thing for employers. This is not just about things that are good for trade unions, and so on; this is actually good for industrial, modern, twenty-first century practice.

Thank you for your question. Decisions on the constitutional future of Wales are a matter for the people of Wales to determine through this democratically elected Senedd. We established the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales to engage with the Welsh public and consider options for future Wales governance.

Thank you very much, Counsel General, for that response. There is no doubt that there is an increase in the numbers supporting independence for Wales, and the current mess in Westminster highlights on a daily basis why we can't continue to be part of this corrupt union that shows so much contempt towards our people.

If you'd been in Wrexham on Saturday, you would have experienced the incredible feeling that there is a huge growth in demand for independence for Wales. What was striking about the march in Wrexham was the number of young people who were there and the large numbers who came from the border area and were calling for independence, not because of narrow and introspective nationalism, but because they want to extend Wales's horizons and believe that we can build a fairer Wales in having the powers to do so. Don't you fear that you're busily putting yourself on the wrong side of history, and that we should prepare for an independence referendum here in Wales, as there will be in Scotland?

Thank you for the question. Of course, while you were in Wrexham marching, I was at a conference in Cardiff talking about Senedd reform, which will obviously be something that will take up a considerable amount of my time in the not too distant future.

I think the point that the Member makes in terms of the future of Wales—. One of the reasons for setting up an independent commission is actually to engage with the people of Wales and to come up with options and analysis that we can consider and take on board with regard to the direction that we actually take. I think it would be a mistake to pre-judge the outcome of the independent commission. I think it is prudent to wait until we have, certainly, the interim report and then ultimately the further report. They're doing very, very important work, and I think it will be very, very valuable when we come to consider some of these constitutional issues in the future. 

I think the most important point that you actually made is this: people want reform, people want change, communities want empowerment, people want a greater say over their lives. Subsidiarity, which is something we talked a lot about in the 1980s and 1990s, has almost been pushed to one side. The common ground is there is a need for real reform that empowers people and communities so that people actually feel they have a real say in the decisions that impact on their lives. I think that is the common ground. How that takes place in a constitutional structure is obviously a debate that will carry on for some time, but will be influenced, hopefully, by the work of the independent commission that we've set up.

Thank you, again, very much for that question. The Welsh Government did not see the Bill before it was introduced. It requires, and is now receiving, careful consideration. We certainly continue to hold fundamental concerns about its potential regressive impact on human rights in the UK and on our positive agenda in Wales.

Thank you for that. I'm aware that you've given a response to the consultation noting your opposition, and I agree with everything that you've said in that consultation. It's unbelievable that the most corrupt Government of all time believes that it has the moral right to discriminate between the people who deserve to have human rights and those who don't. But, of course, people who truly believe in human rights know that their whole purpose is that they apply to everyone in the same way. The Government that has proposed these terrible changes is in the process of destroying itself, so it is, of course, possible that this will change. But it's also possible that its successor will continue with the plans, so it's essential to introduce a Welsh human rights Act quickly. I welcome what you've set out on this. Can I ask you whether you believe that the work of preparing the legislation, as well as the more general work of promoting human rights and supporting organisations to implement them, would be facilitated by establishing a Welsh commission on human rights, as has existed in Scotland since 2008?  

Firstly, I thank you for the comments and the very constructive points that have been made, and there is, of course, a lot of consideration being given to the issue of a bill of rights and, of course, my colleague the Minister for Social Justice has commented on that already. I made the point also in earlier questions, of course, that the Bill, as it's drafted, actually is about transferring rights of citizens on human rights issues back to Strasbourg rather than being able to raise them in the UK courts. So, it is about restricting that, and that is a very strange thing to be thinking about that.

Can I also say that what it also does is it raises very significant issues about the universality of international law? One of the reasons you have international courts is because it's clearly not appropriate, with fundamental principles, for the individual court to be able to pick and choose whether or not it likes those human rights or how it wants to interpret them. That has always been a fundamental principle, and, of course, it's a principle that UK Government recognises in terms of the International Criminal Court and the investigation of war crimes taking place in Ukraine. And it is a great irony, isn't it, that the Russian Duma has passed legislation to remove the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights from Russia at the same time as the UK Government is actually diminishing the role of the European Court of Human Rights for the United Kingdom, and there is a real concern about that overlap in terms of the approach to the importance of international law.

Some very good analysis and articles have been coming out about the whole issue of human rights and where the UK stands within that, and I'd say this—this was from Professor Mark Elliott, a very senior academic at Cambridge University—

'the Government dislikes scrutiny and views accountability mechanisms as threats that should be neutralised or at least marginalised.'

And I think that exactly sums up what the position is of the UK Government. He said it's an authoritarianism and an authoritarian restriction of scrutiny. And if you read through the Bill, that is exactly what it does and what it achieves. Of course, it has many other implications as well, but there will undoubtedly be further debate on this. We are very opposed to it, and we're also very supportive of work to look at how we might incorporate and maintain standards of human rights within our own constitutional structure and within our own legislation.

Good afternoon, Counsel General.

Thank you to Delyth for raising this very important issue.

I do think this opens up a wider debate that is needed here in Wales regarding our collective human rights. As you've said, many UN conventions were enshrined in EU legislation, and given the current Government's record on attempting to dismantle much of what is left of EU law, it would be, as you said, and as Delyth has alluded to as well, sensible for us here in Wales to take a more proactive approach in enshrining our rights in law. So, I wonder if I could just ask a more focused question around the formation, as you've touched on, of a Welsh bill of rights. Could you outline what the steps would be towards a Welsh bill of rights, and particularly what engagement and what powers we would need from the Conservative Government in order to advance this? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you for that, and thank you for your support. Just to make two comments that follow on from some of the things you say, of course, within the Bill of Rights Bill proposed, it excludes section 3 of the Human Rights Act, which requires courts to interpret domestic legislation compatibly with convention rights, and it also has no replacement for section 2 of the Human Rights Act, which requires courts to take account of European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence. So, there's nothing like that within the Bill, and that is an indication, I think, of the extent to which it is actually breaking away from the whole process of human rights, and indeed from the Council of Europe. Of course, the commissioner for human rights at the Council of Europe, which the UK was involved in setting up in 1959, has really said that it is a backward step. Of course, a number of comments have been made recently about the backsliding on human rights within the United Kingdom Government, and I think anyone who's following the debates that are taking place will have a lot of agreement with that.

In terms of the practical steps as to how it might happen, the starting point is this, isn't it: that we had the very important paper that the Minister for Social Justice had commissioned on behalf of Welsh Government by Simon Hoffman of Swansea University, which has given a very, very detailed analysis of those human rights issues. Since, then, the establishment of a human rights body, grouping, with sectoral representatives and all those aspects of civic society and so on that are engaged in the human rights field, I think I will be in an appropriate place to be considering and discussing how it might be achieved. On my role in terms of the Welsh Government and the legal side, what we want to do is to explore, really, the complexities of how we might actually do it in a way that is within competence, that actually does more than just repeat the various human rights aspects and the conventions, and actually gives us some clear substance and focus on what it is we actually want to achieve within Welsh legislation, because we already have legal obligations under the Government of Wales Act to actually do that. But I can assure you that we're committed to looking at that. I don't say, by any stretch of the imagination, that it is something that is easy, that does not have considerable complexities. But, bearing in mind the debate that's taking place, it's very important work that has begun and will continue.

The UK Government regularly fails to consult adequately with us before introducing new legislation, the Bill of Rights Bill being the most recent example. We have not yet undertaken a specific assessment of the cumulative impacts of these latest examples of how the UK Government is restricting access to justice and undermining the rule of law. 

I think the cumulative impact, Counsel General, is very important. There's been much attention to the Bill of Rights Bill and the impact here today in the Senedd, quite rightly, yet this raft of UK legislation, worryingly rushed and lacking effective scrutiny at the moment, could further impact on individual citizens of Wales's access to justice by diminishing or denying that justice to the vulnerable or the poor, to those who dissent from establishment views and who seek the right to protest and to speak out, those who are fleeing persecution and war and arrive here in Wales, and others whose voices are already weak. So, I would ask you, Counsel General, together with the Minister for Social Justice, to make a clear assessment of the cumulative impact of this raft of UK legislation, strident UK legislation, and then make the strongest representations to the UK Government, both in your meetings and in your public pronouncements, too. 

I thank you for those supplementary points, and, of course, at every opportunity we do actually raise these issues, and we have made them at the inter-ministerial meetings as well. The point you raise, in fact, about the various legislation that's been passed, of course, has been something we've discussed on a number of occasions. You'll recall, of course, the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act. There were a number of elements to that that we opposed, that we refused legislative consent to. Some of those were overturned. But, of course, the House of Lords also removed elements to it, and it's very disappointing that, within the legislative programme of the UK Government, there is to be a protest Bill that brings back all of those areas that were of real concern to us, which are restrictions on civil liberties and freedom of speech. 

There was a very important article, I think, that has just appeared in the Constitution Unit blog, and it raised four points that I think are really significant in understanding what is happening. They're talking about the eroding of democracy constitutionally, and they call it 'democratic backsliding'. It said that it starts off with four things, and I will just perhaps mention these because perhaps Members would want to judge whether they think they apply to the situation at the moment. They said the first one is a breakdown in the norms of political behaviour and standards. I don't think we need to look very far to see that item. Secondly, there's the disempowerment of the legislature, the courts and independent regulators. Well, we see that in the bill of rights, the attempt to achieve that, and indeed in other legislation. Third is a reduction of civil liberties and press freedoms, and we've already seen the actual restrictions in civil liberties that have already been introduced in items of legislation. And fourthly, harm to the integrity of the electoral system, and we've seen that already within the elections Bill. I think that those four points all have credit to them and are something that should cause us considerable concern in the direction of the UK Government at this moment in time. 

Thank you for your question. The UK Government’s purported intention to introduce legislation in one legislature to override the legislation passed by another is not only unconstitutional but shows disrespect for the democratically elected Senedd. It is one more example of contempt for the devolution settlement and the rights of the people of Wales. 

Counsel General, we've seen the threats towards public sector workers from this disrespectful, disgraced, corrupt and now collapsing Conservative Government—a Government that doesn't care about working people, especially those working people in Wales. And who knows where we'll end up in the near future. But I'm sure you will agree with me, Counsel General, that it is time for change in Westminster, that it is time for a UK Labour Government. However, with all the chaos that is going on, which continues to go on, in the halls of Westminster, we should not lose sight of what the Tories are actually trying to achieve here by undermining devolution. Can I seek assurances from you, Counsel General, that if they do proceed with the threatened action that has been reported, we are ready to challenge, that the Welsh Government has already taken the initial steps that are needed to challenge in the courts the position put forward by Tory Ministers, this assault on the Senedd and this assault on the working people of Wales? Diolch.

Thank you for those strongly made points. Can I start by saying I think there are those within the Conservative Party, and I believe possibly even within the Welsh Conservative Party, who are supporters of trade unions and the role they play, who do support pragmatic and practical engagement? There are those who still retain some belief in the concept of one-nation conservatism, and that has provided a basis for an enormous amount of cross-party legislation in these areas over the years. We know this from past experience, because the various referenda that we've had have been dependent on cross-party co-operation and agreement, from Conservatives, Plaid Cymru, the Liberal Democrats and from Welsh Labour, and that has always been, I believe, to the benefit of Wales and good constitutional progress. So, as we have a Government that is in actual freefall—and I suppose it must mean the question of a general election is likely sooner rather than later—what I would hope is that, within some of these areas, there is actually a far more progressive and practical and co-operative approach to the common understanding I think many of us actually share, and that is that there is a need for reform, there is a need for change. I'm sure that, co-operatively, we can achieve an enormous amount of that. The current conflict, which has really emerged since 2018, and which appears in all sorts of unnecessary ways in legislation, not only costs a lot of money, and takes up a lot of expert time, but, quite frankly, results in very poor legislation. 

We have sought meaningful engagement since the UK Government launched their consultation in December. The Minister for Social Justice and I met with the Deputy Prime Minister in February. Despite our full response to the consultation, there is very little sign that those concerns have been addressed.

I thank the Counsel General for that answer. The challenges with this bill of rights being brought forward have been well rehearsed this afternoon, not least the significant risks that external observers have noted to the devolution settlements right across the UK, and also significant implications for human rights and equality, not least in terms of article 10, freedom of expression, and article 11, the freedom of assembly, and so on—what has been described as the essential foundations of a democratic society. However, one of the problems of a rushed piece of legislation proposal such as this is the lack of consultation, not just with Welsh Government, but with organisations in Wales, including those speaking up for interested groups such as disabled people, those sharing protected characteristics, and more. Will you ensure in your discussions with UK Government that they consult, using the frameworks that Welsh Government have with partners across Wales, with those organisations, with those individuals? 

The answer is that we certainly will. In fact, myself and the Minister for Social Justice attended a number of meetings with civic organisations that were very, very concerned about the implications of the bill of rights and the direction it was taking. We attended a meeting more recently on that, and there are further meetings that are due to take place. 

In terms of the consultation itself, well, of course, we put in a very detailed consultation response and we shared that with civic organisations and the third sector. I think that was very welcomed and appreciated. There have been approximately 13,000 responses to the consultation. What is very clear from that is that those are overwhelmingly opposed to what is being proposed, and it's not unexpected because the Bill that's being introduced goes contrary to the UK Government's own independent assessment of the need for reform, the Gross report. 

Whereas there is nothing wrong at all with the idea that, periodically, legislation is looked at, this is being ideologically and politically driven, and it is being driven in a direction that undermines democracy and undermines the rule of law. I don't believe it has any significant and credible support for it. It certainly has no evidential base, and the consultation shows that. So, we will continue to develop our contacts and our work, and I'll continue to liaise with the Minister for Social Justice over all these issues, because these things will have a significant impact across Welsh society and across the UK.

I'm sure in the imminently changed Government that we're likely to have, there will be a far more progressive approach to the issue of human rights, and I hope that, in actual fact, this Bill will be completely dropped. 

Finally, question 9, Rhys ab Owen. 

Thank you for the question. It's a very practical question, and it's an important one. We have highlighted in our 'Delivering Justice for Wales' publication in May some of the measures that we're taking to support the legal sector. For example, through Business Wales we are delivering targeted support to legal practices to help them become, I think, more resilient, to innovate and grow. In partnership with the Law Society's Wales office and the national committee for Wales—I'm really pleased to see that the Law Society has now given national recognition to its body within Wales—we've developed a webinar series on business and digital support, cybersecurity, and legal technology.

We've recently invested £100,000 to help legal practices in Wales gain cybersecurity accreditation through a scheme the Law Society is managing. We're also looking at extending pathways into the legal profession to help more young people enter the law from a range of backgrounds to diversify the legal sector workforce and retain more of our Welsh homegrown talent, and, also, because of the importance of the development of the Welsh-medium legal profession.

In April, we issued an apprenticeship framework for two new Chartered Institute of Legal Executives qualifications at paralegal levels 3 and 5, and we're looking at further work on that. We're also investing in legal technology and cybersecurity—some £3.9 million of European funding towards Legal Innovation Lab Wales at Swansea law school, which will make up a total of just under, I think, £6 million that's being invested in that really exciting and important project.

So, these are the steps we're taking. We're obviously looking to do more and more to recognise the importance of the legal economy in Wales, and, again, to make the point that one of the most important things the Ministry of Justice could do would be to give us a decent civil justice centre in Cardiff.

Diolch yn fawr, Gwnsler Cyffredinol. The UK Government have been becoming increasingly hostile towards the legal profession, especially those holding them to account by stopping illegal removals from the United Kingdom and holding them to account against human rights abuses; all of this, also, whilst criminal barristers are striking. The current median annual income for a criminal barrister is £12,200, and that's due to years of legal aid cuts by the Tory Government. Legal aid, I'm sure you'll agree with me, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, is welfare; for years, it's been levelling people up so that they can have decent legal representation. As the Welsh Government's legal officer, when justice is devolved to Wales, will you give us a guarantee that lawyers will be properly respected and properly remunerated when that happens?

I've made the point many times how important access to the law is, because it fundamentally is about the rights of individuals and communities; it's about the empowerment of those two as well. Of course, I have always, I think, praised those elements of the legal profession—within the bar, within solicitors, and those who are paralegals working in Citizens Advice—who actually work in that area that is doing the best to give support to people in communities.

These are not the fat-cat lawyers that you read about in the papers; they're not the starting salaries for some solicitors in London City corporate firms of £120,000 a year. These are people who are making an absolutely valid contribution to our communities; it is the sector we want to expand and to increase throughout Wales. If people don't have access to justice, then you don't have real justice and you don't have real democracy, so I agree with all of the points you've made.

I thank the Counsel General.

Item 3 is next, questions to the Senedd Commission. All questions this afternoon will be answered by the Llywydd. Question 1, Huw Irranca-Davies.

All committee rooms on the Senedd estate are equipped to support hybrid meetings. In addition, other meeting rooms have similar equipment for hybrid meetings that are less formal or on a smaller scale. Hybrid working has become the norm, and the Commission intends to build on technical provision in this area and further enhance it. We will be carrying out further work over the summer and will be adding to the 12 rooms that are currently kitted out for hybrid meetings.

Diolch yn fawr iawn. Thank you very much for that answer. It's good to see the work that has been going on already, and that continues to go on, to increase the proportion of rooms that can be used in hybrid format, because, as we all know, it seems to be that we will have to use this as a modern way of working now, and certainly as we go into the autumn and winter. Is it realistic to expect that most, if not all, of the committee and meeting rooms within the short to medium-term future could indeed be hybrid? Also, would we have the staff available in order to service those hybrid meetings as well?

Well, as I said, it's now a normal way to work that we can provide remote contributions as well as contributing on the estate, and so there is an investment programme in more rooms in order to ensure that we can meet in hybrid format in those rooms, including, for some rooms, that we have the mobile technology, which means that it can be moved from one room to another, and so that provides even more flexibility to us. And of course, as the Member has said and as we've learned over the last two years, the technology is one thing but having the excellent staff that we need to ensure that the technology does work conveniently for Members is vital. And I think that we have proven over the last couple of years that we have staff that we directly employ on the IT side who have responded to the challenge of working in hybrid format or virtually and have done that very well and are ready to take the next steps to ensure that we are a Senedd that can adapt and innovate continuously in this area.

Decisions about the level of benefits payable to support staff, including their pension benefits, are a matter for the independent remuneration board of the Senedd. The Commission has not had any discussions with the remuneration board regarding changes to the pension benefits of support staff. Members and staff can raise issues directly with the remuneration board through various channels, and I understand that a session of that kind is being offered for Members by the remuneration board today.

Thank you for that response, Llywydd.

A disparity for employer pension contributions between Members' support staff and Senedd Commission staff was recently brought to my attention. At the moment, Members' support staff can expect a 10 per cent employer pension contribution, whereas the equivalent amount for Commission staff is 26.6 per cent. I was wondering if the Commission could take another look at this, or indeed encourage the remuneration board to take another look at this, and reconsider. I don't think it's fair when workers in the same building as each other are receiving almost half of the employer pension contributions as their Commission colleagues.

Commission staff are members of the civil service pension scheme, and that scheme is a statutory one, and so the Member support staff are not eligible for that specific scheme, namely the civil service scheme. In terms of what you as Members—. I heard other Members applauding what you said, Luke Fletcher. If you want to influence the pensions for support staff and the support staff want to look at that as well, then, as I've said, it's important for you to make representations and discuss those with the remuneration board, which is independent and which takes decisions on these issues, and it's not, as it happens, a matter for the Commission. So, I do encourage you, if you want to advocate on behalf of your staff, to let the remuneration board know about that.

Item 4 is topical questions, and the first question will be answered by the Deputy Minister for Social Services. I call on Jane Dodds.

Our legislation requires the use of accommodation that meets the needs of care-experienced young people in accordance with their pathway plan. It does not provide for unregulated settings, however there can be occasions where these are used as an emergency resort, and providers must be approved to required standards.

Diolch, Gweinidog. Last night we heard about shocking, disturbing and sad interviews with children and young people in care, who endured exploitation, abuse, violence and threats in bed and breakfasts and hostels where they were placed. This is six years after the Welsh Government had promised to eliminate the use of all unregulated accommodation for children and young people in our care. Only through freedom of information requests to all councils do we now know that over 300 children, some of whom are as young as 11 years old, were placed in bed and breakfasts, hostels or other unsafe accommodation during the last financial year.

In response to my calls for an independent review, the First Minister invited Members to outline gaps between reviews undertaken, and I just want to outline those gaps, because we know that reviews have been undertaken in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, but none in Wales. My office took up that challenge and identified more than 20 subject areas within children's services that have been reviewed in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, but not in Wales. And in fact, looking at just two of those reports, with in fact the widest remits, those by the Public Accounts Committee and Care Inspectorate Wales, we heard that only 30 care-experienced young people and just six local authorities had been interviewed and contacted. Compare that to England, where 1,100 responses were evaluated, and Scotland, where over 5,500 experiences were heard.

And last week I'm sure all our hearts sank when we heard about the sentencing following the brutal murder of Logan Mwangi, and the detail that came out of that as well. I want to make it clear that I am not blaming anybody in respect of that event, and I know nobody here would. This is not about the local authority who were responsible for the care and protection of Logan, but surely you would agree that we in the Senedd need to know that those children are being protected. We need to hear the voices of those people who are working in child protection and childcare, and to hear what they need. We are responsible for those children and young people, and in my view it is essential that we have a review to tell us what the issues are, what support is needed and how we can make sure that not just our social workers, but those working in every single role in child protection and childcare have the resources we need.

So, Minister, I do finish by saying: what else needs to happen for Wales to be the same as every other nation and have this independent review that will help us all to make sure we have in place the steps, the resources and the support that is needed to protect our children and young people? Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you very much, Jane Dodds, for that question. I know how great a concern you have about these issues, and of course it is so distressing to hear about Logan and to hear about the care-experienced young people who were featured last night on the documentary.

In terms of an independent inquiry with regard to Logan, I'm sure the Member is aware that there will be a child practice review taking place now the sentencing has been done, and it will be reporting in the autumn. I think it's absolutely crucial that we look at what that child practice review says. We want to learn lessons from how this happened and we want to see if there are any wider lessons that we need to look at. So, that child practice review will be taking place, and since these tragic circumstances, Care Inspectorate Wales has undertaken an inspection of Bridgend social services, and we're also waiting for that result. So, I'm sure she is aware that these are happening, and we will look at those very carefully when they're actually published, which should be before the end of this year.

With regard to the other comments, I think it is absolutely right that we listen to children, and in Wales I think we've got a really good record of listening to children. We fund Voices from Care, who come to us and tell us very freely what all their views are. We've got care-experienced children on the oversight board of our transformation programme for children's services. We include care-experienced children in the discussions about the minimum income guarantee that we are going to bring forward. We've got care-experienced children on that board—the universal income. And I'm sure that she will acknowledge that, basically, by providing that, Wales is going far ahead of any other country in the world in terms of providing financial assistance to care-experienced children. So, I hope she will acknowledge that. So, we do listen to children. And in September we're holding a summit, which is a summit for care-experienced children, where we will listen to what care-experienced children say.

In terms of accommodation, of the care-experienced children who left care between 1 April 2020 and 31 March 2021, 628 children, that's 95 per cent, were deemed to be in suitable accommodation at the date they ceased to be looked after, but there were 5 per cent who were not. And I think, obviously, the stories, the tales we heard last night were some of those 5 per cent, and obviously that's 5 per cent too many, and we are working hard to see that their situation is improved. 

The Welsh Conservatives called for a general review of children's services across Wales, and my colleague only yesterday—Andrew R.T. Davies—mentioned it in First Minister's questions. I raised it in the business statement. Jane Dodds has mentioned it in a topical question today, Deputy Minister. And as Jane Dodds alluded to, there is a review happening in England, Scotland and in Northern Ireland, but the First Minister said that one is not needed in Wales. But we have the worst rate of looked-after children in the UK. You've just said the contrary, saying we have a good rate, but the statistics actually say we have the worst rate of the UK nations. So, why is Wales the exception to this much-needed review when it's the exception for the rate of looked-after children? And the sad case of Logan Mwangi in Bridgend should trigger a national perspective to have a review across all children's services across the 22 local authorities. So, will you commit your Government to looking at this again, and hopefully seeing a review of children's services across Wales, so we can cover ourselves and not have cases such as Logan Mwangi happen again in Wales? Thank you.

Thank you, Gareth Davies, for that question. I'd just like to correct him, I didn't say we had a good rate of children in care. I think he must have misheard that. I said we had a good rate of listening to children. We've got a good record of listening to children. And in fact, the Welsh Government has been working very hard over the last three years to try to bring down the number of children who are in care, because we absolutely recognise that we've got too many children in care in Wales. And as the First Minister answered to Andrew R.T. Davies in First Minister's questions yesterday, one of the ways we want to tackle these issues is by reducing the number of children who are in care, because we feel that, by giving more help for children who are on the edge of care, helping the children and their families, we can keep a lot of children out of care, and that, I think, is one of our main aims—to keep children out of care. And we've had this reduction strategy over the last three years, and during the last year, the rate has now started to drop, so we are on the right trajectory, but we have got a long way to go. So, I certainly don't think that we've got a good record on the number of children in care.

In terms of the review, as I said in response to Jane Dodds, there is a child practice review that will be happening now, and that will be reporting in the autumn. We will have to see what is the result of that child practice review, whether there are any wider issues that need to be taken up across Wales, and also we're waiting for the CIW report of services in Bridgend. So, we're waiting to see what those two results are. We do have a plan for transformation of children's services. We have committed money to it. We are working at it and we think it's really important that we go ahead and take action on those, and we're certainly going to look very carefully at the result of these reviews.

Thank you to Jane Dodds for tabling this very important question. Like you, I was very moved and disturbed by the documentary. I think Niall's comments really stuck with me saying, 'Prison would have been better for me.' Prison better than somewhere that they were supposed to be safe. I would also like to echo the calls for an independent review of children's social work. I think this is essential. We are an outlier, and these are experts telling us—it's not politicians pushing for this; these are experts working in the field. And may I take from your response to Gareth Davies, therefore, that you are not ruling out the need now, that you are awaiting both and are therefore still open to an independent review should you not be content with both reports that you've referenced? I think that that would be a welcome step today.

And if I may as well, we know that looked-after children are especially vulnerable and outcomes are too often much poorer than we would wish, and research for End Youth Homelessness Cymru's report, 'Don't Let Me Fall Through the Cracks', shows us the links between care experience and youth homelessness—so, really, echoing those calls that we saw from those young people yesterday. Evidence shows that we need to be able to target specialist services at the young people most at risk of experiencing youth homelessness, and this is part of the prevention agenda that you've also referenced—how important it is that we support people so that they don't end up in the care system. But we can't deny that there are young people who are facing risks today—as you said, those 5 per cent; that is a significant amount of young people who are falling through the cracks. Therefore, to what extent is Welsh Government monitoring the outcomes for young people in care, as, clearly, there are far too many in the system without that safety net at present?

I thank Heledd Fychan for that question. In terms of a review, I think our position has been laid out by the First Minister, as he did in First Minister's questions. But, as I've said, we're looking at the result of the practice review later on this year and at what Care Inspectorate Wales says about the social services, and we will see if there are any wider lessons that we need to learn from that. We have had a lot of reviews in Wales. We really feel that we should be continuing with the action that we've started to improve the lives of young people who are care-experienced and to make sure that we give them the best chance that we possibly can. I think it is important to mention the 95 per cent who are deemed to have good accommodation that is safe, secure and affordable, because lots of young people who leave care do achieve and do have happy, fulfilled lives, so I wouldn't want anyone to think that the tragic stories that we've heard are typical, but they're so important, and they are that 5 per cent that she mentions that we've got to do all we possibly can to help. And to re-echo, that's why we want to reduce the number of children in care, so that children who really absolutely have to come into care, we're able to put all our resources in to try to stop there being—you know, to try to give them the best lives that we possibly can.

In terms of youth homelessness, that's obviously something that we're very concerned about and we do put considerable resources into youth homelessness. We put £3.7 million through the youth support grant, and we have homelessness officers working in youth teams in order to identify young people who may be at risk. And we've also put £3.1 million in the youth homelessness innovation fund, and, with that fund, we're trying out different ways of providing accommodation for young people. We've also, this year, put in £60 million for housing and care, which is to provide accommodation where young people who are in need of support are able to live independently but with support. So, that £60 million is going to be spent this year in providing that sort of accommodation. And generally, I think it's just this year that we've got £197 million in homelessness and housing support. So, I think we've certainly put the money in there and we're certainly seeing some innovative responses coming from that, but I absolutely accept the points that Heledd makes and I think that we've just got to do all that we possibly can to help that 5 per cent. 

I thank the Deputy Minister. The second question will be answered by the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales, and Trefnydd, and I call on Samuel Kurtz.

I was pleased to publish our proposals for the sustainable farming scheme today. The scheme has been designed to support farmers to produce food in harmony with the environment. I look forward to hearing the views of farmers and stakeholders on the proposals in our second phase of co-design.

Minister, thank you for your response. I'm pleased to see how far this statement has progressed since the initial 'Brexit and our land' consultation of 2018, where replacement funding was first discussed. Firstly, I am left disappointed that, given the press release calling this a landmark announcement—and indeed it is, as this is the replacement to the basic payment scheme and the first subsidy policy ever developed in Wales for Welsh farmers—only a written statement this morning was issued. I believe that an oral statement to this Chamber would have been more appropriate, given the gravity of the changes afoot. I appreciate that we have a long summer ahead of agricultural shows, where you, I and other Members will discuss the SFS at length with the unions and stakeholders, but I know Members would have appreciated the opportunity to quiz you on this scheme before recess. So, I am grateful to the Llywydd for accepting my topical question.

Moving on to the contents, there is a lot to be commended in the SFS. However, there are a few areas that I would like to seek further clarification on. You say that a decision on how the final scheme will look will not be made until, I quote, further consultation on the

'detailed proposals and the economic analysis has been presented in 2023.'

This will include modelling the actions in the scheme and assessing how the actions support farmers to produce food sustainably. This modelling appears to ignore the need for food security, at a time when global conditions are so uncertain and fragile. I would urge you to ensure that any modelling that goes ahead before next year incorporates food security and growing our food self-sufficiency sustainability. Regarding this modelling, I would stress that there must be key markers to determine the impact of the scheme on not only our sustainable food production but also on our culture, the Welsh language and the vitality of our rural communities. Sustainability is not just environmental, but is also cultural and socioeconomic, and I would hope to see more within the SFS to show that these key objectives are included.

There are concerns relating to the plans for all farms to ensure 10 per cent of their farm is covered in trees. While the industry agrees improvements are needed and it is willing to play its part in supporting nature, it is essential that these trees are the right trees in the right place. A well-meaning policy could potentially have negative impacts. From experience, I know that many farms will already be very close to or even exceeding this 10 per cent requirement, but others have very low levels of tree coverage, due to the locations of their farms. For example, there are many farms on the west coast of Wales—

Can I remind the Member that this is a topical question, and not necessarily a debate? So, please, we need to get the questions, okay.

Yes, of course. I've got many questions on this, Dirprwy Lywydd, so—

Well, you have a limited time, as you know.

Well, thank you very much. But, in terms of this, there are many different types of farms in Wales—how can a 10 per cent blanket coverage be relevant to those farms on the coast of Wales, where trees can't grow as well as on those inland? I appreciate what the Deputy Presiding Officer has said, so I will wrap it up there, but I am keen to hear more on the sustainable farming scheme, going forward. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Thank you. And I think you broadly welcomed the sustainable farming scheme outline that we've published today, and I've certainly been very heartened by the response of many of our stakeholders, our farming unions and individuals. And as you say, I think we certainly have moved a considerable way in four years, if you look back to the first consultation, back in 2018, of 'Brexit and our land'. And that's because of the two consultations we've had, the White Paper we've had, and the first phase of co-design. And I was very keen to publish this outline scheme ahead of the summer shows—I thought it was really important to get it out there, so that we can have those further discussions, and also to encourage farmers and stakeholders to sign up to the second phase of the co-design. We had 2,000 farmers who helped us in the first phase last year; I would like to beat that. I've set that target, so I'd be very keen for everyone to join in that conversation. And of course, I'd be very interested in your views on the scheme.

You focused on a couple of points. I think the biggest challenge to food security are the climate and nature emergencies. And that's why we've got this single agenda, if you like—you can't pick out one thing; they're very integrated and complementary objectives, I think, tackling those nature and climate emergencies and the sustainable production of food. And obviously, we will go further when we publish the agricultural Bill here in the Senedd in the autumn. The main thing is that this scheme is designed to keep farmers on our land, and I absolutely take on board what you say about socio and cultural objectives and outcomes for our farmers.

In relation to trees, we do have a very challenging target to reach of 43,000 hectares of new woodland by 2030 to help us mitigate climate change. And you'll be aware of the UK Climate Change Committee recommendations in relation to that. And obviously, farmers have a significant part to play in helping us achieve that target. You're quite right, many farmers will already have 10 per cent of their land to trees. A farm I went to on Monday to launch the scheme, he hasn't got 10 per cent, and he had some very challenging questions about how he could reach 10 per cent. Others will have 10 per cent, the 10 per cent habitat cover as well. And that's part of the conversation, to hear the concerns of farmers, but also how we can work together to ensure those targets are reached.

I know people will be disappointed that the financial levels aren't there. However, I'm waiting to see the economic analysis. We can't do anything until we have that analysis and modelling, and I think that's accepted, that that will be the next part ahead of the final consultation next year. So, this is just another step along the way. We're now at probably the fourth major step in that journey. 

Minister, it's very pleasing to hear you say you want to keep farmers on the land, and I think that's what we all want to see, and that's what our farming industry wanted to see. In paragraph 2.3.5, it's stated that:

'All farmers should be able to access the Scheme.

'It is important the Scheme works for all types of farms. The Scheme is designed so all farm types can access it, including tenants and those with rights to common land.'

Minister, many tenant farmers are concerned that the good work they're going to do around enhancing the environment could only be to benefit the landowner, or potentially that landowners could evict tenants off their farms to access the scheme's funding themselves. I was asked by a Breconshire young farmer the other day about carbon offsetting, and they were very keen to know will the carbon offsetting go against the active farmer who's doing the work on the farm, or will it actually go against the landowner, say the National Trust, for example. So, Minister, what protections are you going to put in place to protect those tenant farmers and actually make sure that scheme funding goes to the active farmer, and not big conglomerates who do not do any farming at all?

So, tenant farmers have played a huge part, I think, in getting us to where we are now, and you may be aware that I will be convening some specialist working groups to help us look at the co-design of the scheme ahead of the final consultation. And tenancies was absolutely the first working group that we wanted to set up, because I think they do have some very pertinent and specific concerns. And if it doesn't work for tenant farmers, this scheme won't work for farmers. So, I've made that very clear to the Tenant Farmers Association particularly, who I've had many discussions with. 

The whole point of the scheme is that it's farmers who are actively managing the land that will be rewarded. So, that will be part of the discussion going forward. As I say, it's got to work for every type of farmer. It's also got to work for every type of farm. So, I was at a sheep farm on Monday, as I say, to hear Russell Edwards's concerns about the scheme, but it was also really encouraging that he was already ticking many boxes in order to get that baseline payment. But, as I say, this is the start of the next step; I'm sure there will be changes. This is why it's not a formal consultation, because, as we go through those conversations, I'm sure there will be changes and new things introduced ahead of that final consultation. 

Thank you to Sam Kurtz for introducing this question today. And given where we were four years ago with 'Brexit and our land', there's been a significant shift here in language and tone, and that's to be welcomed. I'm also pleased to see that the co-operation agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Government has led to ensuring that there will be stability payments continuing during the transition period up until 2029. Again, that's to be warmly welcomed. 

But, and there is a 'but', the new system needs to recognise the importance of the role of farmers in producing food, particularly in the current climate. Food production should be one of the core outputs, and farmers should be rewarded for this. Will food production therefore be a central part of any new Bill and one of the outputs? In addition to this, as we've heard, the importance of agriculture in relation to community and culture is central to the development of our nation. So, will culture be one of the core outputs, and will farmers be rewarded for maintaining our communities and our culture? 

There is some coverage of the need for land for forestry, water and wildlife. Will you ensure that farmers won't be asked to allocate good agricultural land for this, and that rather you will co-operate with farmers to identify the most appropriate land? Also, is there flexibility in terms of the percentage of land to be designated? Are you talking about forestry, or are you also talking about hedgerows? Would fernland count towards the 10 per cent of waterways?

Finally, with around 30,000 farm units in Wales, it will be important to ensure that Farming Connect has sufficient resources to tackle the additional responsibilities. What additional resources will you provide in order to ensure that Farming Connect can deliver work in this area? And, can you give an assurance that farmers won't be penalised for failings that may be related to a lack of capacity within Farming Connect? I ask this not only on behalf of myself, but a young boy from Dyffryn Ardudwy, Nedw, raised some of these issues with me yesterday and asked what the future of farming will be for him. So, these questions are important to the new entrants too. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll just pick up on that final point. I mentioned in my answer to James Evans that we were setting up some specialist working groups, and young and new entrants will be another specialist working group, because I think you're absolutely right, it is vital that this scheme works for our future generation farmers as well. This is the first time we've had bespoke agricultural policies and protocols and schemes for Wales, so we need to get it right probably for two or three decades, I would say. So, it's absolutely vital that young and new entrants are part of that conversation. I will say there are going to be four specialist working groups—tenancies; young and new entrants; cross-border farm businesses; and, common land—because it is really important that we take all those views on board. 

I think the over-arching principle of this scheme is that you produce food. If you don't produce food, you won't be in the scheme, so I hope that answers your question. We obviously recognise that food production is vital for our nation, but this scheme also recognises that we must, must respond to the climate and nature emergencies if we are to have that sustainable and resilient agricultural sector that we all want to see. As I said in an earlier answer, I think those emergencies are the biggest threat to global food security. 

You mentioned about Farming Connect, and it is important that it's fit for purpose and is able to cope. Obviously, that is something that we've been looking at very closely, not just in preparing this scheme, but over the last probably three years while we've been bringing the policy forward. We've been looking at Rural Payments Wales Online as a sort of measure of how we've done that to take forward this scheme too.

Regarding the 10 per cent, certainly hedgerows will be able to be included. There will be some farms that probably can't reach 10 per cent, so those are the farmers that I do hope will come forward to have discussions with us. We're asking all farmers to reach 10 per cent, so that we can spread the load across Wales to avoid having large-scale land-use change. As I say, we want to keep farmers on the land, so it is really important that we have those conversations. To help meet those tree-planting targets, we are having a hedges-and-edges approach to the universal action, so we will support farmers to integrate more trees onto their land and into the farming system. Certainly, farmers have told me they want to plant more hedges, they want to plant shelter belts, and trees in field corners. So, that's what we will be working with. We're proposing at the moment to allow farmers up to five years to get to that 10 per cent minimum requirement. I think it was Sam Kurtz who said about the right tree in the right place; that's really important, and that will be part of that work as well.

Thank you, Minister.

We move on now to the 90-second statements. First, we have Vikki Howells.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. This month sees the hundred and fiftieth anniversary of Caradog leading the Côr Mawr to victory in the challenge cup. Caradog—Griffith Rhys Jones—was born in Trecynon and worked as a blacksmith in Aberdare ironworks. He was a talented musician, but learnt everlasting fame as a conductor. The 500-strong South Wales Choral Union was formed to compete in the week-long singing competition organised by the Crystal Palace Company in 1872. Voices joined from across south Wales, although Aberdare was the hub of the enterprise. Caradog was the natural choice as the choir leader and conductor. He led them to victory, repeating the success as they defended their title the following year, the last time that the competition was held. Caradog's statue stands proudly in Victoria Square in Aberdare town centre. But, this year, Caradogfest will ensure that the town echoes with the memory of Caradog and the Côr Mawr's triumphant success. An exciting range of events are planned, commencing with the launch of an exhibition and a Llafur lecture in Cynon Valley Museum last weekend. Perhaps the highlight will be the 400-strong choir who will perform in Library Square, drawn together from the local area and recreating the Côr Mawr. Local schools will also be integral to the event, ensuring that the memory of Caradog lives on and Aberdare lives up to its reputation as tref y gân, the town of song.

Last week, we were all made aware of the sad passing of the incredible, inspiring Dame Deborah James, Bowelbabe. Dame Deborah was first diagnosed with stage 4 bowel cancer in 2016, at just the age of 35 years. Even with a terminal diagnosis, she never stopped raising awareness of bowel cancer. The late journalist, former headteacher and newspaper columnist set up the award-winning You, Me and the Big C, and bravely wrote in a national newspaper, spoke about her struggles with her illness on tv and radio. She went on a mission to make everyone aware of the signs and symptoms of bowel cancer, with many people saying that due to her openness and bravely talking about her journey with bowel cancer, and making people aware of the signs and symptoms of the illness, she saved many lives. She incredibly managed to raise £7.3 million through Bowelbabe, which she set up, raising much-needed money for research into bowel cancer. Bowel cancer is something that people often find difficult to talk about, and don't, and often find it a little embarrassing. It is so important that, in Wales, we all ensure that we play our part in raising awareness of bowel cancer and the signs people need to look for to catch this deadly cancer as early as possible. I will just end with the sadly final and powerful message from Dame Deborah herself:

'find a life worth enjoying; take risks; love deeply; have no regrets; and always, always have rebellious hope. And finally, check your poo—it could just save your life.'

Item 6 this afternoon is a motion to annul the Non-Domestic Rating (Amendment of Definition of Domestic Property) (Wales) Order 2022, and I call on Tom Giffard to move the motion.

Diolch yn fawr iawn ichi, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to formally move this motion by emphasising my party's continued opposition to this arbitrary increase to the non-domestic rating of self-catering businesses across Wales. And we do side with the industry on this issue. We believe that an increase from 70 to 105 days to bring them in line with HM Revenue and Customs requirements would be far more appropriate than what is being proposed. This change in legislation has the potential to have a hugely profound impact on the self-catering industry across our country. The Wales Tourism Alliance, the Professional Association of Self-Caterers UK and UK Hospitality Cymru have warned that the tax changes could force as many as 30 per cent of self-catering businesses to close or sell up.

To give some context to these changes: currently, self-catering properties in Wales must be available to be let for a minimum of 140 days in any 12-month period and actually be let for 70 to qualify for business rates rather than council tax; under the new proposals, properties must be available to be let for at least 252 days and actually let for 182 days to qualify for business rates—an increase of a massive 160 per cent. This will have a hugely damaging impact on the businesses being able to operate within Wales and damage our economy, with many businesses that will simply just be forced to close. This, alongside a potential tourism tax and giving councils the ability to increase council tax rates up to 300 per cent on these businesses that do not qualify, leaves them facing a triple whammy of measures, which, to me, will stifle the industry and our economy in Wales as a result.

Instead, the Welsh Government has opted to press on with tax plans, despite receiving a sea of overwhelming evidence of damaging impacts from the Wales Tourism Alliance, the Professional Association of Self-Caterers UK and UK Hospitality Cymru, who surveyed more than 1,500 self-catering businesses across Wales. They said that,

'This all-Wales, one size fits all approach takes no account of the different kinds of businesses that operate in a seasonal Welsh tourism year. Nor does it respond to the fact that the problem this proposes to solve does not affect the whole of Wales, something the Welsh Government has, itself, recognised.'

During the consultation on this issue, which I'm sorry to say, Minister, seemed like a box-ticking exercise, the tourism industry supported the principle of raising the number of days that a property must (a) be available and (b) be occupied in order to qualify as a business. The majority response to the Welsh Government's consultation, which ran from the end of last year, was to raise the occupancy threshold from 70 days to 105 days, in line with those HMRC requirements—that was a 50 per cent rise, suggested by members of a professional sector that understands booking trends, marketing and customer behaviour. So, I'd like to hear in the Minister's response about why they didn't listen to their own consultation, which clearly backed a move to 105 days.

Instead, this rise of 160 per cent was suggested by just nine respondents, less than 1 per cent of the total. This has come as a complete shock to the whole industry, not just the self-catering sector. Whilst the Government isn't bound to follow exactly what a consultation tells it to do, it certainly has a duty to explain why it has totally ignored one. That still hasn't been adequately answered or explained and shows a lack of respect for the people across the country who deserve explanations, not just diktats.

Ashford Price, the secretary of the Welsh Association of Visitor Attractions believes around 1,400 businesses would go under due to the changes and many thousands of workers in Wales would have to be made redundant. He added,

'Rural areas will also be the poorer as when genuine self-catering operators cease to operate there will be fewer tourists spending money in their area during the tourist season. This "summer tourist money" helps the local shops, garages, and pubs survive the long quiet winters in many rural locations.'

That's why it's surprising to see the Minister quoted as saying that

'The purpose of the change is to help ensure property owners are making a fair contribution to local communities, for example by increasing their contribution to the local economy'.

That will be such a bitter blow to those within the industry who support local jobs, produce and local supply chains. They invest in our communities, and increasing the threshold through this punitive change will hammer economies up and down the country. We need to back the industry, after being one of the most adversely impacted industries throughout the pandemic, and not marginalise them and punish them for the Welsh Government's historic shortcomings when it comes to house building.

Finally, Llywydd, a high number of these self-catering properties will, due to this Government action, be put up for sale. However, these properties would not be available for most locals to buy as the asking price would be, in all likelihood, beyond their reach. So, I urge Members across the Chamber to vote to annul today, to show that we stand with the industry and value the contribution that they make to our economy the length and breadth of Wales. Thank you.

Can I thank my colleague Tom Giffard for submitting today's motion to annul, because, as outlined in opening today's motion, and the evidence I've heard as chairman of the tourism cross-party group, this Order would be detrimental to the tourism industry and will simply see many legitimate, hard-working Welsh businesses go bust?

To start with today, I'd like to outline how important the tourism industry is to Wales, as it's really clear to me that Welsh Government simply do not understand this. To be fair to the Minister here today, there should be the Minister for Economy here as well, who should be supporting these businesses here in Wales, rather than hiding away. But as we know, tens of millions of visitors spend their money, which contributes around £6 billion to our economy every single year and supports around 12 per cent of jobs here in Wales, boosting livelihoods and local communities, more importantly.

I'd like to focus on three key areas about why today's motion needs to be supported. Firstly, as outlined by Tom Giffard, these self-catering properties will now be required to be let for 182 days—that 160 per cent increase that Tom Giffard outlined—which is a stark difference to where they were in most recent times. As we know from the mass of evidence that's already been alluded to today, many will not be able to meet this demand. And what will happen if they don't? They're going to face around a £6,000 tax bill every year, possibly, that currently they do not have to face, and that's going to hit their bottom line and will certainly affect their ability to function. It's clear that this simply won't be possible for many, and Welsh Government actions will be putting people out of business and out of work.

The second point is that, as we know, we continue to see many people now tightening their belts. Now is not the time to make these businesses struggle. We need to support them, to see them thrive and survive. It's clear that this Order has sent absolute shockwaves through the industry, with many legitimate businesses not knowing what to do. We've heard today that their mental health and well-being has taken a huge hit.

The third point, and the most disappointing part, which Tom Giffard outlined already, is that the industry would have accepted an increase in occupancy. They're willing to work with Government to make this happen. It's ridiculous that these self-catering businesses will now have to meet these changes with no transition available whatsoever—a 160 per cent increase with no transition. So, what's going to happen to those who can't meet this? How are we going to encourage these businesses to come into Wales and thrive in our country?

In closing, Deputy Presiding Officer, it's clear that this Order is ill thought out, leaving more questions than there are answers. The Welsh Government is here and should be here to support businesses to allow them to thrive and not damage them. Today, we have an opportunity to rectify these detrimental changes and work with the tourism industry to see, yes, an increase in occupancy rates, but one that is fair, one that works for them, and won't see people lose their jobs and their livelihoods. So, Members from across the Chamber, there are thriving tourism businesses in many of your regions and constituencies. They are there, they support your communities and they offer and contribute so much to the places where we work and live. Today is an opportunity to think about those communities and those businesses, support them, and vote to annul this damaging Order. Thank you very much.

It's disappointing, but not unexpected, to see the Conservatives jumping at the first opportunity they have to try and dismantle one of the first steps of the package of measures published to tackle the housing crisis, specifically the second homes crisis.

We're already in the vanguard here in Wales, taking steps to allow increasing council tax premium on second homes and vacant properties since 2014, with Gwynedd Council investing the additional income in its plans to provide more social housing for local people. Now, after 10 years of complaining, the Conservatives want to adopt a council tax premium scheme in England too. It's a matter of time before they emulate the other policies there too.

But, the early experience of implementing the premium demonstrated that some second home owners had found a way of playing the system, avoiding paying either the premium or a penny in tax on their property. The impact of this was the loss of millions of pounds of revenue from public coffers in many areas—[Interruption.]

Will you take an intervention?

Of course. 

Will you recognise that this isn't about second home owners who won't register their home with the Valuation Office Agency and dodge council tax, that this is about Welsh local businesses? Will you recognise that every business that's contacted me—and there's been hundreds of them now—is a local Welsh person, except one, who was born in Gwynedd, is a Welsh language speaker, but is away with the army and has kept his home to come back to when he leaves the army and during his holidays?

Thank you for that contribution. No, I don't accept that. This policy aims to close the loophole; that's the point. The intention of this Order that you as Conservatives are seeking to annul today is to close that loophole, as I mentioned, in the law.

I think most rational people would agree that there is something fundamentally wrong about a situation where thousands of my constituents—key workers, nurses, firefighters, shop workers, council workers—live in unacceptable conditions or can't access a home at all locally, whilst those who can afford a second home in those communities can play the system for their own benefit whilst more and more homes in residential areas are lost, to be used as Airbnbs and so on. It's Airbnbs and those platforms that are threatening the sustainability of the holiday rental sector. Mature businesses that have been contributing to the economy are now seeing their existence at stake because of the huge increase, with a large number of homes being bought as assets to be let on platforms such as Airbnb. This undermines well-established businesses.

In addition to this, there is no kind of regulation on these new platforms. To all intents and purposes, anyone can let property on these platforms whilst well-established companies using responsible providers who have a social conscience, like Dioni, have to reach particular standards before being let. So, we shouldn't look at the 182-day policy in isolation; this policy of 182 days is part of a broader package—in this case specifically, the announcement on Monday on the establishment of a new statutory licensing system for holiday lets. The sector has been calling for this for years, and now, as part of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, we are seeing this being delivered at last.

I welcome the commitment that the Minister has already given in her written statement on 24 May in introducing the Order to retain the package in its entirety under review, including how these latest measures can be used as they're implemented to deliver the objective most effectively. As Adam Price said, co-operation between parties and the need to take action swiftly in order to make a practical difference and to introduce immediate solutions to failings that have been in place for decades in the housing market does require compromise and pragmatism—compromise on using subordinate legislation in order to act quickly, whilst recognising the broader restrictions in terms of council tax, and pragmatism in term of continuing to refine as we move forward, including before this Order comes into force next April.

I also welcome the commitment from the Government to (1) look at specific exemptions for real holiday accommodation before the Order comes into force next April, and (2) to reform the guidance in order to confirm that councils can remove the council tax liability in some circumstances. This all can be done without throwing everything through the window and before the changes come into force. I therefore call on Members to reject the motion today. 

Can I thank my colleague the Member for South Wales West for bringing this forward, this motion? It's safe to say that the tourist sector is fundamental to so many of our communities, so hard hit by the pandemic and deeply concerned about the potential impact of these regulations, as Tom Giffard and Sam Rowlands have eloquently shared. Indeed, as pointed out in evidence provided by a number of tourism bodies in Wales, only nine responses to the Welsh Government's original consultation on these proposals were in support of an increase in the occupancy threshold, and I despair at the lack of understanding of our important economy in Wales that these issues of house ownership and businesses are being conflated without enough due thought on that.

It's not that the industry is against the increase in occupancy threshold, but the concern is that such a large increase in the threshold, as proposed by the Government, will subject far more self-catering businesses to council tax, possibly 300 per cent of the usual rates within those communities, something that many of those businesses, which are still recovering from the effects of the pandemic, cannot afford. There are also concerns about the impact that the cost-of-living crisis may have on the tourism sector, which may further impede the ability of business to meet the new threshold. In fact, the Wales Tourism Alliance, UKHospitality Cymru and others have warned that as many as, as we've already heard, 30 per cent of self-catering businesses may close or sell as a result of these changes. Clearly, this would not only harm our tourism sector, but it would obviously put livelihoods and jobs at risk. As such, Deputy Llywydd, I do believe that these regulations must not be implemented and that Government should reassess its position.

However, if the Government and Plaid are wedded to their current position, then I fully support calls for exemptions to be introduced in line with the current petition submitted to the Senedd by a number of tourism organisations. In particular, there must be an appropriate appeals process as well as an exemption for lets limited by planning permission. This final aspect is something that has been of concern to a number of my constituents. Is it really fair that rural businesses, who have been encouraged to diversify into the tourism sector, will be hamstrung by planning rules so that they wouldn't be able to change the use of their accommodation should they wish to no longer continue in the tourism sector as a result of these rules?

To conclude, Deputy Llywydd, I urge Members to vote in favour of the motion and against these regulations, which are clearly ill thought out.  

Before I get going, let me be very clear; we all know across this Chamber that there is an issue with second homes in Wales and stopping our local young people and our key workers, as Mabon ap Gwynfor has said, getting on the property ladder. But I do not believe that attacking genuine holiday businesses is the right way to address the problem. I've been inundated with correspondence from tourism businesses in my constituency since the Welsh Government announced their non-domestic rating Order 2022. The increase in number of days occupied to 182 is a massive jump from the current threshold, and a significant increase on the HMRC level of 105 days a year. Many holiday let businesses fear the threshold of 182 days a year is not achievable and will force many to cease trading. I think it's worth reiterating again what Tom Giffard said. The Welsh Tourism Alliance, the Professional Association of Self Caterers UK and UKHospitality Cymru have warned that tax changes could force as many as 30 per cent of self-catering businesses to close or sell up. Thirty per cent. That will have a huge detrimental impact to a local economy, costing jobs and people's livelihoods, and that is something—[Interruption.] I will take an intervention, Mr Kurtz.

Thank you, James. That's one of the really concerning parts of this—that a lot of these properties that will be hamstrung by this have never been residential properties. They are developed outbuildings on farms, for example, which have never housed people full time, but provide such an important part of the local economy.

That's totally correct, and that's what we must get here. That's why the Welsh Government exemptions are going to be very key, and I want to hear more from the Minister on that. The Welsh Government have opted here to press on with their tax plans despite receiving evidence about the damaging impact to the sector. The organisations that were with us today surveyed more than 1,500 self-catering businesses across Wales, and it seems the Welsh Government has chosen to ignore those. I note the Welsh Government are looking at—[Interruption.] I will take an intervention, yes. 

Do you not accept that the licensing scheme will actually help the sector, the indigenous sector that's been working for decades in our communities, and also that the biggest problem facing that sector is the huge mushrooming in Airbnbs, and those are the people that are impacting on the number of nights that people are staying in the accommodation in Wales at the moment?

I do believe that Airbnbs are a problem, but there are genuine hospitality businesses that are going to be affected by these changes.

I note that the Welsh Government are looking at exemptions, but I don't think they go far enough. What about holiday lets that are not in holiday hotspots, that only have very short tourism seasons? How are we going to cope with that? What about the businesses that can't operate all year round? Because some of them don't have adequate heating in the cold winter months. Welsh Government encouraged farm businesses to diversity and now Welsh Government have pulled the rug from under them without—. What about the holiday lets that are used for charity groups? Have you thought about that? I don't think the Welsh Government have. Your list of exemptions, as others are muttering by my side, could go on and on. 

The fundamental problem here is we're putting genuine holiday businesses and livelihoods under threat, and they are being punished—punished—by this Government for this Government not building enough houses. That is the problem here, and I have seen in my constituency holiday lets coming back on the market as people are offloading them for £400,000. I'd like to know how the Minister can think that local young people can magic up £400,000, because I can assure you that people in my constituency can't. 

We use HMRC figures in many other areas, like for our mileage rate allowance. Why can we not use the 105-day threshold for holiday businesses? This non-domestic rating is death by a thousand cuts to our hospitality industry. The announcement this week from the First Minister and Adam Price to put more regulation, more bureaucracy, more costs on our businesses, hurting the industry when it needs to be getting more support from this Government, not less—. So, in your co-operation agreement, when you're working together, I think it's about time that you both stepped up, supported our businesses, supported our hospitality industry, because that's what our country wants, and it doesn't need this Government taxing our tourism sector to death. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government, Rebecca Evans. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I welcome the opportunity to respond to the motion today. 

On 2 March, more than 12 months before the changes take practical effect, I announced the outcome of our consultation on local taxes for second homes and self-catering accommodation. Since then, I've answered questions from Members in the Chamber and elsewhere, I've responded to an opposition debate on the subject of today's motion, and I've also had discussions with stakeholders. Throughout this period I've been clear about the Welsh Government's decisions, and about the timing of changes. I've explained the reasons behind our decision to increase the letting thresholds for self-catering accommodation to be classified as non-domestic for local taxation purposes. Our approach will ensure that the properties concerned are classed as non-domestic only if they're occupied for business purposes for the majority of the year, and if they're let on a less frequent basis, they will be liable for council tax. This is about property owners making a fair contribution to the communities where they have homes or run businesses. Self-catering operators—[Interruption.] Yes, I will.

Would you accept and concede that a fair contribution to the community looks often like a thriving businesses supporting people's livelihoods and putting bread on their tables? If those businesses don't exist in our communities, then that fair contribution to our communities doesn't exist.

I think that the fair contribution to communities has to be made within the context of sustainable communities, where we have a balance of businesses and a balance of residents there. We know there are communities in Wales where 40 per cent of properties are second homes, sometimes being let out as holiday lets. And we know that for large parts of the year, in some areas, the lights will be out. So, we need to be supporting these businesses to become—[Interruption.]

I ask Members to allow the Minister to answer the question and to finish her contribution. 

I think that the issue that Mabon ap Gwynfor referred to in his contribution, about striking that balance between those in the more casual end of the sector and those that are established businesses, is important and that work on registration will be important in doing that, so that we can move people towards the more established businesses and support them to have those properties let for a larger number of nights of the year. But I'll come to some further points on that, because, as we've said, self-catering operators above the thresholds will be making their contributions to the community through the higher economic activity that they support, and those below the threshold will make their contribution through council tax in the same way as those who do not meet the current thresholds. And this, in turn, is part of our three-pronged approach to addressing the impact that large numbers of second homes and holiday lets can have on communities. And that, as you know, is the work being undertaken in partnership through the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru. And I do recognise the strength of feeling amongst operators, and I've heard those representations from individuals and from industry representatives. 

In the context of the wider policy priority, to support those sustainable communities and affordable housing, there's a limit to the evidence available in relation to the impact of any option, that's true, but that also includes doing nothing. The evidence that is available has been considered and it's published for all Members to see in the regulatory impact assessment that accompanies the Order. And I do recognise that the stronger criteria might be challenging for some operators, but it's important to recognise that there is evidence that average occupancy of self-catering properties exceeded 50 per cent over the three years prior to the pandemic. So, many operators in all parts of Wales are already meeting the new criteria. And I think it is reasonable to expect businesses to adopt an operating model that maximises the use of their property and the benefit that it brings to local communities. [Interruption.] I'm happy to take an intervention, Llywydd. 

You've got time to take an intervention if you wish. 

I'll happily make an intervention. Most operators would absolutely love for their properties to be occupied for more than 50 per cent of the year, but that is simply not the reality in many parts of Wales. And I don't think that you imposing this arbitrary 50 per cent occupancy rule throughout the year is very fair, Minister. I'd love you to come to meet with some of the very small businesses in my constituency who rely on this income to put that food on the table who will now face potential financial ruin as a result of your decision. 

Well, as I said, average occupancy has exceeded 50 per cent over the three years prior to the pandemic, so many of those businesses are reaching that threshold, and I've already mentioned the point about the regulation system, which will help push tourists and visitors towards those established businesses and away from the more casual end of the market, which is having an impact, I think, on businesses. 

Of course, there will be a number of possible behavioural changes that will occur amongst owners of second homes and self-catering accommodation in response to the changes, and of course it's for individual owners to consider the approach that they take. But, and a number of colleagues have referred to this, I do recognise that some self-catering properties are restricted by planning conditions that prevent the permanent occupation as somebody's main residence. An exception from a council tax premium already is provided for one type of planning condition and, as I've said many times now in this Chamber, I'm exploring whether an exception should apply to other planning conditions. My intention is that any necessary changes are brought in with effect from 1 April 2023, alongside the increased thresholds. 

Will you take an intervention?

The Minister is almost out of time. 

A very quick one. 

No, the Minister is out of time. She is now going into an area that I'm allowing because of previous interventions. 

Okay, I'll try to conclude. I'll also be issuing that revised guidance that we've heard of in relation to the additional options that are available if self-catering properties restricted by planning permission conditions don't meet those thresholds. These options do include discretion to reduce or even remove the standard rate of council tax liability for certain properties where considered appropriate by the local authority—and it is for local authorities to decide whether to apply a premium and at what level to apply it. But we shouldn't assume that all local authorities will adopt the increased maximum council tax premium of 300 per cent that will be allowed from 1 April of next year. The powers have been available to increase it by 100 per cent since 2016, and only three local authorities are currently applying that maximum. 

So, to conclude, as part of the co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, we're taking immediate action to address the impact of second homes and unaffordable housing in communities across Wales, using the planning, property and taxation systems. We do recognise that these are complex issues that require a multifaceted and integrated response, and changes to the local taxes alone won't provide the solution, which is why we're developing that package of interventions. As such, Dirprwy Lywydd, I would urge Members to vote against the motion today. 

I call on Tom Giffard to reply to the debate. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I thank Members for their valuable contributions to my annulment motion today? We've heard from a range of Members across the Chamber, and I'll just cap off very quickly some of their remarks. Sam Rowlands kicked off by talking about the economic impact—that £6,000 additional tax bill that some of these businesses now are going to be forced to pay. Peter Fox talked about this is the wrong time for it. We're just coming out of a pandemic, we're facing a cost-of-living crisis—this is absolutely not the right time, if ever there was one, to enact these changes in the first place. And James Evans also spoke a lot about that blanket approach across the country to these measures. If we want to encourage tourism across Wales and in different parts of Wales, we can't have one uniform rule of 182 days across the country. It simply doesn't work. Sam Kurtz also mentioned that it just totally misses the mark, this policy. Properties that were never available for residential use are going to be caught up in these changes as well.

Can I just talk about Mabon ap Gwynfor's very important—[Interruption.] 

Carry on. 

Can I just talk very quickly about Mabon ap Gwynfor's contribution as well, when he talked about over-tourism? I think the tourism industry wants to help solve the problems of over-tourism—it has said that it does—in those areas where the numbers of second homes are higher. But as Mark Isherwood said, that is a conflation of two different issues here, and, as a result, these businesses have been stifled with a huge increased tax burden to pay instead. 

And finally from the Minister, I noted you talked a lot about a fair contribution, and as Sam Rowlands said, there was no recognition, I think, from the Minister that a fair contribution to a local area is a thriving economy in that area—those local businesses being open. And that's what tourists expect when they visit an area—they want a thriving local community as well, and without these businesses in that area, that simply may not happen. 

And finally, I want to talk about the exemptions as well. We're doing this entirely the wrong way, Minister. We're being asked to vote to support this Bill today without knowing the exemptions that are going to follow. It's totally the wrong way round. [Interruption.] Absolutely. 

Thank you. The Minister talks about exemptions being in place, but doesn't this just confirm that this whole policy in the first place is back to front, and this is the wrong policy, an unfair policy, because the exemptions should have been considered at a much earlier stage, not now? 

Yes. I think this policy has been rushed, quite frankly, to satisfy the demands and the needs of Plaid Cymru and the co-operation agreement. 

So, to conclude—. Well, the one thing I will say in addition to that to Russell, it was notable—

Will you take an intervention? 

Oh, happily from the deputy First Minister. 

Will you take an intervention? 

Yes. 

Do you realise that the reason that we are introducing this package of measures urgently is because we are facing a housing crisis in these communities? And we make no apology for recognising the urgency of the crisis that young people, in particular, in our communities are facing. 

I think what you fail to recognise is that these people are based in these communities. They run and operate businesses in places like Carmarthenshire. They absolutely are part of those communities and help them run. To penalise them in this way by your party and the Labour Party is totally unfair—[Interruption.]—and I think it is notable that not one single Labour backbencher got up to support these—

Can I ask all Members please to keep quiet, because I want to actually hear the contribution from the Member?  

Not one single Labour backbencher got up to defend your plans today, Minister. I think that is a notable point to make as well. And so I would urge Members to vote to annul this Bill today—vote to save Welsh tourism before this triple whammy of announcements and policies from Welsh Government leave us with no sector left to save. 

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

Item 7, a debate on a Member's legislative proposal: a ban on 'no pet' clauses in rented accommodation. I call on Luke Fletcher to move the motion.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Firstly, I'd like to thank the Business Committee for allocating time to this proposal and I thank Members who've already expressed support. I'd also like to thank the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Dogs Trust, Blue Cross and Cats Protection for their support in the run-up to this debate.

It's estimated that roughly half of households in Wales own pets, but in the private rented sector tenants often talk of blanket bans on owning pets. When I and my missus were looking to rent a place, the estate agents told us that having a dog would be a massive problem. In social housing, there's an underdeveloped pets policy, whilst homeless people face the decision of accessing safe accommodation or keeping their pets.

For those of us who own a pet—and, again, most of you know that I own a whippet—they are very much part of the family. That's why the decisions people are being forced to make are so heartbreaking.

In opening this debate, there are a few points I want to touch on. To begin with, there are very few reasons or issues that can't be resolved when it comes to why someone can't own a pet in rented accommodation. When you're looking for a house, owning a pet presents an additional barrier that, for some, is insurmountable. Dogs Trust run the Lets with Pets project, which looks to encourage landlords and letting agencies to accept tenants with pets and to make the house-hunting process easier for tenants, and it has been an uphill battle for them.

It's starker still when you look at it from a homelessness perspective. The Hope project, again run by Dogs Trust, attempts to help people experiencing homelessness with access to services and support, but, again, owning a pet is a significant barrier. Most homelessness accommodations are unwilling to give a space to someone with a pet because of the concern that they may be needing a room for a long time, given the difficulty in finding pet-friendly accommodation in the housing sector—a vicious cycle. 

That struggle, in turn, links to the welfare crisis we are facing with animal shelters. Dogs Trust and other rescuers often cite trouble finding accommodation as a reason as to why people hand over their animals. 

So, what can we do? Currently, the Welsh Government has no plans to legislate regarding the keeping of pets in rental properties. This position has to change. Wales does need a pets in housing Act. Current legislative provision is not enough. Even if we added to the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016, the RSPCA, amongst others, have raised concerns that landlords would still refuse pets. They do so en masse already, so unless we make it clear that they can't refuse without good reason, they'll continue to do so. I think many people would agree that you can't give landlords an inch.

It's not often that I say this, but the UK Government is doing one thing right through legislating to strengthen the rights of pet owners. That's the exact sort of thing we should be doing here. I am short on time, and I know that a number of Members want to contribute, but I would simply encourage Members to support this motion. Support this motion to allow everyone the right to a companion and support this motion to make it easier for tenants and those experiencing homelessness to keep their family members. Diolch.

Thank you so much to Luke for bringing forward this debate. Diolch yn fawr iawn. You all know that I have a greyhound called Arthur. I've never been homeless, but if I had been in that situation, I don't know what choice I would make—either to sleep somewhere where I couldn't be with Arthur or to carry on being with him and, potentially, be out on the streets. That's the issue I want to focus on, those people who are homeless, which my colleague Luke has touched on.

It is estimated that 10 per cent of the people who are homeless have pets, yet most homeless shelters and social housing operate a blanket 'no pets' policy. This clearly acts as a huge barrier to those who are attempting to enter homeless shelters, meaning that many are rejected from accommodation and left still without a home. For instance, the RSPCA could only identify eight hostels throughout the whole of Wales that operate a dog-friendly policy. This leaves homeless people in an impossible situation and also means that the welfare of animals is at risk too.

We know how important dogs specifically are to homeless people. They provide them with support, with company, with warmth when it's cold and with the opportunity to have somebody with them who has been through so much as well. It is really essential that we consider abandoning this 'no pet' policy. 

Some other research is that not a single local authority in Wales has addressed the issue of pets in their homelessness strategy, so, without the intervention of national government here in Wales, it doesn't appear as though the issue will be properly grappled with, and people who are homeless will continue to have to deal with challenges in accessing accommodation and that terrible choice.

I will be supporting this motion and I'm glad to see that Wales, hopefully, will take an important step by scrapping this blanket ban, which is fundamentally unfair and impacts some of the most vulnerable people in our society. I hope I will never be homeless in Wales, but, if I am, I hope I will not be separated from Arthur. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you to Luke for bringing this proposal forward. It's one I've long supported, indeed the Senedd petition for 'no pet' clauses to be banned, which was signed by more than 850 people, originated in my constituency of North Wales by Sam Swash.

On a principle level, it's completely unfair that being able to own a pet is currently reliant on whether you own a house or not. The lack of legislation banning 'no pet' clauses further entrenches punishment on the growing number of people, particularly the young, who are unable to get on the housing ladder. Most of these people would prefer to have their own home, but are unable to do so because of wealth inequality, rocketing house prices and a lack of affordable housing. They're often forced to rent out of necessity, paying more in rental payments than they would in mortgage payments, such is the extent to which our housing system is broken. And to further restrict the freedom of this group of people to own a pet, which would bring them great comfort, is adding insult to injury. 

Any society that places restrictions on the rights of people based on whether they are affluent enough to own a property is not one that has the right to call itself progressive. Tenants and pets suffer every day across Wales because of these punitive blanket bans on pets. The single biggest reason given for dogs being handed into rehoming centres is because of a change of circumstances, which is being unable to live in a rented property with a pet. It's abundantly clear that the current legislation is failing. Encouraging landlords to be more accommodating by sharing best practice with them was never going to address this problem, as is evidenced by the fact that less than 7 per cent of private rentals are advertised as pet friendly—that's less than 7 per cent.

I often hear excuses made about the potential damage that pets could cause to rental properties, yet very few private tenants who own pets cause damage to the properties they rent—it doesn't happen. To compound that, according to Shelter Cymru, 34 per cent of private rented accommodations in Wales fail to meet standards on decent living conditions anyway. When more than a third of private rented housing in Wales does not even meet acceptable living standards, it's clear that these landlords are not held to the same standards as tenants, when tenants are punished wholesale on the basis of hypothetical, potential events. 

The position in Wales is no longer tenable and this is only exacerbated by the fact that the UK Government, hardly known for its progressive sympathies, has already legislated to end this practice. And I would encourage the Welsh Government to implement Luke's proposal as soon as possible to ensure that we no longer discriminate against tenants with pets here in Wales.

One of the first pieces of casework that I had after being elected was an appeal for help from a woman who had been relocated and rehomed as a result of escaping from domestic abuse. She was in an extremely vulnerable condition, having had to move from her home and community to a new town, having had to move her daughter to a new school, having to try to make new friends and cope with the trauma that she suffered as a result of domestic violence.

She had some ducks, and she told me how watching the ducks and looking after them helped her cope with the mental stress that she was under; however, the housing association was not happy for her to keep the ducks because they were considered not as pets but as livestock.

I went to see her. These were a small number of ducklings, kept cleanly and tidily in a small, purpose-built hut in her back garden— pets that brought pleasure and comfort to a vulnerable person who desperately needed that pleasure and comfort. I remember her telling me, 'I'm treated differently because I can't afford to buy my own home.'

The housing association eventually gave in, after I intervened, but how many more people receive orders and accept them, without the ability, or the energy or the knowledge to challenge them? Why should someone who cannot afford to buy their home, or who has had to move to a new home for whatever reason, be deprived of companionship, of the mental health support, of the pleasure and love that pets can provide? I encourage you to support this proposal, which would ensure that everyone can benefit from keeping a pet, whatever their circumstances.

I stand today and speak in support of these proposals and I will be voting in favour of them today. The Minister will know that this is the subject of a petition, as Carolyn Thomas has said, and my committee is still considering that, so it just makes it clear that there is not only political interest in this; there is clear Welsh public interest in this matter. The Minister will also be aware that in the previous Senedd I worked with a number of organisations like the Dogs Trust, like the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, like the Wallich and like the National Residential Landlords Association, and many others, to bring forward a pet-friendly 'pawlicy', as I called it then. The main focus of that document was to ensure that there are no additional barriers to homeless pet owners finding suitable accommodation.

My interest in that begun when I slept rough in Chester one night, and that choice between having a pet, which is often your only companion, as Jane Dodds has said, or having a roof over your head, isn't one that anyone should face in Wales; it isn't one that anyone should face in the United Kingdom. I met an individual that night who'd made that choice, and he slept with his pets on the streets of Chester on a harsh winter's night. I can guarantee you I doubt very much that I'll see that person again, nor his beloved pet.

So, Minister, I would be grateful if you could respond. I know time is precious, but if you could address some of those issues that particularly those who are sleeping rough at the moment will face. Also, will you consider the proposals put forward by Luke Fletcher, but also will you commit to revisiting that pet-friendly 'pawlicy' document, which I'd be happy to share with the Government again, to see if we can improve these proposals for the people who do love their pets and who deserve a hot, warm roof over their head during the years and years to come? Diolch.

I call on the Minister for Climate Change, Julie James.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. I also want to thank Luke Fletcher for bringing this really important subject to the Senedd for debate today, and of course I fully support the overall intent of the motion, which is to allow more people to enjoy the companionship that a real pet can bring. My own dog recently died, and I have to say that I'm extremely bereft without him, so I very much appreciate the companionship that a pet of that sort can bring. 

Of course, it's vital that everyone has access to safe, affordable housing that meets their needs now and in the future, and I absolutely agree that people should never be forced to limit their living choices simply because particular landlords seek to refuse to have pets. But I just want to set out the current position accurately, Deputy Llywydd. I'm not really clear about point 2(a) in the motion, which calls for

'a standard tenancy agreement similar to the UK Government’s model tenancy agreement'.

So, just to be clear about what's actually happened, the UK Government has published a model tenancy agreement that includes a clause on the keeping of pets, but a landlord using a model agreement is entirely free to delete the clause, as there is no statutory right to keep a pet anywhere in the UK, and that will still be the case after this model contract has been put in place. So, I'm afraid they're not suddenly seeing the light in terms of being much more enlightened.

In Wales, the implementation of the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 will introduce a requirement for all rental agreements, or occupation contracts, as they will be called under the Act, to be set out in writing, and model contracts are available to assist with this. Again, whilst at the moment there is no statutory right to keep a pet created by the renting homes Act, additional terms can be including in the occupation contracts to cover this. If a term is included that allows a contract holder to ask permission to keep a pet, the landlord cannot unreasonably refuse consent or cannot make consent subject to unreasonable conditions. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 already prevents landlords from unreasonably refusing any reasonable request to allow tenants to insert additional clauses in their contract, and that includes the keeping of pets. And it’s very important to remember that this already applies to all types of tenancy agreement or contract, so applies equally to social housing as it does to the private rented sector. However, consumer protection law is a reserved power, so we will wait to see what the UK Government’s recently announced proposal for the model contract does, and whether they actually strengthen rights under the Consumer Rights Act, but they haven’t said that that’s what’s happening so far, and we are actively watching that space.

Here in Wales, Rent Smart Wales already actively promote the RSPCA’s 'Homes for All' good practice guide, as well as the free draft pet agreement that landlords and tenants can use and which Jack Sargeant and I have discussed previously in the Senedd. The Rent Smart Wales code of practice also encourages landlords and agents to be accommodating towards tenants with pets. I’m not currently aware of any problems at all when tenants wish to keep pets in social housing, and that includes a range of pets that aren’t just cats and dogs, so, if you do come across that again, I would be very grateful to know, because that should not be happening. We have been very clear with providers that pets are to be welcomed unless there is a very specific reason why that particular pet or that particular accommodation can’t accommodate it. Because there are certain types of accommodation that are completely unsuitable for some pets, but we do expect providers to work with tenants to come to some sort of mutually beneficial resolution where that issue arises, including actually looking for alternative accommodation, obviously.

Social housing providers also have a duty of care to all who live in their community, so there will be cases where they will not allow some dogs, for example, any that would qualify under the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976.

I also wholeheartedly agree that for many people forced to sleep rough on the streets of our towns and cities—which, might I say, in Wales is not the case now, because, of course, we provide services to all people who present as homeless, so this is very different scenario from the briefing that Members will have had, which pertains mostly to the English situation, so just to be clear about that—. But, nevertheless, a dog or animal is often a crucial companion to help them cope with the situation they find themselves in, and very beneficial for mental health, as Sioned pointed out actually for the ducks point there. So, I agree that a pet should not be a barrier to them coming into services, and it’s unacceptable where that’s the case.

Now, we have been working really hard over the pandemic and immediately afterwards, and including with the Ukrainian refugee crisis—Ukrainians are particularly fond of pets as well—to make sure that as much of our hostel and emergency provision across Wales caters for companion pets. It’s just not possible in some places, but, where it is possible, we have been really clear that companion pets must be catered for. We do however include a risk assessment, and that has to be done at the discretion of the on-site project manager. So, I don’t want to be negative at all, because I’m completely on board with what we’re trying to achieve here. But, quite clearly, if you have traumatised people and one of them is terrified of dogs, there’s going to be a big problem if there’s a dog included in the accommodation. So, we have to have a balanced way of making sure that we have mutually beneficial ways of risk assessing that. And of course, that can be a deterrent to somebody who wants access to that particular shelter or service, so it is all about trying to get the right balance and the right flexibility to ensure we’re meeting the needs of individuals. And then, obviously, the thing to say is that emergency accommodation, a hostel, is a last resort place; we’re not at all keen for people to be there at all, so, obviously, what we’re trying to do is get the best move-on accommodation and long-term suitable housing for them, and that of course would then allow them to keep their pets permanently.

So, in summary, I agree pets should be welcome in all types of accommodation, as long as it’s appropriate for both the tenant and the animal. We don’t think it’s necessary to legislate, because we think a lot of the protections are already in place, and we have a good balance of risk assessment, but, if any Member has an example of a social landlord in particular refusing pets unnecessarily, please do get in touch with me about those specifics and we’ll be working with the social landlord to make sure that we understand what’s happening and to make sure that companion pets are welcome in our housing in Wales. Diolch.

I call on Luke Fletcher to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I’d like to thank the Minister for her response and Members from across the Chamber for their contributions. I think there’s, hopefully, cross-party agreement that there is a need to act here. I always hear a lot about Arthur. I haven’t actually met Arthur yet, but I think the point Jane made, and Jack as well, around homelessness and homeless people with pets is a very important point. We know that for many of these homeless people who own pets, the pet is their world. They would put the pet before themselves. I know of many who feed their pets before they feed themselves. And that's why this specific issue is quite heartbreaking, when we think about the fact that these people are put in positions where they have to give up their pet in order to access safe accommodation. So, there is a need to address that as a priority. And the figure of only eight hostels across Wales is a shocking figure indeed.

Again, referring to Jack as the Chair of the Petitions Committee—I hope I haven't jumped the gun a bit here—as a fellow member of the Petitions Committee, and, of course, Carolyn as well, pointing out that petition that was before the committee, submitted by Sam Swash. I think that demonstrated the desire for this outside of the Senedd. So, again, not just a political call, but something I think that the people outside of the Senedd want to see as well. And Sioned as well, I think, with the important point she made around her constituent and her ducks, because I think it's important for us to remember, when we're talking about pets, we're not just talking about cats and dogs, we're talking about a whole array of different animals. And it was an important point on why people should—. It was an important that Sioned made, in the sense that why should people who don't their own home be restricted in having their own companion, like many other people—over half of households in Wales—are able to have. 

On the Minister's response, I'm incredibly grateful for the Minister's support in principle for the idea that people should be allowed to have pets no matter whether they're in their own home or in rented accommodation. I do think there is a need for legislation. I outlined some of those reasons in my opening speech. It's not just me saying that; it's the RSPCA as well. The UK Government seem to think that there is a need as well. They're beginning to legislate on this particular point. Because I do agree with the Minister on the model tenancy agreement. It is slightly unclear, but there's further legislation coming down the line, so I've been told. I think this might be, actually, the first time since I've been elected that I've actually said that I agree with something that the UK Government is doing, so I hope the Welsh Tories are savouring the moment. But, again, the RSCPA are also saying this as well. There seems to be a bit of disconnect on what the Government says is in place to prevent the refusal of pets in rented accommodation and what is actually happening on the ground. Although we disagree, I think there is scope for continued dialogue on this, and I very much look forward to working with the Government, with the Minister, on this particular point. And I hope actually, as a cross-party contingent of Members in this Senedd, that we can all work on this going forward, because there is a clear demand for this.

So, in closing, I would repeat what I said initially in my first speech, or to end my first speech, which was that I hope other Members will support this motion in order to ensure the rights of everyone in Wales to have a companion, no matter whether they're in rented accommodation or in their own home. Diolch.

The proposal is to note the proposal. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes. I will, therefore, defer voting on the motion until voting time.

Item 8 today is a statement by the Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee on the procedure for dealing with complaints against Members of the Senedd. I call on the Chair of the committee, Vikki Howells.

Good afternoon, and thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, for the opportunity to make this statement today. The committee has today laid a revised procedure for dealing with complains against Members of the Senedd, and an accompanying report. The procedure will come into force on 18 July 2022. 

As elected politicians, we have a responsibility to ensure that we set the highest standards of behaviour and, as Chair of the Standards of Conduct Committee, that is never far from my mind. The procedure for dealing with complaints against Members of the Senedd regulates the process for making, investigating and determining complaints against Members, and is a key tool in setting expectations for the way Members should behave. I am therefore pleased to be able to make this statement today, outlining how the committee has updated and improved the procedure to make it work more effectively for everyone.

During the fifth Senedd, a comprehensive review of the code of conduct for Members of the Senedd was completed, and a new code was approved to come into force from the start of the sixth Senedd. To complement this, the committee agreed to consider the existing procedure, and consider whether it remained fit for purpose, as our first substantive piece of work in the sixth Senedd.

The committee issued a draft procedure for consultation between 19 January and 21 February 2022, and received 11 responses. The Senedd Commissioner for Standards, Douglas Bain, attended an oral evidence session and was able to give significant technical advice, drawing on his experience from Northern Ireland as well as Wales. I would like to take this opportunity today to thank him on behalf of the committee for his assistance.

In reviewing the procedure substantially for the first time since it was introduced, the committee has endeavoured to make it clearer and more accessible to the public. We have produced an explanatory guide in easily understood and accessible language to sit alongside the procedure. This takes the form of a key steps document and a flowchart, allowing members of the public to see how the procedure works at a glance. The committee has also produced more technical guidance on the operation and application of the procedure to help comprehension. This will be a living document that can be updated whenever new questions or issues arise. The process itself will also be more transparent for those involved, as the commissioner and the committee will contact the complainant and the Member who has been complained about at newly agreed milestones, to keep them informed.

In order to ensure that recollection of events is still fresh and evidence readily available, the committee has set the timescale for admissibility of complaints at six months. However, I would like to provide reassurance that the commissioner will consider complaints relating to incidents outside of this timescale where there is good cause for delay. This ensures that the procedure is able to capture repeat offences, where behaviour has been taking place over a longer period of time. Further guidance on what is meant by good cause is included in the guidance.

The committee has removed the appeals provision in the procedure by a majority decision. This was a decision that we considered very carefully, looking at the processes in other Parliaments and the experiences of the last Senedd, where the appeal mechanism was used for the first time. There are a number of stages within the process that allow for input and challenge and raising those concerns that were set out as the grounds for appeal, given that each complaint is dealt with by the commissioner and considered by the committee, with the final report being debated in Plenary. The Member who has been complained about has the right to attend the relevant committee meeting in person to make representations. We strengthened the oral hearing stage of the procedure, so that it is clearer that this is the opportunity for the Member to raise issues of factual dispute or procedural concern in relation to the commissioner's investigation and report. The committee is also able to refer matters raised at this point back to the commissioner for further consideration.

The final major change is that the commissioner will now only share the facts established with the complainant and the Member complained of, and the committee will be responsible for sending the commissioner's report to the Member complained of and the complainant. The committee will also be required at this stage to set out the next steps in the process to all those involved, which we hope will increase understanding of the process and address some of the concerns that have been shared with us about the anxiety around not knowing what is happening during the complaints process.

The other changes made by the committee to the procedure are outlined in our report. These changes add up to a document that is much clearer and easier to understand than the previous version, and also take into account experiences that the standards commissioner has had in his past roles, as well as useful evidence from other commissioners and relevant stakeholders.

I would like to thank all of those who contributed to this inquiry for taking the time to provide us with valuable evidence, and ensure that we have been able to make the procedure fit for purpose. Members of the committee will be available to discuss any aspect of the revised procedure with Members at drop-in sessions next week. I look forward to answering any questions that Members have here now.

I only have one speaker and I call Joyce Watson.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. And thank you, Chair, for taking on what is an extremely complex and difficult thing to do.

But I do have one question and it's about the removal of the appeals provision by majority decision. I had, as you well know, extreme difficulty in appealing a decision that went in favour of Gareth Bennett in the last Senedd and against me. It resulted in having to bring in somebody else from outside to overturn that decision, because I was in a position where I was told I couldn't appeal and that other people would have to speak on my behalf, which was completely unsatisfactory, as was the result from the previous standards commissioner, who agreed that misogyny, sexism and all those things were acceptable. I know now that that has been put to bed, but if individuals don't have the right of appeal, and if, as was the case in my situation, the first I knew of that decision was when that final report was made—. I didn't have an opportunity between putting forward a complaint and finding out what the resolution was to know exactly what was happening. So, I do note that that point has been raised in what you're doing. But I wouldn't like to see such a situation and I wouldn't want anyone to go through what I had to go through again, and that is taking on a commissioner for standards, when it's that person who you're relying on to actually uphold the standards that we rightly should be working under.

I'd like to thank Joyce Watson for her comments here today, and I sympathise very much with the comments that the Member has made. And what I would say in reply to that is that the issues that Joyce Watson has raised today fall mainly under the code, the code of conduct, which was subject to significant consultation and discussion in the latter half of the last Senedd, and the review that was made of the code then. This committee intends to allow that code time to bed in and to review it at a later point in this Senedd, to ensure that it remains fit for purpose, which is, of course, good practice, and to address any issues that may have arisen. And I note the Member's comments, and they can be fed into that review.

And, as Joyce Watson has correctly identified, the appeals process was never really intended for the way in which Joyce would have liked to have had the opportunity to have used it. In fact, any appeals could previously only have been made on very narrow procedural grounds, and were conducted entirely on the written representation of the Member who was complained about and existing papers related to the complaint. In fact, we found, in the fifth Senedd, that when the appeal process was utilised for the first time, concerns were expressed about how costly that appeal process was and, actually, that it had the potential to be abused by Members seeking to delay the outcome of the process. The most recent appeal, for example, took 11 weeks from the Member having received the committee's report to receipt of the decision on the independent, legally qualified person to be received. And, as the right of appeal was unqualified at the point of commencement, there was no sanction for making an appeal that is without merit. The process could potentially have been used by a Member, not in the way that Joyce would have liked to have used it, but actually to delay a final decision, for example, in the case of a complaint arising towards the end of a Senedd term. And I would end by saying also that just under half of the respondents to our consultation agreed that that appeals process should be removed, and there's also no appeals process in Scotland.

I thank the Chair.

The next item is the Plaid Cymru debate, the first this afternoon, on the winter fuel support scheme, and I call on Sioned Williams to move the motion.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. It's midsummer, and when the clouds rise, it is a time to wear light clothes, T-shirts, to open the windows, sit in the garden, hang the clothes on the line, enjoy a barbecue and to know, usually, that the energy bills won’t be as high as usual, and that the meter won’t spin quite as quickly as the heat of the sun warms our skins and our homes. But this year, the sky is full of black clouds and the long summer days lead not to a feeling of liberation and relaxation, but rather to a period of sadness for too many people. Because the economic storm of the past few months has not eased, and the worst is yet to come.

The impact of the cost-of-living crisis is truly terrifying. The cost of filling the car with petrol or diesel is well over £100 by now. The cost of everyday foods such as pasta is 50 per cent higher, and bread is 17 per cent higher. And energy bills, which are already incredibly high and unaffordable, and which have caused so much anxiety for so many people in Wales, even now in the summer months, are going to climb higher still in the autumn. We need to ensure that any measures to support people who will be living in fuel poverty or who are at risk of fuel poverty are fully effective, fully accessible to those who are or who will be in need, and that they mitigate the serious pressure and the impossible choices that will face too many Welsh households when the storm is raging during the winter months.

We have, of course, welcomed the Government's plans to try to support people who are in the eye of the storm. But our research supports the calls of campaigners who believe that we could review the winter fuel support scheme in order to ensure adequate support for those who need it most, and some of the suggestions to improve the scheme have been outlined in the Conservatives’ amendments.

I would recommend that the Welsh Government ensure that this is a scheme that is available all year round, rather than being a seasonal scheme, to ensure that no-one goes without heat or power during the coldest months. And as I mentioned previously, even though it's summer, there are people now who can't afford to turn on the oven or run a hot bath. We should expand the number of people who are eligible for support, so that everyone who needs support under the scheme can get it, such as those on pension credits, for example. We also need to build a mechanism into the scheme to ensure that it reaches low-income households who pay for their fuel as part of their rental payments, for example. An element of discretion could be introduced into the scheme, so that people who might be on the borderline of eligibility and might miss out, or who find themselves in new or critical situations that push them into poverty, can apply for help.

The Minister has suggested that she agrees that it is necessary to ensure that payments are made before the Ofgem cap is increased in October, and we need a review, therefore, and an evaluation of the previous scheme to ensure that improvements are made before then, to make absolutely sure that payments reach as many eligible households as possible. We need action to improve and harmonise how local authorities engage with needy households and process the claims, alongside an awareness-raising and promotional campaign by the Government. While the Welsh Government has taken positive steps to help people through this cost-of-living crisis, especially compared to the disgraceful and heartless behaviour of the Westminster Government, we must ensure that those steps are thoroughly robust, in order to prevent suffering, the likes of which none of us has seen before. That's the aim of our motion. I encourage Members to support it.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion, and I call on the Minister for Social Justice to formally move amendment 1 tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths.

Formally.

I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendment 2 tabled in the name of Darren Millar.

I move amendment 2. Fuel poverty is a long-standing social justice issue in Wales, but the recent global energy price increases have brought the issue to the forefront. National Energy Action Cymru have called for the winter fuel support scheme payment to be made in the autumn so households know they have the funds before they turn their heating on. The Minister has previously stated that she would want the payment to be available by October, if not September, hence our amendment, which further calls on the Welsh Government to guarantee any changes to the winter fuel support scheme are made ahead of autumn to ensure the payment reaches as many eligible households as possible. Can the Minister confirm whether this is still her intention?

Age Cymru have called for the Welsh Government to extend eligibility criteria for their winter fuel support scheme to include older people in receipt of pension credit. The Minister previously stated that the Welsh Government were going to extend eligibility and will be looking not just in terms of those on pension credit, but wider eligibility. Hence, our amendment further calls on the Welsh Government to widen the eligibility of the winter fuel payment to reach more low-income, vulnerable households in need, such as those eligible for pension credit. Can the Minister provide an update accordingly?

We understand that by late January there had been relatively low take-up of the scheme, with variation between local authorities. It also needs to be better publicised that off-gas households, using oil or LPG, are eligible for the scheme if they're connected to the electricity grid. Our amendment therefore calls on the Welsh Government to launch a public awareness campaign on the winter fuel support scheme to improve awareness and boost uptake of the scheme.

To keep people as hosts under the Homes for Ukraine Wales scheme, they will also need fuel bill support. However, it's disappointing that the Welsh Government have tried to score political points with their amendment. UK Government support for the cost of living now exceeds £37 billion this year. Almost all of the eight million most vulnerable households will receive at least £1,200. All domestic electricity customers will get at least £400, all of which is now a grant rather than a repayable loan. Pensioner households will receive an extra £300, and around six million people across the UK receiving disability benefits will receive a one-off payment of £150 from September. In that category, as chair of the cross-party group on disability, we are calling for greater help, but nonetheless it's a step in the right direction. Further, from today, around 30 million people will save up to £330 a year on their national insurance contributions. And, of course, the Welsh Government wouldn't have been able to increase its winter fuel scheme without the consequential funding provided by the UK Government. Diolch yn fawr.

We sometimes think that poverty is a conclusive state: you either are poor or you aren't. But, that's not how it works at all. So many people will find their lives tip into chaos over the coming weeks and months, and that isn't scaremongering—it is a categorical fact. Thousands more people will struggle to live—to stay alive—because of monstrously everyday things like food and gas bills. There's something horrible and aberrant about mundane things becoming frightening.

I don't have long in this debate, I know, so I'll keep my points brief. Households eligible for winter fuel payment support need to be told about that support. As we've heard Citizens Advice suggest, we should be contacting people on social tariffs for water or energy, and the Government could use their JIGSO data-sharing arrangement or could encourage Dŵr Cymru to help. I welcome that people on pension credit are eligible for the scheme, though Age Cymru have pointed out that 70,000 eligible households don't claim that credit, and many believe the eligibility criteria is still too rigid.

I'm desperately worried, Dirprwy Lywydd, about those already in debt—the people on prepayment meters who are self-disconnecting already. One Citizens Advice client in south Wales is using a candle for light, and living in one room because of their energy bills. Those everyday horror stories will be repeated in houses all over Wales, behind curtains that are kept closed to keep the heat in, because poverty isn't precise; people's lives don't always fit into tidy boxes that we can say categorically who needs help and when.

Finally, this scheme shouldn't just be for winter. Again, as we've heard, as NEA and others have pointed out, people will need this support the whole year round. Payments should be made as well before the winter bites. Anyone doubting the severity of the impact that the cost-of-living crisis is having should read Age Cymru's 'The Cost of Cold' testimonies, because they're heartbreaking. Geraldine, who's 77, told them, 'Already I wear gloves on my hands at home and a heat pack inside my leggings'. And people of all ages are effected in so many ways. Referrals to food banks by Citizens Advice hit an all-time high in March. What a shameful milestone that is—an all-time high for people living in profound desperation.

So, in closing, Dirprwy Lywydd, I appreciate what the Government is doing, I know that so many causes of these crises are global or outside their control, but some of these things are in the Government's gift. So, please, I'd implore the Minister to listen to the points made in this debate, because every day we don't make these changes is a day that more people will become desperate.

Around 75 per cent of households are expected to be supported in some way by the Welsh Government's cost-of-living interventions, with increased support targeted at households in the bottom half of the income distribution. We know the winter fuel support payment is valued by people who received it and one recipient in my region of North Wales said, 'the £100 alleviated my poverty for this month and will also keep me warm for at least a month and a bit. Another £100'—which was given—'will mean I can keep warm in March, April and up to mid May. It made such a difference.'

We do face very serious challenges. UK household incomes fell for a fourth consecutive quarter at the start of this year, making the longest run of decline since 1955, and it's now estimated that up to 45 per cent of all households in Wales could be in fuel poverty, and more than 100,000 of those in severe fuel poverty. Citizens Advice expressed to me how fuel voucher schemes provided a crucial lifeline to those in crisis situations. The Welsh Government has ensured vital funding is available in the form of the fuel voucher scheme and the discretionary assistance fund to support these families in these situations, and it's gratefully received.

The Welsh Government is doing what it can to support those in need, but, fundamentally, the people of Wales have been let down by the Tory UK Government, which has failed to act to stop astronomical energy prices. To make matters worse, the welfare system, as it stands, is entirely unfit for purpose, and universal credit fails to protect families. Years of fiscal restraint has stretched our public services and eroded public and private sector workers' pay in the name of productivity. But that productivity has not increased wages and living standards.

Grants are a sticking plaster, can be bureaucratic, not reach everyone in need, and don't address the fundamental problems people are facing. I noticed that Flintshire County Council were advertising for 10 new benefits officers, but those are on £19,200 each. They could be going to foodbanks before long as well. It's just increasing all the time. Action needs to be taken now to put money in people's pockets, at the fuel pumps, and in their pay packets.

One concern I would like to raise with the Minister, however, is that many tenants are forced to use private prepayment meters, which are excluded from Ofgem's maximum-price regulations. Energy is resold by the landlord to tenants, with the landlord able to pass on a daily standing charge to the tenant. This further entrenches a poverty premium that is applied to those using prepayment meters, many of whom have no choice in the matter. As it is within the competency of the Welsh Government to end this practice, I wonder if the Minister could comment on the practice, please, in her response to the debate, and outline if the Welsh Government has any plans to address this, if at all possible. Thank you.

The Welsh Government's winter fuel support scheme sets out to support those most vulnerable, and it's valued by those who receive it, as Carolyn pointed out. But my concern lies with those that don't receive it. My constituent Michelle is a disabled full-time unpaid carer for her disabled husband. They depend on their personal independence payments and her carers allowance to survive. As she recently discovered, she was not eligible for the winter fuel support scheme because she isn't claiming a qualifying UK-administered means-tested benefit. Why are we choosing to rely on the notoriously heartless DWP system to dictate to us who is eligible for the winter fuel support scheme, when we often regret how little control we have over our own welfare system? Are we really denying this support to someone who is experiencing such crippling poverty that they must choose between food and fuel? It should not shock the Siambr at all to know that many people experiencing poverty may not be able to access the usual means-tested benefits. Through the eligibility criteria we've chosen for the winter fuel support scheme, we are at risk of simply operating like a welfare delivery department for the DWP, with the DWP de facto telling us who is eligible for support.

We must take the initiative here in this Senedd to ensure that all those who need our support get it. We have the power to do that with the winter fuel support scheme by expanding the eligibility criteria. Potentially we could even add a discretionary element to the fund for those who just miss the eligibility criteria. In Michelle's instance, I was directed to inform her that the discretionary assistance fund was available for emergencies where she would need to preferably make a new claim for each different emergency. It's welcome that the fund is there, but I would ask: which emergency should Michelle claim for? Her inability to light her home every day? Her lack of hot water? Those in poverty experience emergencies like these every day. As we approach winter this year, we must ensure that this vital scheme is fit for purpose. People like Michelle and her husband need the financial lift that the winter fuel support scheme provides. Let's not only change the eligibility criteria so that we can help those most vulnerable through this cost-of-living crisis, but ensure that payments are regular and timely throughout the year, so that support is always available. Because, God knows, Michelle and others need it. 

I call on the Minister for Social Justice, Jane Hutt. 

Diolch yn fawr. I'd like to thank Plaid Cymru for bringing this important debate today, and it's very timely. I thank Members across the Chamber for their contributions. I will be making an announcement within the next fortnight on the new fuel support scheme. It's going to be a fuel support scheme—not a winter fuel support scheme, but a new Welsh fuel support scheme, learning from the scheme that we've already progressed over the last year, which actually—as Carolyn Thomas says, that £200 had made such a difference to so many people's lives. And also, what I will be announcing in the next fortnight is the wider eligibility criteria for the new fuel support scheme, and it will open in the autumn. So, this is important, that all of the engagement and the consultation that has taken place is influencing the next phase. 

Will the Minister take an intervention? 

I just wondered if I could ask you about what the take-up was of the original scheme. Because you talked about the 350,000 people or householders who were eligible, and the Minister for Finance referred to 200,000 households that had taken it up. Are we talking the same numbers of people, or could you clarify how many people you thought were eligible and actually were able to be made aware of their eligibility?

Thank you very much for that question. We weren't sure how many would be eligible—we're very much dependent on DWP data and information about that. As you recall, we actually created this to very much follow the cut to the £20 of universal credit, so we were looking, very initially, at working families, and that's why we now need to widen it beyond that. But the take-up was reaching the 200,000 mark. I'll certainly give more indication of that, a clear indication of that, when we get the final response from our local authorities, who actually did deliver this scheme for us. I met with the partnership council, with the Minister for Finance and Local Government this morning, not only to thank them for the delivery of the winter fuel support scheme, but to forewarn them that we would now expect them to deliver this. And of course the take-up of it, the publicity, the awareness of it, is crucially important, as has been said. 

Now, we've been through the context—since Ofgem increased the energy price cap by 54 per cent in April, our analysis has shown that the number of households living in fuel poverty in Wales rose from 12 per cent in 2018 to an estimated 45 per cent. And the planned increase in energy prices in October, of course, will further exacerbate the financial problems that households are experiencing. We held a cost-of-living summit in February, and I'm holding a follow-up event on Monday, but also meeting the disability equality forum, Wales race forum, as well as the cross-party group, of course, chaired by Mark Isherwood, just to understand the impact of the crisis on the ground and develop informed solutions to guide us, because this is about building the resilience of vulnerable households at this time. 

So, the feedback has helped to inform the development of this further fuel support scheme for Wales, how it can reach more households so that more people can receive the £200, which offers such crucial support, but widening its eligibility. But I will say that the fuel support scheme is just one suite of initiatives to support people who are struggling to meet the increased cost of their energy bills. And I'm very glad that reference has been made to the announcement I made of our partnership now with the Fuel Bank Foundation—nearly £4 million of funding, on 10 June we announced that, for the national fuel voucher and heat fund scheme in Wales. So, that's also going to provide direct financial support to eligible households that prepay for their fuel—those with pre-payment meters, those not connected to the mains gas network who are struggling to prepay for their fuel.

I will follow up those points and questions that have been raised today about the eligibility and the impacts in terms of landlords and the standing charges, which actually have risen highest in north Wales. And I did announce this at Wrexham foodbank, because I know how this was hitting households in rural areas and in north Wales in particular in terms of those standing charges. But also, that money is going to fund the expansion of the partner network to support wraparound energy and savings advice. This is, again, and we've discussed this in response to questions in my oral questions earlier on, actually about enabling the message to get out, the support to be given, every contact that's made, but also the additional funding to ensure our discretionary assistance fund can provide that support throughout the summer and the winter. We've agreed that to the end of March next year for people who are unable to afford, for example, their next delivery of oil or liquid petroleum gas due to extreme financial hardship. So, these initiatives are delivering alongside our £150 cost-of-living payment, our £25 million discretionary fund for local authorities, our Warm Homes programme and 'Claim what's yours'.

Now, just finally, Llywydd, my reason for amending the motion was to ensure that this debate recognises that the main levers for addressing this fuel crisis do sit with the UK Government, and I do thank Sioned Williams for acknowledging this as well. It was the UK Government's reluctance to act early on this that compounded the impact of fuel price rises. Even now, despite the evidence of the impact it's having, there remain gaps in the support that they've offered. So, I've already responded, earlier on today, to say that we call for the removal of all social environmental policy costs from household energy bills, for those costs to be met from general taxation and to introduce a lower price cap for lower income households to ensure that they can also meet their energy bills. But we also need to increase local housing allowance rates, to increase funding for discretionary housing payments to prevent a significant number more people becoming homeless as a result of rent arrears. So, I hope Members will consider supporting this amendment—not only the Welsh Government's commitment to address the cost-of-living crisis, but also it's the duty of the UK Government to do so much more with their powers and responsibilities, which they're failing to do. But our scheme will be announced and it's responded to so many of the issues that have been raised today. Diolch yn fawr. 

Mabon ap Gwynfor to reply to the debate. 

Thank you very much, Llywydd. 

So, energy prices have skyrocketed to unprecedented levels over the last year. The price cap increase in April saw the average gas and electricity bill increase to north of £2,000 a year, a rise of £700. In the last 18 months alone, the cost of heating a home has doubled. This will hit the poorest and most vulnerable households the hardest, with many having to go without, rationing or even, as Delyth mentioned, self-disconnecting. On top of this, energy bill arrears are currently greater in Wales than in any other UK nation. Yesterday, Jordan, a pupil from Ysgol Cefn Coch in Penrhyndeudraeth asked me, 'Why is it that fuel is so expensive, and what are you doing about it in the Senedd?' Children are talking about this, and it's causing huge anxieties. Can you, Minister, honestly answer Jordan and say that, as a Government, you are doing everything within your abilities? This is why we must ensure that those that are entitled to access the winter fuel support scheme are aware of it in the first place, with some estimates of take-up being as low as 50 per cent. Yes, the Minister said in her response that awareness was crucial, so the Welsh Government should launch a co-ordinated awareness campaign to improve on this figure, and also release take-up statistics to allow for improvement and proper scrutiny. 

We also know that things are going to get worse before they get better, with energy bills predicted to rise around £2,800 on average after the next price cap review in October, and may well rise again in January if Ofgem decide to review every three months, rather than every six months. And today the BBC are reporting energy experts saying that they expect energy bills to reach £3,000 a year. All this while energy companies are making record profits. 

The consequences of these rises would be devastating for so many. We have to ensure that all those who need help are entitled to it, by expanding the eligibility criteria for the winter fuel support scheme and adding a discretionary element for those in unexpected need. In my own constituency, we have some of the highest fuel poverty rates in the UK. Meanwhile, we're generating so much electricity, yet not reaping the rewards for it. Take Tanygrisiau, for example—a highly impoverished community with unacceptably high levels of people in fuel poverty. Yet, above Tanygrisiau lies Stwlan reservoir, owned and run by First Hydro-Engie UK, with a generating capacity of 360 MW, all of which goes to the grid while the community directly beneath it suffers from extreme fuel poverty. How can this be fair? 

The Minister made an announcement about a new fuel support scheme, and that's fantastic and really welcome to hear. But rural poverty is a huge issue that the winter fuel support scheme and current support schemes are failing to tackle. Firstly, not all local authorities are issuing the winter fuel support scheme to those off-grid residents, because of the wording of the Welsh Government's scheme. And secondly, for those that do issue the support to people off-grid, the limit is set at £200, which will buy you 200 litres at today's oil prices, but oil distributors won't deliver anything less than 500 litres. So, £200 is no good to people off-grid. The same problems obviously apply to the fuel voucher schemes and discretionary payments. Off-grid residents are being discriminated against because of this and it must be resolved. 

So, high energy prices are here to stay and wages are not rising accordingly, with the Tory Government in London doing all they can to halt wage growth for fear of inflation. We therefore need to be proactive and willing to be constantly improving on what support we do provide here. So, we welcome what the Minister has said and accept that the main levers are with the UK Government, but we need to maximise what we can do in this Senedd. Diolch. 

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection, and I therefore defer voting on the motion until voting time. 

Item 10 is next, and that's the Plaid Cymru debate on rejoining the single market. And I call on Luke Fletcher to move the motion. 

Diolch, Llywydd. One hundred billion pounds a year—that's how much the Financial Times estimates that not being a part of the single market and customs union has cost the UK. On top of that, £40 billion less revenue to the Treasury a year and the UK lagging behind the rest of the G7 in pandemic recovery. That's where we're at. Not being part of the single market is undeniably making us here in Wales worse off. It's stunted our economy and limited economic growth, as well as worsening the current cost-of-living crisis. Not being part of the single market will make recovering from the pandemic and getting wages to rise sustainably during the cost-of-living crisis massively more difficult. 

A report from the Resolution Foundation and the London School of Economics found that labour productivity is expected to be reduced by 1.3 per cent by 2030, because of the decline in the openness of the British economy after Brexit. This is the equivalent to losing a quarter of the efficiency gains over the past decade. It's massively damaged the competitiveness of UK exports, which we know is particularly affecting our farming communities here in Wales, with UK exports to the EU expected to be 38 per cent lower by 2030 than they would have been if we were inside the single market, with a further 16 per cent decline due to forgone further integration with the EU over that period. 

Boris Johnson promised us in October that Brexit would help create a high-wage, high-productivity economy, yet only recently he has urged workers not to ask for bigger pay rises to prevent a wage-price spiral driving inflation higher. During the referendum, he also promised that leaving the EU would not mean leaving the single market. This only reveals more of his many lies. Moreover, the Trades Union Congress has warned that post-Brexit trade deals are failing to guarantee workers' rights and employee protections.

We know that the cost-of-living crisis and the pandemic hit our most vulnerable and poorest communities here in Wales the hardest, and remaining outside of the single market is making this worse. It's estimated that higher import costs are costing British workers nearly £500 a year, which is an enormously steep figure for those families already struggling in poverty. 

The Guardian—and I don't often quote The Guardian—recently reported about how Brexit is affecting schoolchildren, with a rising amount of pupils now unable to pay for school meals following increased food costs and shortages. Ninety per cent of companies providing school meals in England and Wales have said that they face food shortages as a result of supply-chain problems, while average costs have increased by 20 per cent since April 2020.

The impact of remaining outside the single market is really tangible and affecting people in their everyday lives, which is why we are calling for support for this motion today. Now, I noted the First Minister's response to Adam Price yesterday in First Minister's questions—'magical thinking'. I have to say I don't share the First Minister's views. It's certainly not magical thinking for Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway—three non-EU countries that are all members of the single market. Nor is it magical thinking for Northern Ireland, which is currently a part of the non-EU UK yet in the single market, with the backing of most parties in the Northern Ireland Assembly.

If the criticism of 'magical thinking' was listened to every time, then there would be a lot of things that we hold dear that wouldn't exist today. But that's what we do as elected Members: we identify a problem, we think of a solution and we build a case. That's Plaid Cymru's aim today, and that's what we'll be doing. 

I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on the Minister for Economy to move amendment 1 formally.

Formally, Llywydd.

Diolch. James Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I'm pleased to contribute to this debate this afternoon. I'm sure it will come as no shock to Members in this Chamber that those of us who sit on this side will not be supporting the motion this afternoon. Of course, I'm not surprised to see that Plaid Cymru has taken the opportunity to raise yet again its political obsession with the European Union. It's a real—[Interruption.] It's a real shame that you cannot accept the will of the people of Wales.

Let me just remind Members on those Plaid benches that the people of Wales voted to leave the European Union. I know you don't like that fact, but it just simply doesn't change it. People across the country voted to leave, and with that they want to see Wales flourish in a strong United Kingdom. Thanks to the UK Conservative Government, a strong Wales in a strong United Kingdom is what they're going to get.

The UK Government is working hard to make the most of the opportunities presented by our departure from the European Union. It's bringing forward the Brexit freedoms Bill, which will cut £1 billion of EU red tape and boost Welsh businesses by creating a new regulatory framework, tailor-made for the UK, that will capitalise on our new Brexit freedoms.

Let us not forget that the UK Government has now struck free trade deals with over 70 countries, collectively worth over £808 billion—deals that make it easier for British businesses to export their goods. These include deals with Japan, Australia and New Zealand—deals that pave the way for our entry into the £9 trillion Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

There has also been progress in creating new free ports across the UK, cutting regulation and supporting innovation. Businesses operating from free ports will benefit from tax relief and have a simplified customs and planning system, helping them to grow and create jobs. We need to crack on and grasp the free port opportunities here in Wales.

Members will be aware that collaboration between the UK and Welsh Governments to establish a Welsh free port is already under way. We need to pick up the pace on this to ensure that we don't lose out on investment. Once a Welsh free port has been established, it will be able to attract new businesses, jobs and investment, as well as growing the Welsh economy.

In addition to free trade agreements and free ports, we also have the UK and EU trade and co-operation agreement, something that people in this Chamber said we'd never be able to do. It's a zero-tariff, zero-quota trade agreement that covers areas such as—

Will the Member take an intervention?

I'll just make this point and then I'll take it. Digital trade, intellectual property, public procurement, aviation, road transport, energy, fisheries, social security, law enforcement, judicial co-operation and more. And Mabon, I will take your intervention.

Do you think the trade agreement with New Zealand and Australia will be beneficial to our rural communities and farmers?

I think there's a great opportunity for our businesses right across the country. Yes, there are issues that need to be ironed out, and that is what the UK Conservative Government are planning to do. If we listened to the nationalists and socialists in here, we would become an insular country with no international presence whatsoever. A lot of important work has already been done to establish a strong co-operation agreement, which is underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field and respect for fundamental rights.

There is already a strong partnership agreement in place in terms of trade agreements between the UK and the EU, so there is no need to rejoin the single market. Rejoining the single market is not something that any businesses that I speak to are calling for. Even the Labour Party and the Welsh Government have clearly just smelled the coffee and—

You're going to have to wind up now, because I've been very generous with time already.

Even Labour don't even want to join the single market any more. So, I say to the Plaid Cymru Members today: wakey, wakey—Brexit is done. Wales voted to leave. 

Okay. Okay, I think—

We have now left the European Union, the customs union and the single market, so get over it—[Inaudible.]

Yes, okay. That's it. Cefin Campbell.

Well, thank you very much, Llywydd. I want to start by making one thing clear: unlike the virtual life of James Evans, leaving the single market has been a complete disaster for Wales and for all the countries of the United Kingdom. All of the promises made by the Brexiteers have been nothing more than a fraud, and the effect of this on our communities has been hugely detrimental.

Let us consider the reality of leaving the single market: a mountain of bureaucracy for our businesses to export goods, the rising cost of imports, problems with VAT payments, the pound being devalued, our farmers facing checks at the border with Europe as they sell their products, while food entering these countries can arrive unhindered.

And now that we've left the common agricultural policy, the Tories in Westminster have cut £137 million this year and £106 million next year from the Welsh agricultural budget. So, that's the great Brexit dividend for our farmers. Yet Brexit was supposed to mean new and exciting opportunities for our agriculture and fishing sectors. Unfortunately, the opposite is true. It was all rhetoric based on dishonesty.

As we've already heard, but it's worth mentioning again, as our manufacturing and small business sectors face endless bureaucratic challenges, it's no wonder that business exports to the EU by small companies are expected to be 38 per cent lower by 2030. Next year, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development calculates that the UK will record the lowest growth in the G20, with the exception of Russia. The Office for Budget Responsibility says Brexit will cut UK GDP by 4 per cent over the coming years; this equates to about £100 billion in lost outputs, and £40 billion less revenue to the Treasury. The Centre for European Reform said that, by the end of last year, the UK economy was 5 per cent or £31 billion smaller because of Brexit. Now, I heard earlier on Mark Isherwood desperately trying to list the advantages of leaving, but this is the reality, reported by not Mickey Mouse organisations, but highly respected think tanks. The Brexiteers promised there would be no downside to leaving the EU and the single market, only sunlit uplands. How they lied to us; how they deceived so many people in so short a time.

As we look around us, what we see is a cost-of-living crisis—

Will you take an intervention from Joyce Watson, Cefin Campbell?

From whom?

Joyce Watson.

Yes, of course. 

Diolch, Cefin. Whilst I would love to rejoin the single market—I’d do it tomorrow, I’d go back to the European Union tomorrow and I’m sure that other people would—and I agree with everything that you’ve said, don’t you accept that, at the moment, we cannot just automatically go back into the single market? And what we actually need to do is make a better condition for those people in the current situation that we find ourselves and improve that in the first place.

Well, Joyce, Brexit has been a decidedly detrimental factor. We cannot just allow this to happen; we have to set ourselves a goal to make things better, and our ambition is to rejoin the European Union and certainly the single market, and, as we’ve already heard from Luke Fletcher, other countries are doing this and it’s perfectly possible for us to do it as well. So, let’s not lower the bar, but look ambitiously to rejoining.

So, if I can just finish off, Llywydd.

I won't be long. What we see around us is a cost-of-living crisis, the cost of fuel and food increasing, inflation at its highest level for 40 years, and some sectors unable to recruit workers—and there are a number of them here; I won't list them all.

In the view of Plaid Cymru, rejoining the single market is the only sensible way of responding to these acute problems that have been caused by Brexit. Yes, 2016 was an act of serious self-harm, but it is possible to negotiate a way to rejoin, and we need to do that urgently for the benefit of our communities here in Wales and across the United Kingdom.

Well, where on earth do we start with this one? Let’s make no mistake at all about what today’s Plaid debate is about: it has nothing to do with keeping us in the single market; it has everything to do with Plaid Cymru trying to keep us in the European Union against our will. It’s been six years, but the so-called Party of Wales can’t accept that the people of Wales voted to leave the European Union. If they bothered to listen to the people of Wales, they’d find out that not only did a poll discover that Wales is the most pro-unionist nation of UK, they’d also find out that 52.5 per cent of people in Wales voted to leave the European Union, higher than the UK average. Plaid Cymru don’t like to listen to what the people of Wales have to say; they like to talk at them. And perhaps it explains why Wales rejects Plaid Cymru time and time again at the ballot box, and, if you don’t believe me that this is what this is about, let’s look at what Plaid Cymru themselves have to say. The leader of Plaid Cymru was quoted in 2018 as saying, ‘Brexit must be stopped.’ Their European manifesto in 2019 said, and I quote:

‘That is why we're appealing for support from across the political spectrum: to secure a People's Vote, to make Wales matter, and ultimately to maintain Wales' membership of the EU.’

Isn’t it ironic, Llywydd, that they want the people of Wales to vote again on an issue that has been consistently backed by the Welsh public but are running scared of the idea of giving the people of Wales a say on more politicians in this place? But where I will give Plaid Cymru credit is that at least they are consistent in their ignorance towards the views of the people of Wales.

The Labour Party, as usual, are all over the place: just three short weeks ago, the First Minister spoke up the merits of the single market, then, yesterday in First Minister’s questions, he tried his level best to defend his Westminster party leader’s position by dismissing membership of the single market as unrealistic, and  Keir Starmer's new Brexit policy, whatever it was, was dismissed by Alun Davies, wherever he is, as a policy that doesn’t have credibility at all. Who knows what the Labour Party thinks about Brexit? It truly is anybody’s guess. That’s why we as the Welsh Conservatives are, as usual—the true party of Wales—standing up and defending the interests of the people of Wales, putting our faith in the fact that it is them that know best. We're also the party that defends their vote and their voice against the forces that try to ignore it. The people of Wales don't want to rejoin the single market, they don't want to rejoin the European Union, what they do want is a political class that listens to what they have to say, rather than treat them as though they don't know what they're talking about. So, that's why I urge all Members to show proper respect to the people that we serve and represent and reject this motion today.

Well, stop the press, the Liberal Democrats are in favour of rejoining both the single market and the customs union, and rejoining the European Union, at some point in the future. I have to say, it is, of course, a little bit disappointing that Labour support for the single market seems to have been abandoned, and I am, I'll say, very confused by their current situation, which seems to change quite significantly. But I just want to say a few things that I hope people will listen to with respect, because it does affect the people here in Wales.

The twin pressures of Brexit and the pandemic have created the perfect storm for those people who are really struggling with the cost of living. Prices have been rising since our departure from the single market, and it is inevitable that this will continue due to the barriers to trading with our European partners. Wales was dependant for a huge amount of its trade on the European Union, and our exclusion from the single market has resulted in a far more significant impact than in parts of England. I've heard from small businesses, including the Welsh FSB, who are really struggling with the bureaucracy—[Interruption.]

I think the chitchat of the backbenches of the Labour Party are—. I'm not pointing any fingers, unlike you, Hefin David. [Laughter.] If we can have a bit of quiet to listen to Jane Dodds.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. I've heard from small businesses, including the Welsh FSB, who are really struggling with the bureaucracy, the red tape, the additional financial burden caused by the Conservative's deal. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of Government to ensure that its citizens are well looked after, and we can only truly address the cost-of-living crisis by regaining access to the single market. And, as you've heard, we need to consider the effect on the agricultural sector. Farmers have experienced a significant amount of uncertainty since—

Will you take an intervention?

Of course I will.

Thank you. Whilst I totally understand, comprehend and recognise the context that you've set out, would you explain how you would approach the fact that, like it or lump it, the referendum has been held?

Yes, thank you for that. We have rehearsed these arguments many, many times. And you're right to say that a very slight majority of people in Wales voted to leave the EU, but what they've seen is a raft of lies in terms of what they thought would be delivered to them and, therefore, we have to think differently. I will finish in a minute, if you'll allow me to move on.

I was just touching on farmers. It's really important that we recognise the effect on our farming businesses. And as somebody who represents a significant rural area, I've heard many times from farmers about the effect that leaving the EU has had on them. 

Just before I wrap up, I sadly won't be voting for the Welsh Government's amendment, because I am disappointed by Labour's lack of courage on this issue and, as I said, I'm very confused. So, my plea to Labour Members, who may also be confused, is that if they realise that single market membership is key to Welsh recovery from the pandemic and to growth in the future, then vote for this motion unamended. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The Minister for Economy to contribute, Vaughan Gething.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to begin by recognising that, despite the contributions made, there are significant areas of agreement between us, Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Liberal Democrats. We believe that a positive partnership with the EU, based on mutual trust and shared values, could and should reduce trade barriers, unlock investments and help to protect jobs. These shared aims are based on what we believe best serve the interests of the Welsh economy. 

So, when the Foreign Secretary tells us that she defends a Northern Ireland Bill, as a patriot, with the obvious implication that this carries, we can see, yet again, the depths that what is left of the UK Government will sink to. Now, while we differ on a motion that stirs strongly held views, and mine as much as any other, I'd hope that all Members here would recognise just how dangerous it is for UK Ministers to suggest that support for the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill is a test of anyone's patriotism. This divisive language should not be normalised in Government, and I have made directly clear to the UK Government that this tone is a real problem that must be urgently addressed.

Llywydd, we have attempted to broach shared objectives with a pragmatic approach since the 2016 referendum. That's why we published a joint White Paper with Plaid Cymru in 2017, when we were still within the European Union, setting out viable options for a post-referendum plan for Brexit. That included compromise positions that were both actionable and credible and, indeed, Theresa May moved ever closer to our position over time. But, Llywydd, we can't support Plaid Cymru's motion, because it does not meet those tests of being actionable and credible, given the context that we face today. The motion does not provide a workable solution: single market membership without the benefits of the customs union, which Luke Fletcher mentioned in his opening sentence, would not return the trading conditions that we've previously enjoyed. The motion also raises more questions than it answers. It doesn't suggest how this option would be advanced in a post-deal context or whether, frankly, the EU would entertain such a proposal. Llywydd, we can't endorse a position that is so specific on one element of the relationship whilst remaining silent on the wider questions, which do have major implications for our exporters in particular. 

Our aim is to secure the closest possible frictionless trade with the EU. To support that position, Welsh Government actions reflect the immediate needs of businesses that export from every part of Wales, as well as partners like our universities, who have been let down by the UK Government's failure to secure access to the Horizon programme. Our priority is to promote constructive steps designed to fix the Northern Ireland protocol, reduce those unnecessary trade barriers and to secure access to joint programmes and investment opportunities. We are actively urging the UK Government to change course on all these matters and prevent the immediate risks posed to our economy. We believe that a partnership approach with the EU, based on high standards and respect for international law, could secure major progress that is in Wales's interests. High standards matter, because we know that the engine that drives a successful, modern economy is not powered by a race to the bottom and a tax on workers' rights.

Given the ongoing collapse of the UK Government, it is perhaps no wonder that the Prime Minister is bringing forward new rules allowing agency workers to break strikes. He may soon be turning to them to fill Government posts deserted by an ever-increasing number of people who are withdrawing their labour, and I should add, Llywydd, without the benefit of a ballot before action.

But, Llywydd, given the realities that we face, it is important that the Welsh Government is a partner in the growing coalition of voices presenting the case for the UK Government to change course on its relationship with the EU. It's important because, as many of us agree, significant damage is being done to our economy and much of that could be prevented by the UK Government. That's why I've made clear to UK Minister that we do not accept their analysis of the UK's current trading performance. UK exports to the EU remain below pre-pandemic levels when we account for inflation. The growth of imports also means that the UK deficit on the balance of trade in goods was also at a record level in the first quarter of this year. And the Office for Budget Responsibility has observed that none of the new free trade agreements or regulatory changes announced will be sufficient to have a material impact on the hit to UK exports. So, we have never accepted the overblown rhetoric on new free trade deals, and we remain vehemently opposed to threats to deregulation.

The partnership approach that we advocate is a world away from the aggressive, rule-breaking unilateralism that defines the current UK Government's stance. Their course is both economically illiterate and morally bankrupt. The trade and co-operation agreement does change the context for what is achievable within a constructive partnership with the EU, and what credible next steps could look like. I cannot say with any sincerity to businesses that I meet that the Welsh Government can help them to overcome the problems they face by adopting a position that is simply not credible or even available to UK Ministers today. We continue to want to secure the closest possible frictionless trade with the EU and will continue to press that case. We also believe that it would be much easier to make that case if there were a new Government after a ballot in which all of us could express our opinions.

Rhys ab Owen to reply to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. We've heard some clear and factual reasons this afternoon, from Cefin Campbell, from Luke Fletcher, from Jane Dodds, of why we should join the single market. In fact, I think we heard some clear and factual reasons from Vaughan Gething, the Minister, on why we should join. Now, we know that Boris Johnson dismissed the impact of Brexit on the economy in very unparliamentary language before he became Prime Minister. Well, we didn't hear language like that from the benches opposite today, but we certainly did hear plenty of Boris bluster, didn't we, from James Evans and Tom Giffard? And James and Tom, I think you need to stop emulating Boris Johnson because his days are numbered.

To answer—[Interruption.] 

Will you take an intervention?

No, you've had plenty of time. To answer James and Rhianon: people are allowed to change their minds, James and Rhianon. That's why we have regular elections, and the Conservatives will find, at the next general election, that a lot of people have surely changed their minds. On Monday—[Interruption.] I'll take an intervention from you, Hefin, yes.

I appreciate my friend offering me that intervention; that's very kind of him. He knows I've got respect for him, so this question is genuinely meant. I don't understand Plaid Cymru's position on wanting to rejoin the European single market, but wanting to leave the UK single market. Can he rationalise that?

Yes, of course. We want to be part of a bigger European Union, part of an equal nation with the other European nations. We are an internationalist party; that's the answer, Hefin David. And our position is very clear and consistent with this, whilst Keir Starmer's newest slogan, 'Make Brexit Work', is completely nonsensical. He spoke against rejoining the customs union on Monday. The Welsh Government should agree that Brexit is a disaster, that the slogan should be 'Brexit Isn't Working'. And as Luke Fletcher reminded us, it's the poorest in our communities who are suffering because of it. Sixty-two years to his death, Aneurin Bevan put it best:

'We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run over.'

And I hope Sir Keir listens to that advice, because it's impossible for him to stand up for the poorest in our communities, for the poorest in Wales, while he's sitting so firmly on the fence all the time. It's disappointing that the Welsh Government seems to be sitting on the fence also, and they've weakened the motion to make it meaningless today—totally meaningless.

Meanwhile, Scottish Labour actually have said that they want shifts to rejoin the single market. That's why today we are calling for everyone here to support this motion. Welsh Labour, stop sitting on the fence; splinters are painful. It's time to say 'yes' to the single market, 'yes' to a better Welsh economy, and 'no' to Boris's disastrous Brexit. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, so I will defer voting on the motion until voting time.

That brings us to voting time, and so we will take a short break to prepare for the vote technically.

That brings us to voting time, and the first vote is on the motion to annul the Non-Domestic Rating (Amendment of Definition of Domestic Property) (Wales) Order 2022. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Tom Giffard. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 35 against, and therefore the motion is not agreed.

The next vote is on item 7, and this was the debate on a Member's legislative proposal—a ban on 'no pet' clauses in rented accommodation. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Luke Fletcher. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 30, 12 abstentions and seven against, and therefore the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on item 9, the Plaid Cymru debate on the winter fuel support scheme. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 24 against, and therefore the motion is agreed.

There are no further votes on that item. That brings us to vote on item 10, the Plaid Cymru debate on rejoining the single market. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 38 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We'll move now to amendment 1. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. In favour 37, no abstentions, 12 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

We'll now vote on the motion as amended. 

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 38, no abstentions, 11 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed. 

That concludes voting time for today.

We will now move to the short debate, when those Members who are leaving the Chamber have done so.

If Members can leave the Chamber quietly, we're moving on to another item of business. I ask John Griffiths to speak to the motion in his name. John Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Knowledge is power: education is a route out of poverty. Llywydd, Mike Hedges, Luke Fletcher and Laura Anne Jones will contribute to this short debate.

Llywydd, on Pill library, there is a keystone at the top of the building that states that knowledge is power. I'm very pleased to say that having been born and brought up in Pill, now so ably represented as part of Newport West by my colleague Jayne Bryant, I very much agree with that sentiment. Knowledge is power and, obviously, education, training and skills are ways of establishing that power in our communities, if we make sure that they're available to everyone, and particularly those in more disadvantaged circumstances.

The power of education is very precious to me, Diprwy Lywydd, because my own route out of what I guess was relative poverty was through education and lifelong learning. I went to secondary school, Dirprwy Lywydd, but unfortunately didn't take any exams, and I was then for a period of time out of work with a young family, living on a council estate in Newport, and thinking about not just my own future, obviously, but the future of my family. I thought about my options, and decided that education would be my route, hopefully, out of those circumstances into more favourable ones, and thankfully that did prove to be the case. It was evening classes that enabled me to take those opportunities at what we called 'Nash tech', now, I guess, Newport college, of Gwent college—the Newport campus. Evening classes in GCSEs, then A-levels, and then on to Cardiff University where I studied law. I later worked as a solicitor and then went on to politics, local politics and now to the Senedd. That journey was of great benefit to my family as well as to me, and, of course, it's not just about better income and better standard of living; it's also about personal development, and, for me, fulfilment of my ambitions to try and make a difference—help to make a difference in politics, and try and help other people on that journey, as well as having undergone it myself. So, education is very precious to me—lifelong learning—but also, obviously, trying to get it right in the very earliest years and at primary and secondary level, as well as into further and higher education, skills and training.

And we do note that there is a great need to provide whatever opportunities we can to allow people to help make Wales a more equal country. I was looking at the paper that Dr Mark Lang did for ColegauCymru that really was looking at these issues of social mobility and if current education provision in Wales supports that social mobility and adequately enables young people to secure a life of well-being. The focus is post 16, but it also considers education provision more generally, and whether that service supports social progression and socioeconomic resilience, particularly for young people from deprived communities and disadvantaged personal backgrounds. In producing that paper, Mark Lang looks at the background that we have in Wales and the UK where, sadly, skills inequality is now higher and social mobility lower in the UK than any other developed country. And it refers to publications by Janmaat and Green in 2013, and then Oxfam in 2016, which show that, again, economic and social inequality are at unprecedented levels. The Social Mobility Commission in 2019 stated that social mobility had stagnated over the four years previous to their publication, at virtually all stages, from birth to work, and being born disadvantaged means that you will have to overcome a series of barriers to ensure that you and your children are not stuck in the same trap. And the recent Augar report, in 2019, states that there has been no improvement in social mobility in over half a century. And, indeed, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report in 2018 shows social mobility declining. So, I think it's clear that there are very big challenges ahead of us if we are to reverse those trends, reverse that pattern and, particularly, do something here in Wales that is powerful in reversing that picture.

There is some hope, of course, on the horizon, and, indeed, Dr Lang states that, although there's a shortage of statistics in Wales that are recent and comprehensive on education and social mobility, nonetheless there are some sounds of progress here in Wales. But, of course, we know that, more recently, we've experienced the pandemic. We now have the cost-of-living crisis and, day by day, our society is seeing new challenges that exacerbate and highlight inequalities in all areas of our society, and very poor decision making, policy and strategy at a Westminster level is leading to the rich getting richer and the poor becoming ever poorer. Poor management of the economy is exacerbating the inequalities that we face. So, it's a major challenge, of course, for all of us and for our schools and educational establishments to try and counter some of these influences and trends. But, as I said at the outset, knowledge is power, and education can be a route out of poverty. A good education allows for underprivileged young people to access the skills required to take employment with higher pay and better conditions, and it's also about education as a good in itself, not just about economic progress, but personal development and social progress also.

So, what are the statistics in Wales that we can draw on in looking at these issues and these matters? They show that pre-pandemic data from 2019 showed that 28 per cent of learners eligible for free school meals achieve level 2, which is equivalent to 5 GCSE passes at grades A to C, and that 28 per cent compares to 61 per cent of learners who are not eligible for free school meals. There has been a deal of improvement in closing the gap here in Wales since devolution, but, obviously, more needs to be done. The Bevan Foundation, who I work closely with on the poverty cross-party group, have highlighted differences in the exam results of children who receive and did not receive free school meals, and many of the gaps that we see appear when children are very young, and widen as children get older. And, of course, the pandemic has worryingly worsened these gaps as well. The Bevan Foundation added that the risk of not obtaining five A-to-C GCSEs is highest for pupils eligible for free school meals, but also those on the special educational needs register.

As far as the new curriculum is concerned, this is seen as providing a very important opportunity to make the sort of progress we need to see in Wales. It's very exciting and has great potential. And of course, it's built on four purposes and aims to develop learners who are ambitious and capable, enterprising and creative, ethical and informed, and healthy and confident citizens. So, it's very much on that wider territory of personal development, social progress, having those life chances and that quality of life that we want to see our children and young people enjoying, as well as economic progress and advantage. It's very much underpinned by the aim of reducing inequalities in education. I welcome that national mission aiming to achieve high standards and aspirations for all, and the value of not giving up on learners who are disadvantaged by poverty through the continuation of support for learners throughout their educational journey by providing them with opportunities to achieve their potential and fulfil their aspirations. 

A very important part of the Welsh Government's strategy is the pupil development grant, one of their flagship policies first introduced some 10 years ago with the direct aim of tackling the impact of deprivation and disadvantage on educational outcomes. It provides extra money to schools based on the number of pupils eligible for free school meals on their roll, and it seeks to try and weaken that link between relative deprivation and high attainment. Of course, we know of many positive cases of young people from disadvantaged backgrounds that go on to do very well in life, and do very well in education, but too many do not follow that route and are largely not equipped, encouraged and facilitated to do so through systemic failure. The Welsh Government's commitment of £130 per annum on the pupil deprivation grant is very valuable indeed, and of course it covers not just those eligible for free school meals, but also looked-after children and those in referral units. The increase of a further £20 million from 2022-23 is also very welcome, particularly in the light of the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis. 

In the last Senedd term, as a member of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, I know that the report 'On the Money?' focused on the pupil deprivation grant and its effectiveness, and made many important recommendations to make the most of this investment. Of course, the earliest years are absolutely crucial, and Flying Start is a very important programme for this effort. Children under four years of age living in some of the most disadvantaged areas of Wales benefit. In Newport, over 3,000 children, and many more in my patch, as it were, in the Monmouthshire council area, benefit from these services. Thirty-eight per cent of that Newport figure are children from an ethnic minority background, and I would very much support what Julie Morgan, our Deputy Minister for Social Services, said in regard to the programme, when she said:

'I have heard from parents and carers about the positive impact Flying Start has had on their families. We are committed to expanding early years provision and this excellent programme is the best way of delivering this. We know children who attend quality early years settings benefit from spending time in a happy, nurturing environment with their peers and are better prepared for primary education.'

In Newport East as well, the pupil development grant is delivering very important opportunities, advantages and benefits. Ringland Primary School, I think, is a very good example of this. The community of Ringland has relative deprivation, and it is great to see that the work of the school has been recognised as the Voice 21 spotlight school, a pioneer in terms of oracy and well-being. And in Lliswerry High School, a big proportion of the PDG has employed specialist staff to very good effect. 

In conclusion, I'll just mention one other very welcome development, which is Welsh Government increasingly prioritising and highlighting community-focused schools. We know many children in deprived areas do not get the mum's taxi experiences, but they will benefit from activities and opportunities after the school day if they're provided at their school. Dirprwy Lywydd, Wales once seemed to provide teachers to the world. I do believe education is still very much valued in our culture and DNA. We must draw on that spirit and those values for a national mission to engage our children, families and communities to ensure all our children, young people and lifelong learners succeed in our country. 

The Member has shown his passion for the topic and has used up all of his allocated time, but I'm in a generous mood this afternoon, so the two Members will be allowed to speak. Luke Fletcher. 

My thanks to John Griffiths for yielding a portion of his time. This is an important debate to have, and I agree wholeheartedly that knowledge provides that route out of poverty. Members know this already about me, but I was on free school meals and the education maintenance allowance growing up and, before I came into politics, I was a bartender. I'm not sure if John remembers—I hope he does—but one of the first times I met him was when I was doing GCSEs and I had work experience in Welsh Government, and John was the Minister that I had that work experience with. It was at the same time that the 5p plastic bag charge came in. Maybe I'm embarrassing Members a bit in terms of my age, there. But, I think that was vitally important—as well the free school meals and EMA—to why I'm here today now. It's something I passionately believe in. 

There are two points I want to focus on very quickly here. Education is a route out of poverty, but too many aren't able to fully traverse that route, with barriers to education via the cost of the school day. Free school meals, of course, go a long way to addressing that, and the EMA is another way. I've made points in the past to the Minister and various other Members, and continue to make the point, that the payment should increase to £45. It's currently at £30, and it's been £30 since 2004; it was £30 when I was in receipt of it. So, I think it's vital now that we look at how we can facilitate an increase. And of course, travelling to school and the cost of travel is proving another barrier. We have got kids in some of the most deprived communities in Wales walking over an hour to get to school. And of course, with free school meals—again, very important—it's all well and good, but if the kids can't get to school to have those free school meals, it still presents a barrier. Until we solve the cost of the school day, then the system won't allow working-class kids, like I was and like John was, to flourish and reach their potential. 

And finally, very quickly, Dirprwy Lywydd—I know I'm testing your patience—I think we need to also have a bit of a culture change in education. What I mean by that is that we need to move away from the obsession with going to university. Apprenticeships should be on an equal footing. I know a number of people who have gone on to do apprenticeships who are extremely successful now, even though, and they would admit this themselves, they weren't necessarily academically gifted. University isn't the only route out of poverty. 

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, for your generosity. I would also like to thank John Griffiths for giving me a minute in this debate. There are traditionally two legal routes out of poverty. One is via sporting prowess and the other is via education, but education is not a level playing field, and it has become less so with the development of technology. I had access to every book that my wealthier contemporaries had, although it was via the library. Today, I would be limited to two hours of a computer in a public library, and have to pay to print my work. I spent 25 rewarding years teaching in further education, and I believe I helped to change the lives of very many. 

Education offers an opportunity to young people, but also, via the further education sector and the Open University, there's an opportunity to gain qualifications throughout life. Taking these opportunities has transformed the lives and earning capacity of many people, moving them out of low-wage employment into higher wage sectors. I would urge everyone to take their educational opportunities, because unless you are a highly gifted sportsperson, this is your one big chance. I, like John Griffiths, can say it worked for me. 

I call on the Minister for Education and Welsh Language to reply to the debate—Jeremy Miles. 

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. This is such an important debate, and I thank John Griffiths for bringing it forward and for the other contributions that we've heard. Challenging poverty and inequality is a central part of all our work as a Government and my work as a Minister, and education, as we've heard, is crucial to deliver that objective. We want to see high standards and high aspirations for everyone, wherever they come from or whatever their background.

We've taken significant steps forward already, leading to our current reform programme, our commitment to invest in early years education and care, as we heard from John Griffiths, the new Curriculum for Wales, our Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Act 2018, assistance for post-16 education and lifelong learning—we've heard about the power of that clearly today—our free school meals policy, our funding for the school day, initiatives related to music services, and giving books as gifts. All of these focus on overcoming barriers to success and equality. 

Although we have made progress, I think that progress has been too slow. Look at the 14 to 16 cohort, for example. We know from our own data that there hasn't been sufficient progress over the past decade in closing the attainment gap between learners from low-income backgrounds and others. And the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the situation. According to research in our universities, the well-being and attainment of pupils in poverty have fallen even further behind, as John Griffiths noted. We cannot accept a situation where personal success in the future relies on one's background, and I'm determined to take radical and consistent steps to ensure that that isn't the case. 

We need a whole-system approach that looks at the areas that will make a difference to people. This should be based on an approach to education that reflects and draws on the community, and is consistent with policy developments in areas such as health and the economy. In my statement on 22 March, I started to set out some of our work in delivering this, and I outlined further steps for the Bevan Foundation on 16 June. And soon, I will publish an action plan that will bring these publications together, and will set out the direction for partnership working in the future. 

Qualifications play a crucial part, but we also need to consider employability, well-being and achieving personal goals. I am commissioning a review in this area, and I've asked my colleague Hefin David, Senedd Member for Caerphilly, to look at the way education providers do provide experiences related to the workplace, and to make recommendations on focus, consistency and the efficiency and effectiveness of these experiences. 

We will have to use the pupil development grant in an effective way. We're already starting work with partners in this regard. The PDG access has made a huge difference to many disadvantaged families across Wales, assisting to alleviate concerns about buying school uniform or equipment, and enabling children to go to school and take part in activities at the same level as their peers. Last year, the grant was extended to children and young people in all school years, meaning that it is now possible for even more families to benefit from this support.

Whilst acknowledging the pressure on families, Dirprwy Lywydd, in March I announced a one-off payment of £100 to all children and young people who qualified for this grant. This means that the funding for that grant has increased to over £23 million for the next school year.

Building on this, and working with Plaid Cymru as part of the co-operation agreement, from September of this year we start to roll out the universal primary free-school-meal offer. The biggest influences, Dirprwy Lywydd, on the success of learners are the quality of the learning and teaching they experience, and particularly, as John Griffiths was saying, for our younger learners, the environment that they experience both at home and at a community level as well. And I've previously set out some of the actions we are taking to support community-focused schools, for example, but it's also essential that we continuously improve the quality of learning and teaching that learners from low-income households experience, as we know how profound an impact this is on their progress. So, I want to look at how we can incentivise teachers to teach in the schools that serve our most disadvantaged learners, and I'm commissioning some initial research in this, with a view, then, to launching a pilot to explore some approaches. Over the next five years, we will be providing over £500,000 to enable our school improvement services to offer a specific professional learning programme, focused on how to raise the attainment and support the well-being of learners from low-income backgrounds, and that will be launched in January of next year.

We are also establishing a strategic partnership with the Education Endowment Foundation, and they will be adapting their teaching and learning toolkit, which provides teachers with accessible evidence of effective learning and teaching strategies, in our distinct context in Wales, and it will obviously be available both in Welsh and in English. As part of the rich professional learning opportunities we are offering our teachers, our universities are working with us to develop a module for our national Master's programme, focused specifically on tackling the impact of poverty on attainment, and that will also be available from 2023.

The reading and oracy action plan, which I announced last autumn, sets out our priorities to improve speech, communication and language. I've announced an additional £5 million for reading programmes across Wales, which will provide a book for every learner alongside a targeted scheme of reading support, focusing on early years and on disadvantaged learners, and we're expanding a project that will support over 2,000 children to improve their language, communication and reading skills—a project led by Bangor University—and it provides seven to 11-year-olds with an intensive, interactive 10-week language and literacy programme in Welsh and in English, either in or out of the classroom.

In relation to learning and teaching, evidence indicates that many of the countries that have the most equitable education systems are those that adopt mixed attainment learner grouping for as long as possible, so that can raise overall learner attainment and it can avoid the detrimental impact of setting, which often can result in learners from lower income households being placed in the lowest groupings, and that suppresses their aspirations, all too often. We know that setting and other forms of attainment-based learner grouping are used widely in our system in Wales, but we lack the robust research evidence on it, and the effect that it has. So, I am commissioning an initial review of evidence, with a focus on the extent to which mixed-attainment teaching and learning is already taking place, what the advantages are of that, and what the downsides are as well.

All of these considerations are at the forefront of the curriculum reforms that we are undertaking. As John Griffiths said, it is designed to achieve high standards and aspirations for all, and that absolutely includes those impacted by poverty. Schools are free to design their own curricula, with the needs of their learners and their communities in mind. I published additional materials in June to support schools to design their curriculum, and to embed that knowledge and those experiences key to the process of curriculum design.

In response to the disruption caused by the pandemic for learners moving from pre to post-16 education, we've introduced a post-16 transitions plan, supported by £45 million-worth of additional funding from 2020 to 2023. But there is much more that the post-16 sector can do to tackle the impact of poverty on attainment, and in my oral statement earlier this year, I made clear our intention to expand the work of the Seren network, for example, so it reaches more socioeconomically disadvantaged learners. And in the Bill that we've just passed through the Senedd, there will be a legislative duty on the new commission to seek to expand equality of opportunity and improve access for learners from under-represented groups, and to encourage learners from lower income backgrounds into post-16 education.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I thank John Griffiths, once again, for bringing this debate. His story, as we have heard, is the embodiment of my ambition for Wales to be a nation of second chances, where it is never too late to learn, and I know as well that we both share the conviction that whereas untackled poverty can be a bar to education, we also know that education at its best can also be a bar to poverty. Dirprwy Llywydd, working with our partners, I give you the promise that we will build an education system that can play its full part on the journey to the fairer Wales that we all want to see, where we achieve high standards and aspirations for all.

Thank you, Minister.

And diolch to all Members who contributed, because I think this is an important topic and the passion you've shown demonstrates that.

And that brings today's proceedings to a close.