National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon, and welcome, all, to this Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Finance and Local Government, and the first question this afternoon is from Siân Gwenllian.

I welcome the actions being taken across Wales to encourage individuals to put themselves forward for elected office. Diversity delivers better, more inclusive decision making. In advance of the 2027 local elections, work to encourage diversity includes the programme for government commitment to extend the access to elected office fund.

Since the county council elections a year ago, around 35 per cent of councillors in Wales are women. In Arfon, we succeeded in increasing the number of women standing for Plaid Cymru by 21 per cent. This was the result of intentional work by some of us, a great many encouraging conversations, training, mentoring, and the support has continued over the past year for them since the election. But do you agree that we need statutory measures to create the genuine change across Wales's councils to reach a position of equality? And what work is ongoing to create that statutory change that is needed?

A range of work is ongoing at the moment in order to try and ensure that we have a more diverse group of people putting themselves forward for election, for both town and community councils, and county and country borough councils, in future. And those include the reviewing of the access to elected office fund, which was very successful in supporting a number of candidates to become town and community councillors at the last elections, but also looking to see how job sharing, for example, can be extended to more roles within councils, to recognise how important that is for becoming a more attractive option for a wider range of people. We know that women, in particular, and those with caring responsibilities, find that particularly attractive. And we've also been exploring what more we can do in terms of widening the access to hybrid meetings as a way of working, which, again, supports a more diverse group of people. But in terms of making those things statutory—I suppose we're talking about gender quotas here—I think there is a conversation to be had about that, but it's not one of our key proposals at the moment in terms of reforms, but, certainly, something that we should be having a discussion about. I'm very keen to have more of a discussion with Siân Gwenllian about her ideas in that space.

I've been proud to host and speak at both the 2022 and 2023 Equal Power Equal Voice Senedd events, celebrating the Equal Power Equal Voice project, a mentoring programme aiming to increase diversity of representation in public and political life in Wales. Equal Power Equal Voice, or EPEV, is a partnership between Women's Equality Network Wales, Stonewall Cymru, Disability Wales, and Ethnic Minorities and Youth Support Team Wales. And I was also pleased to participate in last month's north Wales regional meet-up for the EPEV programme, at the Autistic UK office in Llandudno, meeting and getting to know more about the mentees in north Wales. Although most of those attending were women, both men and women also identified inter-sectional issues, including disability and sexuality, which combined to create barriers for them. What positive action is the Welsh Government therefore taking with people to address this, in order to increase diversity of representation in public and political life in Wales?

I'd like to begin, really, by joining Mark Isherwood in recognising the importance of mentoring schemes. I've been a mentor myself in one of the schemes, and I found that probably as valuable to me as to the mentee, so I would absolutely encourage all colleagues to look at opportunities to support those kinds of schemes. One of the things that we have been doing is trying to widen our evidence base, looking at protected characteristics, and we undertook a survey of members of the public about their perceptions of local councillors, but then, also, our candidates surveys. And those surveys do show that there is a real lack of diversity, and they did give us some kind of insight, really, as to what the barriers are, in terms of allowing people with protected characteristics—often, one or more of those protected characteristics—being able to participate fully in local democracy. So, building on that suite of research, we've been able to hold a range of workshops, whereby we invited elected members, but also representatives of a range of organisations representing diverse, protected characteristics, to talk in a bit more depth about the barriers that there are to people becoming involved in elected politics. And I think that those workshops have been really helpful. They've recently concluded, so now we're looking at all of the learning that we had from those workshops in order to try and help us set out the next steps in this important agenda.

Local authorities are burial authorities and responsible for their own cemeteries and crematoriums. It is for local planning authorities to identify suitable sites for new crematoriums. Proposals for new crematoriums would be subject to planning and environmental law.

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. There is no crematorium in Powys. Many of my constituents have to travel into England, and the vast majority of my constituents have to travel over an hour to the nearest crematorium. So, clearly, this is not ideal for grieving families or friends, or, indeed, very sustainable at all either. Most crematoriums, of course, in Wales are owned and managed by local authorities, but I'm keen to know how the Welsh Government can support either a local authority or a private business to build and provide crematorium services in my constituency. And I ask the question in the context that there was an application in my constituency in north Powys from a private developer to build a crematorium. It was supported by the local authority in principle, and through the planning process as well, but it was rejected by Welsh Government after a call-in. So, what I'm very keen to understand from you, Minister, is how you can support, and Welsh Government can support, either a local authority or a private developer to build a crematorium and provide those services in my constituency, because a private developer isn't going to do that unless they know that their risk is minimalised and they have the support of the Welsh Government. So, can you perhaps give advice to me, and any private developer that wants to build a crematorium in north Powys, to support my constituents?

Thank you to Russell George for raising this issue this afternoon. I am aware of the particular application to which he refers, which was called in and then subsequently refused. The reasons for that are set out in the decision letter, and, because it is open to the applicant to challenge the decision in the High Court, I won't say any more about that application today. But I understand the more general request for information, and, I suppose, the advice would be for the interested private business to have discussions with the local authority in the first instance, because assessment for the need for crematoriums is locally led, and local planning authorities will need to take into account a range of factors, such as drive time, catchment for the existing provision—Russell George has set out some of the challenges there—the capacity of existing provision, and population and demographics, as well as planned housing developments in the area. And, obviously, the authority would want to take into account the views of the local residents as well. Guidance on the establishment of crematoria, including meeting the requirements under the legislation, is available from the Federation of Burial and Cremation Authorities, and that might be another source of useful information for the individual concerned, and for Russell George. 

Questions now from party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Sam Rowlands. 

Diolch, Llywydd, and good afternoon, Minister. As I'm sure you'll gladly recall, earlier this month I wrote a letter to you regarding council tax exemptions, in particular relating to the 182-day regulations for self-catering businesses in Wales. In this letter, I asked for an update on what exemptions will be made in relation to those regulations, and I was grateful to receive your response following the explanatory memorandum published on 6 March. Minister, you will know that these new regulations, with such limited exemptions, will mean that many genuine, well-established businesses in Wales will now pay thousands of pounds in tax that they previously had not done, or had not had to plan for, some of that being retrospective, therefore making some of these businesses unviable. So, Minister, what is your assessment of this? 

The Welsh Government has tried to set out a position where we recognise the pressures on businesses, but also believe that the owners of properties should be making a reasonable contribution to the communities in which those properties are situated. We have recognised that some self-catering properties are restricted by planning conditions, preventing permanent occupation as somebody's main residence, and, in the regulations, which we laid on 6 March and which come into force on 1 April 2023, we recognise that in terms of the letting criteria and the maximum council tax premium. It is important, though, that where statutory exemptions are clearly definable in legislation and would be appropriate in all circumstances where they apply, that we use that as the format and the basis for taking our decisions, because planning conditions, I think, do satisfy those requirements as being clear and permanent and having their own legislative basis, and, where they apply, they apply in a consistent way. So that, I think, is an appropriate basis upon which to take decisions. I know that colleagues have provided a long list of other potential areas for exemptions, and we have looked at all of those in detail, but the regulations as laid, I think, set out a reasonable approach to move forward. 

Thank you for that answer, Minister. As you've outlined, the main exemption put in place in relation to planning conditions specifies properties may only be used for holiday lets et cetera. But you also noted in your response just then the other exemptions that were sought by these businesses in Wales, and, in particular, this included an exemption for registered charities that provide respite for carers and properties that cater for those people with special needs. So, in light of this, Minister, will you reassess your council tax premiums and look at introducing an exemption for those who provide respite care in Wales? 

We have looked at the case made by you and by others in respect of where a property is run by a charity, and I think that the circumstances will depend on the particular situation relating to that property. Some will already be covered by an existing exemption or by the new exemption, and, in cases where that's not so, authorities do have discretionary powers that they can use. The nature of charitable lettings can vary, and it would be difficult to define a specific category for this, but I think that there are cases where local authorities will be looking to the revised and refreshed guidance, which the Welsh Government is providing to help them take those decisions, when they believe that there is a real case for a individual property or a group of properties or a category of properties locally to be exempted. 

I thank you, again, for that response, Minister. I'm sure you would be the first to acknowledge the importance of these self-catering businesses in supporting our communities, both in the jobs that they create and sustain and the difference that they make to their communities, and I'm sure you'd also acknowledge and accept some of their anxiety and worry due to these 182-day regulations that they're facing at the moment, and many hoped that there would be some sensible exemptions to the premiums, but, clearly, this hasn't been delivered, and I think this needs to be reiterated here today. But, in light of this, Minister, will you today commit to working closely with this really important sector to ensure that we don't see these legitimate, hard-working businesses close, which would consequently result in loss of jobs and, therefore, an impact on our communities here in Wales? 

The Welsh Government does work very, very closely with the tourism sector, and we do listen very carefully to the representations that they make on behalf of their members. I think that Sam Rowlands will recognise that we are trying to strike a balance here between supporting the tourism industry and allowing that to thrive and supporting that to thrive, but at the same time recognising that there is an important issue in terms of underused properties, particularly in some of our more rural and coastal communities, where there's a great deal of tourism but not opportunities for local individuals to rent or buy a home. So, I do think that we are trying to strike a balance in what is quite a challenging situation. 

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd. 

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Minister, the Barnett formula all too often ends up being a rather convenient reason, some would say, for the Welsh Government to delay implementing transformative policies. The most recent case in point, maybe, relates to public sector pay here in Wales. Because we do know that, very often, the lack of action in England leaves Welsh Ministers sitting on their hands—you would say, 'having to sit on our hands', I'd imagine. Do you agree that the recent UK Government budget and the continued fiasco around HS2 funding, and now the even more absurd decision on no consequential funding to Wales from the Northern Powerhouse Rail work, has again underlined what Plaid Cymru has long advocated—that we need to move away from the current arrangement to a needs-based funding formula, delivered through an independent office of fair funding, which would have a legal obligation to deliver a fairer economic balance across the nations and regions of the UK, legally bound to ensure that public money delivers equality of outcomes right across the United Kingdom?

I would say that the Barnett formula and the fiscal framework that was agreed by the First Minister when he was in this role with the UK Government actually does provide some advantages to Wales in terms of the fact that the Barnett formula does recognise relative need. I think that's important and that's certainly something that we wouldn't want to move away from. I think that, where there are challenges—as the First Minister, I think, set out in First Minister's questions yesterday—is where the UK Government is the judge and jury in terms of the application of the Barnett formula. I think that that is where some of those real challenges arise, for example the classification of HS2 as an England-and-Wales project when it self-evidently isn't. HM Treasury's own analysis suggests that it will have a disbenefit to south-west Wales. I think that all of those things do lead us to the point where I think a more independent look at the Barnett formula and how it's applied is important. I think that the work that we've done in terms of inter-governmental relations is important as well. When we get to the point of testing some of this through the disputes mechanism, I think it will be an important moment for us to make those arguments quite clearly to the UK Government, using the process that we've agreed.

I'm not sure any of us would relish having to run through those processes, to be honest, because I fear that we maybe know what the outcome might be. But there we are; we won't go there.

Really, it sounded a little bit as if you were making excuses for Barnett earlier on in your answer, but we know that by placing relative need first and foremost within the arrangement, we'd then be able to direct more public finances to address some of the socioeconomic and environmental challenges that we face here in Wales. Needs arising from our ageing demographics, for example, would then translate into increased funding for health and social care. Low employment would incentivise increased spending on education and training. Climate adaptation would necessitate funding then for more green energy investment. Without such reform, Wales is just going to be locked into the current cycle where we depend on a UK Chancellor making spending commitments for England before we can then subsequently act here in Wales.

What commitment can you give, Minister, as a Labour Minister here in Wales, that any incoming UK Labour Government would actually overhaul Wales's funding settlement to achieve that fairer, economic balance across the regions and nations of the UK—something, of course, that would fiscally empower you as a Welsh finance Minister to deliver on our priorities here in Wales, rather, of course, than having to wait, as we do currently, for England to act before we can make the investment that we so desperately need here in Wales?

I'm really keen to impress upon UK Labour the same argument that we've been making to HM Treasury in terms of the fiscal flexibilities that Wales needs. Our borrowing powers are not fit for purpose, really, in the sense that we have such a limited annual ability to borrow. I think that that obviously needs to be addressed. The year-end issues really need to be addressed in the sense that our budget often changes very late on in the year and there are some real limitations on carry-over, so it does potentially lead you to taking spending decisions at the end of the year that might not be the decisions that you would make if you had the ability to carry that funding over into the next financial year. Again, that's just a simple thing I think that the UK Government could do, which would be a common-sense approach to the issues that we're facing. Obviously, we're having the opportunities to make representations to the UK Government. I don't think it's going to be making piecemeal announcements. As the First Minister said yesterday, they will obviously be considering the production of the manifesto for the next election. Certainly, I don't think that this would be the appropriate place for me to be making announcements on behalf of UK Labour in terms of what they would intend to do for a future UK Government.

Local authorities deliver their essential services through their talented staff. While each local authority is responsible for its own recruitment, the Welsh Government continues to provide support through Academi Wales leadership programmes including the all-Wales public service graduate programme, personal learning accounts and our wider apprenticeship programme.

Diolch, Minister. I'm always pleased to see the work that my local Bridgend County Borough Council do to improve community. With Brexit's complexities causing an increased workload, to the regeneration of our community, to combating the climate and nature emergency, local government staff play a vital role in the day-to-day lives of everyone. However, according to research conducted by the Institute for Government, the average age of civil servants across the UK is 44, and whilst Bridgend County Borough Council has launched a graduate scheme—some members of which are in the gallery here today—Minister, this is a real issue. Therefore, considering the increased workload for local government, what work is the Welsh Government doing to encourage young people to fill vacant posts in local government, and will they encourage schemes like this across Wales? Diolch.

Thank you very much for raising this important issue this afternoon. I absolutely join you in recognising the vital role that our local government staff play in terms of serving their communities. I'm very sorry I'm not able to meet the Bridgend graduates in person myself this afternoon, but it's wonderful to see them at the Senedd.

I think that there are some really important things that Bridgend is doing in terms of the significant use of apprenticeships. I know there are 144 of them, and that's been particularly useful in ICT, social care and building control. Those are all areas where we need to be encouraging talented people to make a career in local government. I think that, as Bridgend is doing, really, all local authorities need to be thinking about how we can promote the benefits of working in the public sector. As well as having the opportunity to really make a strong contribution to your local area, there are also fantastic opportunities within local authorities to progress within your career. I think that the more we can do to start getting young people at school and college to start thinking about careers in local government, the better, because as you say, there are great opportunities, and it really is a job where you can make a huge difference.

There are many people in black, Asian and minority ethnic communities who have a range of skills that will benefit the delivery of local authority services, such as language skills and a deep knowledge of different cultural communities. Minister, what should local authorities do to improve the rate of employment amongst these communities to better reflect the people they serve?

I think it's really important that local authorities—and the public sector more widely—takes opportunities to look to attract a much wider and more diverse range of people to work in their sectors. They can do that by, for example, ensuring that the advertisements for roles are appropriately placed in places where people with more diverse characteristics are likely to see them, and also finding ways to make the interview process a more welcoming and inclusive way in which to find your new staff. And again, those mentoring schemes, which we were talking about earlier in terms of political roles, I think are really quite exciting and important within the context of the public sector as well. There is absolutely more that should be happening in that space, but lots we can learn, I think, from the work that we're doing to improve diversity in democracy, because I think that in many ways they're two sides of the same coin.

We are working closely with colleagues. The Wales pension partnership discussed decarbonising local government pensions at the Partnership Council for Wales in November. Following your meeting with the First Minister in January, the WLGA has agreed to run an event in May with leaders and pension providers to discuss the next steps.  

I'm very grateful to the Minister for confirmation of that meeting and the session with the Welsh Local Government Association. The Minister will know that, in 2021, the Welsh Government produced the route-map for decarbonisation across the Welsh public sector by 2030, and it shows what can be achieved if the public sector works together on climate emissions. In the spirit of collaboration and in the spirit of the decarbonisation session with the WLGA, I wonder if the Minister agrees with me that that, there, is an opportunity where we can come up together with a new strategy to decarbonise the Welsh public sector pension fund by 2030.

I absolutely agree that working together to respond to the climate and nature crisis is the only way that we are really, really going to be able to make the improvements that have to be made. The whole pension system really needs to be responding to this agenda. It is true, of course, that local government pension authorities can be learning from each other and from across the public sector more widely. The meeting that I know, Jack, came about as a result of the work that you've been doing I think will be important in sharing that information. 

It's also important to recognise that pension owners are already taking some steps to decarbonise. So, it's important to recognise good practice where it is taking place. The local government Wales pension partnership announced a new decarbonisation initiative across £2.5 billion of its investments in April of last year. And again, I think that there are opportunities there to explore that good practice and see how it can be widened even further. 

I'm pleased this subject has been raised this afternoon. I have grave concerns over the decarbonisation of pension funds and how that will be implemented over a sustained period of time as a lot of public sector pensions rely on investments in fossil fuels. If you want a statement of fact, in the Member for Alyn and Deeside's own constituency, in Flintshire, they invested in renewables and clean tech way back in 2008 and 2009. So, you saw the perfect example in his own constituency of how a council can work proactively in decarbonising the pensions themselves without necessarily having the legislative framework in place to support that. 

But the question I want to ask, Minister, particularly around this is around the lowest-paid workers, some of whom fall within the Clwyd pension fund, which covers my constituency in Denbighshire. In terms of implementation, what would that look like in terms of protecting the lowest-paid workers so that we don't impoverish the lowest-paid workers who very committedly engaged in pension funds all their working career and want a reward when they do decide to retire? What steps is the Welsh Government taking to support the lowest-paid workers in Denbighshire in that sense? Thank you.

These would be matters, really, for the members of the pension board and the pension fund to be considering in terms of the investments that the fund makes. But that said, I think that green pension investments can be very good investments in terms of the way in which the current energy market is moving towards a greener and more sustainable way of delivering energy for the future. I know all of these things will be things that the pension scheme managers and so on are discussing with the pension board. Those specific investment decisions are really not for the Welsh Government, but for the pension boards themselves. 

There are now 20 remaining historic private finance initiative contracts in Wales. In 2019, the First Minister instigated a review of PFI contracts, encouraging contracting authorities to renegotiate or terminate PFI contracts where there was a value-for-money case for doing so. This work is ongoing.

Thank you for that. That's very helpful. Two of those cases that you've identified are in the Caerphilly borough. One is fully in my constituency, Lewis School Pengam, and the other has a campus in my constituency, which is Ysgol Gyfun Cwm Rhymni, and there are nine years left to run on the original 30-year PFI contracts. I don't think we would have had the schools without them, and they are very impressive schools, but Caerphilly County Borough Council believes that key benefits could be gained if the contract, which relates to the provision of building maintenance, cleaning, catering and grounds maintenance services is terminated early, and it's due to be discussed at full council on 19 April. So, in advance of that, I just wanted to ask the Minister: what support can the Welsh Government provide to Caerphilly County Borough Council, if they did decide to exit that PFI contract early?

Well, authorities are continuing to review their contracts to determine value for money, and contracting authorities that are undertaking reviews to renegotiate or to terminate a contract don't need Welsh Government approval to renegotiate or terminate that contract. Welsh Government does, however, review the business case, as we provide some revenue support cost for PFI initiatives. This stream of funding is considered as part of the value-for-money case for the overall public purse. So, in terms of Caerphilly County Borough Council, they have submitted a business case proposing the voluntary termination of their PFI contract for the two schools, as you just described, and I've approved the continuation of some revenue support for the remaining period that the contract would have run if the PFI continued. It is now for Caerphilly, of course, to make the decision as to whether or not it wants to voluntarily terminate.

Minister, as you know, the use of PFI has been calamitous, to say the least. You will know that many councils were caught in the grip of toxic PFI schemes, and as we know, Minister, at last count, I believe there were 23 PFI projects with a capital value of £701 million, which was sponsored by Welsh Government, and there were five projects sponsored by the UK Government. Minister, there will be times when access to private capital is essential. However, often, they've offered poor value for money and merely place a burden of debt on many generations to come. I just wondered what lessons has the Welsh Government learned from the experience of PFIs. What work is the Welsh Government doing in order to increase transparency and to ensure that taxpayers get the best value for money when engaging with the private sector?

Well, I will say that successive Welsh Governments have consistently avoided the pitfalls of PFI contracts, and as a result of our approach, liabilities relating to this type of scheme in Wales are much lower than in other parts of the UK. For example, the average cost per head of PFI schemes in Wales is around £40, and that's approximately a fifth of the cost per head across the UK as a whole.

In Wales, we've looked to develop a different kind of model, which is of course our mutual investment model. It does differ from traditional PFI in a number of ways. For example, it ensures that the businesses involved have to help the Welsh Government deliver on the objectives of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015; they will, for example, need to deliver very stretching community benefits, and there are remedies for non-delivery; they will need to commit to the Welsh Government's ethical employment code, and also build with long-term sustainability and environmental efficiency in mind as well.

So, I think we've seen some very good examples—during the construction of the A465, for example, where we've seen lots of new local jobs being created, lots of employment for people who have experienced long-term unemployment, or who are not in employment, education or training, for example, and, of course, a number of community initiatives have been supported through the community initiatives programme, which was set up as part of that as well. So, I think it's important to recognise that we have developed the MIM model, but it does differ significantly from traditional PFI.

The Minister for Economy, working with the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales, is engaging across Government and working in partnership with Anglesey council through the 2 Sisters taskforce. Our collective focus to date has been on supporting affected workers and the community in Llangefni and beyond.

Thank you for that response. There does need to be a response in terms of additional funding on many levels. This is a huge blow to us on Anglesey. I, of course, am in contact with many of those who are losing their jobs as they face an uncertain future, and I am asking for an assurance today that the Minister will look favourably at any applications for support for workers and their families, both directly and by creating employment and training opportunities and so on too.

In terms of the county council, work is currently ongoing to identify the areas that will place most demand on them. They're looking at well-being and social needs, housing, the resilience of families, and so on and so forth. And the great concern at this point is that it won't be apparent what the impact will be until after the plant closes. So can I ask, once again today, the Government to work very closely with the community. and the council particularly, to secure sufficient funding to face the challenges that arise?

I'd just begin by reassuring Rhun ap Iorwerth that the Minister for Economy is working very closely indeed with the council on this issue, and the taskforce also continues to be meeting regularly to establish a way forward and also to understand those wider implications to which the Member has referred. The Minister for Economy has approved additional funding through the Welsh Government's Communities for Work Plus programme for Anglesey County Council and Gwynedd Council in 2023-24 to expand the capacity of their local Communities for Work teams, to support those who have been made redundant as a result of the closure of the Llangefni plant. And both of those teams are already on site, alongside Careers Wales and Job Centre Plus, to ensure that the staff at 2 Sisters get the full range of support that they need to find alternative employment.

With the plant's closure having now entered the next stage, consideration is being given to future options for the site, which remain with its owner. Alongside the local authority, we are engaging with them to ensure that this important and prominent site can once again provide local employment opportunities as soon as possible. As far as I'm aware, to date, no funding request for the site has been made to the Minister for Economy, and given that the taskforce's focus to date has been on the individuals affected, there hasn't been any additional funding request from the council at this time. But I appreciate that these are early days in terms of understanding the full impact of the closure.

Can I support Rhun ap Iorwerth in his request for the appropriate support to be provided to the local authority at Anglesey? I noted in your response there, Minister, that you rightly pointed to the important goal of the support for workers from the 2 Sisters site and also for the re-establishment of the site to be utilised at some point in the future as well. I also noted that, right towards the end there, you said that you hadn't seen any further requests for support from the local authority. But I wonder if you'd be able to expand on any other types of support that may have been requested to you, whether you've had sight of those, and what the options might be for supporting the community from other places, not just from the local authority.

The request for additional support, for example the additional funding that has gone through Communities for Work, was made to the Minister for Economy. So, I haven't had any particular approaches in terms of additional funding. But I do know that there was a meeting held on 15 March between Anglesey council, the Wales Office, Welsh Government and Amber Holdings who own the site, and that meeting secured an agreement to engage with stakeholders to agree a future use of the site in line with local needs, and also to engage with local businesses to determine the type of property required in the current market. And again, that would be a discussion led by the Minister for Economy. But I just thought that sharing that could be of interest to colleagues this afternoon as well.

The responsibility for setting the council's annual budget and, as part of that, decisions about council tax, are matters for each local authority and its elected members.

Thank you for that response, Minister. I recognise that local authority members themselves are responsible for setting council tax, but as you will know, in Conwy, local residents there are facing an eye-watering increase in their council tax bills of 9.9 per cent this year, which is the largest increase in Wales, and one of the largest in the whole of England and Wales. Such an increase would not be permitted if that local authority had the same opportunity to have a cap fitted on it by you in your responsibility as the Minister for local government. And, of course, in England, residents there who face excessive council tax increases cannot have them imposed upon them without a 'yes' vote in a referendum. Can I ask you, will you consider the introduction of similar legislation here in Wales, so that when things go wrong with significant increases like this at a time when there are cost-of-living pressures, people can have the opportunity to have their say on their local council tax?

The Welsh Government doesn't intend to introduce any legislation of that sort, because we do believe that capping an authority's budget would be a serious imposition on the responsibilities of those locally elected members. We do provide local authorities, of course, with flexibility when setting their budgets and determining their council tax levels, and that does allow them to respond to local priorities and pressures. We believe that's an important feature of local democracy and enables authorities to be accountable to their residents. Obviously, those local referenda in England are costly. Instead, we channel our funding to the front line of local government through the local government settlement so that authorities do have that greater flexibility in terms of allocating that funding according to their local priorities.

Supporting vital public services through these hard times was a key priority in the 2023-24 budget. I have provided an additional £227 million for local government, including funding for schools and social care, which sits alongside other directly funded cost-of-living support interventions, including £18.8 million for the discretionary assistance fund.

Thank you, Minister. I was really pleased to see that the budget for the discretionary assistance fund would be increasing by nearly £19 million, and that the cash value of payments would rise in line with inflation by 11 per cent. This news has been very warmly welcomed by, for example, the Bevan Foundation, as we know that the DAF is used by councils as a lifeline for families facing crisis. With our principal authorities being at the coalface during the cost-of-living crisis, how else is Welsh Government supporting councils so that they in turn can support their local communities?

Welsh Government sees the most important thing that we can do in terms of helping local authorities support their communities through this difficult time as providing as much support as we possibly can through the revenue support grant. Our settlement for 2023-24 is an increase of £227 million to the indicative allocations that were published at the last budget. That, in part, is due to the fact that we provided over and above the consequential funding that we received for both education and social care in the previous statement from the UK Government. And, as a result of the reprioritisation exercise that we undertook across Government, we were able to provide that more generous settlement. We think that prioritising local government and ensuring the best possible settlement is the absolutely best way to help local authorities help their local communities.

Question 9 [OQ59298] has been withdrawn, and Jayne Bryant isn't here to ask question 10 [OQ59321], so we'll move on to question 11 from Mike Hedges.

Since its introduction in 2009, the invest-to-save programme has supported approximately 200 projects with an aggregate value in the region of £200 million. Most recently, it has provided funding for three new projects, helping us to deliver our programme for government commitment in respect of looked-after children. 

Can I thank the Minister for that response? I know that, at one time, it was being used by Natural Resources Wales to fill their gaps because of the cost of the merger. But, generally, I believe it's a very good thing, invest-to-save, and it is an opportunity to help the Welsh public sector and get as much as we can for what we spend. The question I've got is: how do we ensure that what works and is seen to work in one place is actually shared and followed up by other parts of the Welsh public sector, so that we can all benefit rather than just having some one-off successes instead of having successes across the whole sector?

Cardiff University undertook some work with us, which sought to have discussions right across the public sector where the invest-to-save programme had been used, and it's been used right across Wales in a range of ways to understand what the barriers were for the implementation and expansion of those good projects and the learning across Wales so that these kinds of interventions could be made without the need for the invest-to-save funding. So, we are still considering, really, the learning of that, and it was very much about ensuring that there are opportunities for collaboration and for sharing that information. But we are currently exploring and considering how the fund will operate in future, what activities it should focus on, and part of that will be considering the learning about the barriers to the expansion of good practice.

Thank you very much to the Minister.

The next item, therefore, is the questions to the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales, and Trefnydd, and the first question today is from Janet Finch-Saunders.

I have regular discussions with the Minister for Economy about a range of north Wales matters, including the north Wales growth deal. At the last Cabinet sub-committee for north Wales, the Minister for Economy gave an economic update for the region, including progress of the deal.

Thank you. I'm sure you'll agree with me that the north Wales growth deal, made possible by funding from the UK Government, represents a fantastic opportunity for investment and jobs in north Wales. I also hope you'll agree that local businesses should be encouraged to do everything they can to apply for funding as part of this deal. This includes our rural and agricultural sector, who also play a role that's just as important in driving economic growth. Hedd Vaughan-Evans, head of operations at Ambition North Wales explains, 'We want to hear from businesses and organisations that can meet our funding criteria and work with us to deliver the benefits to the region from the growth deal. Our website has all the relevant information about funding and how to apply.'

Now, the deadline for submitting bids is 27 March 2023, however, many smaller rural businesses simply do not have the same time available and resources to devote to developing these applications, and they are rather complex business cases, easy for much larger businesses to do. So, what can you do, as the Minister, to increase awareness among rural businesses of these funding opportunities, and what help is being provided to smaller rural businesses to make the application process as easy as possible? Thank you.

I think it is really important that, obviously, the application process is as straightforward and, as you say, as easy as possible. I was aware the £30 million call-out for new growth deal projects did go live on 13 February for six weeks, which I think does take us up to 27 March. And I know Ambition North Wales is particularly interested in transformational projects that have investment ready and complement the programme objectives for agri-food and tourism, along with low carbon energy as well and land and property. I think the process is very robust, I think it's very fair and it's very transparent; I think that's really important. I appreciate what you're saying about the timescale, but I do think the process is important to get it right. Obviously, the responsibility for delivery of the growth deal lies with the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, not the Welsh Government, but I know that my officials do have meetings with the board, and I will certainly ensure that the point you make around the small timescale for small business is raised.

Just a few minutes ago I was asking the Minister for finance for support for Anglesey as a result of the closure of the 2 Sisters Food Group works. Additional funding that is becoming available now through the growth deal could be a way to provide support to the food sector in Anglesey as well. I'm eager to see whether that funding could be delivered to provide the food park that I've been pushing for for several years, and whether, against the clock, we can put together a bid for establishing a food village on Anglesey. The demand is there, Coleg Menai say that they are ready to support that, working with their food technology centre, and the development that's going to be happening in Glynllifon too, which includes a food element. It would be good to have the Minister's support in principle to proceed with those plans, and any support that she and her officials could provide. But also I would appreciate a pledge that she will do everything that she can do to ensure, as a result of the closure of 2 Sisters, that the growth of food employment in Anglesey is a priority. 

Thank you. Obviously, we've met previously around your request for a food park. I'm actually visiting the food technology centre in Llangefni—I think it's during the Easter recess—so I'll certainly see where we are up to in relation to that. 

With respect to 2 Sisters, as the Minister for Finance and Local Government said, I'm working very closely with the Minister for Economy. I think it was—. Unfortunately, I think we could see what was on the cards when the consultation was announced, but it's really important we do everything we can. You may be aware that the Minister for Social Justice recently visited, and, as I say, I'm visiting the technology centre and other areas of Llangefni during Easter recess, so I'll certainly be happy to have further discussions with you around that. 

Minister, one of the key projects in the north Wales growth deal is supporting the work at the digital signal processing centre in Bangor University, where they're developing next-generation technology in digital connectivity. And Llywydd, I will at this point declare an interest as an unpaid member of the project board at the DSP centre. Minister, you'll know I want to see north Wales becoming a global innovator when it comes to digital technology, and, to do this, we need good collaboration from both the Welsh and UK Governments, as well as academic and industry partners. Will you, Minister, provide an update to the Chamber today on what conversations Welsh Government officials, both in your department and the Minister for Economy's department, have had with UK Government counterparts on the importance of investing in north Wales's digital projects?  

Thank you. So, it was actually the first project to be delivered under the north Wales growth deal, as you're aware, so I think it really does demonstrate the difference that the deal investment can make in the area. And I certainly share your ambition to see north Wales—and, in fact, all parts of Wales—become a global innovator when it does come to digital technology, and I'm very happy to amplify that ambition in any interactions that I have with the UK Government. But I know the Minister for Economy, who obviously leads on this—. There was a meeting between him and UK Ministers that focused on digital connectivity, particularly in relation to the UK Government's delivery of the Project Gigabit in Wales. So, the Minister has asked for his officials to be kept updated with that. 

Welsh Government is committed to ensuring everyone has access to green spaces close to home. We are delivering this through programmes, including Local Places for Nature, community facilities, landfill disposals tax communities scheme and access improvement grants. Over 1,400 green spaces have been created by Local Places for Nature alone.

Thank you, Minister. Minister, almost three years ago, you established a green recovery task and finish group led by the chair of Natural Resources Wales. In their report to you, one of their key recommendations was reimagining urban areas and green spaces, building space for nature in the design of urban landscapes. There are many dreadful examples of urban development with little thought to green spaces for recreation and well-being. What specific actions will you take over the course of this Senedd term to address how, in your planning and development policies, this can be addressed? People want places to live and green spaces to enjoy, and not just buildings to sit in. 

Thank you. We have several projects that we are taking forward during this term of Government. I mentioned a couple of them in my opening answer to you; certainly, Local Places for Nature I think has been incredibly successful, and it is very well received by our constituents all across Wales. And we are continuing to support and expand on the valuable work of that specific programme, and build on its success. We've allocated approximately £10 million to all 22 local authorities and the three national parks; £1.4 million—I know you take a particular interest in Bridgend—has been allocated to projects in the Bridgend, Rhondda Cynon Taf, Swansea and Neath Port Talbot local authority areas to support that nature enhancement of community green spaces here in Wales. There are other, obviously, schemes—the community facilities programme I’m sure you’re very well aware of—and I think what is really important is that communities themselves take ownership of green spaces.

I absolutely endorse your ambition, and also NRW’s ambition, to reimagine urban spaces. At a time when people’s mental health is quite fragile, this is a really important thing. In my experience, it isn’t local vandals who are the problem—it’s people operating on grass-cutting contracts who, basically, mow down trees and flowers that people have planted to make their own area look nicer. I just wondered how the Welsh Government plans to ensure that everybody is engaged with this, with the importance of reimagining our urban green spaces. We don’t need to spray weedkiller to kill off weeds because it also kills off plants as well and it adds to the phosphorus problem. So, how do you think you might be able to ensure that, in urban areas, we have a complete partnership approach with our communities and with all our services that are being delivered, so that we’re all singing from the same hymn sheet?

Thank you. I think you raise a very important point, and you’ll be aware of some of the campaigns as a Government we’ve brought forward. So, one of them is—. Carolyn Thomas, our colleague, has been working to develop and promote the ‘It’s for Them’ campaign, and that’s about helping local communities understand the importance of verges and green spaces for wildlife, for instance, as well as, obviously, planting wild flowers as well. So, there are a variety of schemes that we’re bringing forward. We’ve got the ‘Nature isn’t Neat’ scheme, which I think has been very successful as well.

Minister, as you say, community groups are doing some very good work in greening our local communities, and this is vital, isn’t it, in meeting the challenges of climate change, in connecting people more with nature, and gaining popular support for the transition that we need if we are really going to meet the environmental challenges of the future? One example of that, I think, is in the Maindee area of Newport East. On Saturday, the First Minister will be coming along to open the Triangle site, which is all about greening the local community—there’s a community café, there’s a performance space; some really, really good work has been done. So, Minister, will you continue to look at how you can support these community groups right across Wales, with their litter picks, with their planting, with their greening activity?

Yes, thank you, and certainly it sounds a great project in Maindee and, if the First Minister is attending on Saturday, I’m sure the event will be very successful. But I think it is really important that you work with communities about what they want in their open spaces and their green spaces, because then I think they’re valued more, and they’re respected more as well. So, certainly, working closely with my colleague the Minister for Climate Change, we will certainly look at what more we can do across Wales.

Questions now from party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, Darren Millar.

Diolch, Llywydd. As the Minister for north Wales, can you tell us how the Welsh Government is ensuring that people across the north Wales region will benefit from the additional funding that was announced in the Chancellor’s budget for growth last week?

Obviously, those decisions will be taken across Cabinet, with the Minister for finance. You’ll be aware that we didn’t receive perhaps as much money as we had hoped to, but those decisions are taken on a cross-Government basis. Obviously, as the Minister with responsibility for north Wales, I will ensure that north Wales continues to get its fair share.

Well, I’m afraid that answer didn’t give me a great deal of hope, Minister. As you know, this is £180 million-worth extra that is coming to Wales, and this is on top of—this is on top of—£600 million that was announced in the autumn statement last year. So, that’s £780 million, £0.75 billion extra, that you have to spend in the financial year 2023-24. And we have a situation where the UK Government is determined to invest in all parts of the United Kingdom, levelling up across the country. I just wish that we had a Welsh Government that was determined to level up across Wales, because, unfortunately, north Wales doesn’t get its fair share and is constantly being left behind.

Now, we know that the Welsh Government has no plans at the moment to invest the extra cash into extending the universal free childcare offer to the under-threes. So, can I ask you again: what are you arguing for in these discussions that you're having with Cabinet colleagues in terms of investment in north Wales? Give me your shopping list.

No. I'll discuss that with my Cabinet colleagues, not with an opposition Member here in the Chamber. You will see, if you look, that north Wales absolutely gets its fair share, and you will have heard the First Minister say time and time again yesterday that we already provide much of the childcare facilities and care and provision that the UK Government are merely talking about and kicking into the long grass. They clearly have no confidence that they're going to be there after the next general election, and that's why they've said they'll do it in 2025. And as for levelling up, you look across north Wales and see how many bids were not successful in the levelling-up fund. So, please don't talk to me about the UK Government and the levelling-up fund in relation to north Wales.

Let's have a look at the evidence, shall we? Let's look at transport—let's look at transport: £800 million you're investing in a metro system in south Wales; north Wales, a paltry £50 million for the north Wales metro. Let's have a look at the airport that you're investing £250 million in, in south Wales; so far—so far—north Wales, diddly-squat. The roads review: you cancelled projects across the north Wales region, while you're still building a brand-new dual carriageway in the south. The evidence speaks for itself, Minister. And what the people of north Wales expect from the Minister for north Wales is someone who will fight for investment, to solve the crisis in the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, to solve the crisis in NHS dentistry, to help people get themselves onto the housing ladder, to freeze their council taxes, where they're going up beyond extortionate rates, and to deliver those road improvement schemes that people want to see. These are the sorts of priorities that I would expect to be on your shopping list. So, will you adopt them?

So, as you said yourself, we had an extra £180 million. I was trying to add up in my head all the money that you think should be spent in north Wales, and, believe me, it comes to a lot more than £180 million. We are getting £1 million for capital funding next year—[Interruption.]—£1 million. If you look in—[Interruption.] Do you want to listen?

Allow the Minister to answer the questions, please.

You know, as well as I do, how much money would be needed to bring our estate in Betsi Cadwaladr up to the standard that we all want. I don't know about you, but me, I use the NHS, and I get excellent healthcare from Betsi. If you use private healthcare, that's up to you. [Interruption.]

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Welsh wool is a sustainable product, it's multipurpose, and it's environmentally beneficial. There's increasing demand for eco-friendly produce, and Welsh wool is perfect for this end. As the Minister knows, Welsh farmers have an unswerving commitment to secure sustainable farming, and, of course, Welsh wool could play an important role as the sector tries to live up to its ambitious environmental commitment. But despite these positives, international wool prices have come under pressures, as high energy prices lead to loss of business, and buyers' confidence falling, which, in turn, cause problems for the providers of core materials such as wool. Will the Minister therefore commit to doing everything she can to assist the sector, and for the Government to show leadership, including by using procurement powers, noting the need to use Welsh wool in Government projects, such as using Welsh wool carpets in building and transport schemes? For example, how much Welsh wool is used in Transport for Wales vehicles? Thank you very much.

Thank you. I think you raise a very important point, and I'm certainly committed to doing all I can. I think I meet probably annually with the chief executive of the British Wool council, and I'm due to meet in the next few weeks, I think, again. And certainly, it's really good to hear from them their ideas for the use of wool. So, for instance, it was raised with me that one of the ways we could help would be to use it in insulation, but, actually, when you talk to the British Wool council, they said that wasn't the best use. But the point that you made around transport—so, in seats on transport—I certainly had some discussions with the Deputy Minister for Climate Change to see, as we were procuring the new trains, how much wool could be used for the seats. Obviously, I've had discussions with the Minister for Climate Change as well, and she's very keen to use more wool. So, I shall certainly continue those conversations, and I'll be very happy to update the Member.

Thank you very much to the Minister for that response. I want to move on now, if I may, to forestry. Around 15 per cent of Wales is covered with forestry of different sorts—around 316,000 hectares here. The trees are different, with various different species and different kinds of cover, individual trees, small woodlands or large forests. But the one thing that is common is that managed woodland does better than unmanaged woodland. Whether that management is for construction timber or fibre, biodiversity or habitats, flood management or leisure, you will need a timber permit in order to ensure that the woodland is managed at some point or another. 

The new agriculture Bill, as it currently stands, is going to significantly change the licensing system in this area. I would therefore invite the Minister to set out her vision for woodland and forest management in Wales. 

Thank you. So, you are quite right, part of the agricultural Bill—and, obviously, we've got Stage 2 tomorrow—does include new powers to allow for environmental conditions to be added to felling licenses, and to amend or suspend, or revoke any licenses that have already been granted. I'm having to look very carefully at the forestry element of it, as is often the case when you start a piece of legislation. As you go through the various stages, you perhaps need to look at providing more clarity in the legislation going forward. And I will certainly be looking to have more detailed provision at Stage 3.

The Welsh Government's priorities for animal welfare are set out in the animal welfare plan for Wales. The plan includes a timetable for the delivery of key actions against our four animal welfare programme for government commitments, alongside our other planned work.

Thank you, Minister. The second anniversary of the regulations introducing Lucy's law—the ban on third-party sales of cats and dogs being brought in here in Wales—is imminent. This was such an important step forward in terms of domestic animal welfare. So, I'd like to ask: how is Welsh Government working to monitor those regulations, and to ensure that its provisions are being enforced, and building this into its wider animal welfare work?

Thank you. I am aware, obviously, that Lucy's law is reaching an important anniversary next month, and Lucy, the spaniel who the legislation was named after, did come from a farm here in Wales. But that legislation only applies to England. As you're aware, our legislation, which was the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Wales) Regulations 2021 goes further, and I hope that demonstrates and reflects my strong commitment to the welfare of dogs—in fact, all animals here in Wales—and my officials do monitor very carefully those regulations. 

I do accept, of course, that those regulations do not address all the problems that we have associated with puppy trading, and that's why we are bringing in further measures. As we look at that legislation, and we monitor that, we look at other measures to bring forward to ensure that we really have those high welfare standards in our dog breeders here in Wales. 

Minister, as you will be well aware, the purchasing of domestic animals as pets online is fraught with danger, and sadly, there are little to no safeguards in place that can stop buyers from unknowingly purchasing animals that have been bred in puppy farms and raised in horrific conditions. There's also the issue that dangerous dogs, with a known history of attacking people, have been advertised and sold online, which, tragically, has led to some horrific, and even fatal, attacks. 

Minister, as sad as this is to say, there is also the issue of dogs being advertised as 'free to a good home', and these dogs who may well be given to seemingly genuine people can end up in the hands of illegal dog fighters, who use these free dogs as bait to train fighting dogs. I believe—and I'm sure every Member here will also agree with me—that we cannot go on like this and allow such easy trade of abused animals. We need much tougher measures in place with regard to online sales and advertising.

Justice for Reggie, a charity set up to campaign for much tighter regulations with regard to the online sale and breeding of domestic animals, will have, during our recess in April, their Online Pet Sales Awareness Week. And with this in mind, Minister—and I'm conscious of your comments to my colleague Vikki—what commitments are the Welsh Government making to tighten regulations regarding the online sale of domestic animals in Wales by individuals and businesses? Thank you. 

Thank you. Well, as I stated to Vikki Howells, our legislation goes further than the legislation in England. I do think you raise a very important point, though, because we know that, unfortunately, people do still buy their pets online, and our legislation means someone should only go and purchase a pet where that pet was bred. So, it's something that we're continuing to monitor and, within the powers that we have, we're doing all we can. I'm also calling on the UK Government to strengthen its dog legislation, particularly around dangerous dogs, because I don't think it's fit for purpose, but to date they are not happy to do that. 

We recognise the worrying decline in pollinators. Our action plan for pollinators, the first of its kind in the world, aims to provide diverse and connected flower-rich habitats to ensure healthy pollinator populations. In Gwent, Nature Isn’t Neat is changing how verges and parks are managed to benefit pollinators.

Thank you, Minister. I asked what action is being taken to protect our crucial pollinators because of the emergence of a new threat, which I'm sure you're aware of, the Asian hornet. The invasive species preys on native honey bees and, as a result, is now causing serious concern, as several cases are reported in the south of England. With reports recording an estimated 23 per cent decline of the honey bee in Wales, we need to be vigilant against this new threat. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has said it's absolutely essential that any possible sightings of the Asian hornet are recorded as early as possible to ensure swift action. Minister, I'm sure you'll agree with me that it's vital that the Welsh Government works in close collaboration with the UK Government to tackle this threat. Can you outline what steps your Government is taking to prevent this threat from escalating?

We certainly do work very closely with DEFRA. I'm not aware of any sightings in Wales, and I'm not aware of any sightings in England, actually, for quite a little while—I think certainly not this year. But when there is a sighting of one, obviously our officials work very closely and it's dealt with also very quickly, and it's not something that we do want to see in Wales. It's not something that I discuss frequently with DEFRA, but officials do work, as I say, very closely to ensure that, if there is a sighting, action can be taken.

Thank you. As detailed in the debate on 8 March, I will launch a public consultation regarding greyhound racing later this year. The consultation will gather evidence on the benefits and impacts of both legislating and banning greyhound racing in Wales.

The Minister will know, from private conversations and public, that I fully support the Welsh Government's consultation. In last week's meeting of the Economy, Trade, and Rural Affairs Committee, I asked you for a commitment, should the forthcoming Welsh Government consultation recommend anything that causes a restriction on greyhound racing in Wales, that the Valley Greyhound Stadium in my constituency in Ystrad Mynach would be considered, and that you would have conversations with the Minister for Climate Change on how flooding as a consequence of the potential track closure would be alleviated. We are concerned about the consequences for flooding there, should that go ahead. So, would you be willing to have those conversations with your ministerial colleagues and identify potential Welsh Government support through Natural Resources Wales, and, as things progress, to meet with me, perhaps on site, to discuss some of the concerns that I've got for those people living in Ystrad Mynach? 

Thank you. Well, as I said, last week, during the scrutiny session in committee, I'm very happy to speak with the Minister for Climate Change, and I'm sure she would be very happy to speak to you also, if any future changes in land use were likely to exacerbate flood risk to any existing homes or businesses in your constituency. I think it might be a little bit premature at the moment, but I'm sure, further down the line, if that was necessary, she would be happy to do so as well. I think there are a lot of variables at play here. I don't want to pre-empt any outcome of the consultation or the future of the race track.

Minister, the Valley race track in my constituency has clearly outlined that it will apply for a Greyhound Board of Great Britain licence. Now, you may want to ban greyhound racing or you may not, but herein lies the problem. We all want to have a higher animal welfare standard, but the question must be: how do we work with the industry going forward? GBGB has a number of strict animal welfare requirements, including monitoring greyhounds from when they are puppies, to when they are transported to races, to after they retire. I'm really pleased to hear about the millions of pounds that GBGB has provide to animal welfare charities to ensure that retired greyhounds are placed in loving homes.

Minister, you'll be no stranger to poor animal welfare legislation, so it won't come as a surprise to you that there is another big gap in Welsh animal welfare law. Essentially, we have not adopted the Welfare of Racing Greyhounds Regulations 2010. Now, these regulations help local authorities revoke or suspend greyhound racing licences, and also set out the conditions for disqualification from a licence. Furthermore, to get a licence, a vet has to be present before and throughout the race, conditions of kennels have to be of a high standard, the microchipping of dogs is required, as well as the maintenance of records of greyhounds participating in races and injury records. I think that it would be a really easy step for the Welsh Government to adopt and implement these regulations here in Wales. So, Minister, are you willing to work with GBGB to ensure that animal welfare is a top priority, or, unfortunately, is this going to be, in effect, where we are going to have a sledgehammer to crack a nut in this sensitive area, going forward?

Well, as I say, I don't want to pre-empt the consultation that I will be launching later this year. I have met with representatives from the Greyhound Board of Great Britain. I have met with other welfare organisations, and I have met with the owner of Valley Stadium to discuss welfare issues and plans for the Valley site. As you say, the site currently isn't up to GBGB standards. 

I'm glad that I followed my colleague Natasha Asghar because I really want to make it clear that I've also met with GBGB. Let me tell you two things that GBGB confirmed that they did, which I don't think you would want to see as high animal welfare standards. One of them is that we know that, at a GBGB track in Harlow last year, we saw racing of greyhounds at a temperature of 32 degrees centigrade, when the RSPCA had told domestic pet owners to keep their dogs indoors. And yet, at a GBGB track, racing continued.

The second issue is that GBGB do offer a rehoming bond, but only to those dogs homes who will not make comment on greyhound racing. So, they restrict their funding to dogs homes—and I'm calling them dogs homes. They are not rehoming centres. They have to go from there to a home. Sixty-seven per cent of the homes under GBGB—. Sorry, GBGB only rehome 67 per cent of their dogs through dogs homes. So, really, GBGB have a lot to answer for, and I'd love to have a chat with you, Natasha. But my point is—

I think that the Minister is being blissfully ignored in this discussion. [Laughter.]

I know. I'm sorry. I couldn't resist that, Llywydd.

No, I'm taking it all in.

If you could focus on your question now.

My point to you, Minister, is as follows: going back to Valley racetrack, which Hefin has highlighted, I understand—and I hope that you would agree with this—that if greyhound racing was banned at Valley racetrack, we would only see a period of between nine and 12 months when dogs would need to be removed from there to be rehomed. Therefore, the potential closure—and I know that you can't comment on the ban—would not have a long-term effect on the dogs from that home. I know you can't comment on it, but I'm sure you would take that into account.

Thank you. Well, as I say, I cannot pre-empt any consultation, but, certainly, the discussions I have had—. I mentioned in my answer to Natasha Asghar that I have met with representatives of many welfare organisations on a range of issues. Obviously, housing dogs is something that I am particularly interested in. Clearly, nine to 12 months is not a huge amount of time. I am very grateful for all of the work that our animal welfare organisations do in Wales.

I have not had any specific discussions with the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding a mother and baby unit for the people of Arfon. I am, of course, aware of the plans to improve access to specialist mother and baby unit provision for the people living in north Wales.

According to a recent statement by the local health board, they are working with NHS England to provide a unit in Chester, with two beds in that unit for mothers from all parts of the north. I understand that it is in the Countess of Chester Hospital that this unit will be based. Could you confirm that?

In a report that was published last year by the Care Quality Commission, it was noted that maternity services at the Countess of Chester Hospital were inadequate, and that a lack of staff and equipment were problems that needed attention, as well as problems in terms of leadership at the particular trust. Do you think that establishing two beds over the border in England for mothers who would need to travel a long distance, and in a hospital that has a poor track record in terms of maternity care, is a wise and sensible plan in your view as Minister for north Wales?

What I do think is that it's really important that these babies have access to the very best care available, and my understanding is that the Welsh Health Specialised Services Committee undertook an assessment of demand in north Wales and concluded there was a need to fund two beds in a mother and baby unit and, within their plans, they concluded the most appropriate approach to delivering this was for joint working between themselves, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board and NHS England to develop plans for that shared unit.

Can I welcome the question from Siân Gwenllian and also pay credit to her for her persistence on this really important issue for people in north Wales? Just to expand on the question already asked, Minister, as the Minister for north Wales and a Member, of course, in the region as well, I wonder what assurances you can give that the particular needs of people in north Wales, whether it's around language or whether it's around the distance having to be travelled to access these services, especially keeping in mind the potential fragility of the people who need to access these services—. I wonder what assurances you can give that the proposed provision will be suitable for the people of north Wales.

It's imperative that the proposed provision is what we would want for our constituents across north Wales. My understanding from the work that WHSSC undertook is that this was the best way of providing provision. I do take on board what you're saying about the language; it's very important that that is part of the consideration. But I think we have to be very pragmatic here and say that we can't have mother and baby units in every hospital, unfortunately. There just isn't the capacity or the capability to be able to do that. What I would want for my constituents, as you specifically asked me, and as the Minister for north Wales, is for our babies to have the very best access in the very best way, and I think that is having a specialist unit.

Thank you. The Down to Earth project, funded through rural development programme, is due to submit the final claim in June 2023. The project is required to appoint an independent assessor to report on the impact and outcomes achieved, which will be assessed before the final claim is paid and project ends.

Thank you very much, Trefnydd. A number of constituents in the Whitchurch area of Cardiff have contacted me on the Down to Earth project. What they want to know and what I also want to know too is whether the Minister can explain why rural development funding is being used to build on one of the green sites in the north of the capital city, and how an urban area such as our capital qualifies for funding from the rural development programme. Thank you very much.

You'll be aware there are very strict criteria around this funding. So, the Down to Earth project is funded through the EU RDP co-operation and LEADER schemes, and it's absolutely able to do that. You're very well aware, I'm sure, of what the project will be working on—two specific schemes. RDP projects are subject to special conditions, and, as I said, this will be assessed. It has to be assessed by an independent external evaluator within six months of the project start date. Nothing has been raised with me of concern. If you have anything that you wish to raise with me, please write to me.

Minister, ensuring that RDP spending is effectively allocated and delivered is key to ensuring that it delivers value for money, while supporting the development of rural communities. In the most recent Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee meeting, you stated that you will no longer be setting up a rural development advisory board to advise on the content and delivery of the domestic rural support programme. I would stress the importance of reporting arrangements for replacement rural development funding in ensuring transparency and accountability to ensure effective monitoring, especially given the damning Auditor General for Wales report that RDP funding was allocated by the Welsh Government via direct payments with no competition. Therefore, what plans does the Welsh Government have to publish the proposed measures, budget allocations and commitments, and spend for each of the financial years in the transition period? Diolch.

Well, the report to which you refer was many years ago, and we’ve certainly learned lessons, and there’s been no criticism since that time, and I can assure you that will absolutely be put in place. The reason I said I wasn’t having a board any more is because we’re not looking to replace the RDP in the way that it currently is, and we’re focusing very much on bringing forward the sustainable farming scheme.

Our animal welfare plan for Wales details how we will deliver our programme for government commitments. A review of the Animal Welfare (Breeding of Dogs) (Wales) Regulations 2014 is planned and will include consideration of broadening the scope to include cats.

Wonderful. My colleague Huw Irranca-Davies, the MS for Ogmore, and I recently met with Cats Protection in their Bridgend adoption centre to discuss the work that they do to improve the welfare of cats in Wales and across the UK. According to Cat Protection's latest 'Cats and Their Stats' report, ownership of pedigree cats in Wales is on the rise, with 25 per cent of the cats purchased last year being pedigree breeds. While many pedigree cat breeds can live healthy lives, there are a few extreme breeds with genetic birth defects that can lead to a very painful existence throughout the cat’s life. For example, ultra flat-faced cats, such as Persians, will struggle with breathing problems throughout their lives, or Scottish Folds, the sale of which has now been banned in Scotland, suffer from severe cartilage deficiencies. Unlike dogs, cat breeding is currently unregulated, so does the Welsh Government have any intention in the meantime of bringing cat regulation up to the same as dog regulation in Wales? Diolch.

Thank you. Well, as I mentioned, a review of the dog breeding regulations is going to be broadened to see if there are any other species—and, absolutely, cats would be part of that—would benefit from being within the scope of the regulations, because I think we’ve seen it with dogs, haven’t we? You referred to the extreme breeds and, unfortunately, as you say, we are seeing it with cats as well. I was aware of your visit; I saw your photographs on social media. I think it is really important that we do look at what we can do to improve the welfare of cats in Wales.

As a cat owner myself, I'm delighted that Sarah Murphy tabled this question, and I welcomed the Welsh Government's introduction of Lucy's law 18 months ago, which seeks to ban third-party sales of cats and dogs under the age of six months. On reading your explanatory memorandum to the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Wales) Regulations 2021—snappily titled—I was interested to see that you mentioned the regulations were drafted as a first step to ensuring that the welfare of puppies and kittens in Wales who are currently being bred and sold to third parties is improved significantly. However, as you will be aware, Minister, cat and dog breeders are subject to a licensing scheme enforced through local authorities. I also note you provided statutory guidance to local authorities on the regulations alongside creating a pan-Wales system for training local authority enforcement officers. So, how far are you in assessing the effectiveness of Lucy's law in Wales, and how well are enforcement and licensing officers applying it at local authority level, and what is the next step in protecting the welfare of cats?

Thank you. Clearly, the Member didn't hear my answer to Vikki Howells—we didn't introduce Lucy's law here in Wales; that's England-only legislation. We went beyond that; we brought forward the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Wales) Regulations 2021, and, as I say, that went further than Lucy's law.

The point you make around the local authority enforcement project I think is a very pertinent one. What we did as a Government was give funding for a three-year project to make sure that our local authorities' inspectors had all the tools that they needed to be able to carry-out visits to dog breeding premises and ensure that they absolutely knew what they were looking for and that they could take forward the significant changes. And, certainly, the project has received some high recognition, and I've just extended the project for a further three years.

Finally, question 9, Llyr Gruffydd.

Future rural development support focuses on delivering our core programme for government commitments. I have already announced a package of support through my rural investment schemes worth over £200 million to support the rural economy and our natural environment. 

Thank you very much for that. The question that I'm asking here is who is driving that work of reviving the economy. What is the focal point that draws together what feels like a plethora of bodies and projects and programmes and strategies into one strategic, co-ordinated package. Where's the wider strategy and who is responsible for that? In the past, the Development Board for Rural Wales would have filled some of that vacuum that I feel exists. The question I want to ask is whether you think that the time has come for us to look at creating some kind of entity or some kind of medium that will be responsible for driving that agenda forward, because at the moment it just feels like a series of disconnected programmes that don't pull in the same direction.

I don't think they're disconnected at all. What I've been really keen to do with the rural investment schemes is for our stakeholders to work very closely with us and that they tell us what they want. For instance, we had, I think, three schemes specifically around horticulture, because that's what I was being told people wanted. Of course, you can tell by the number of bids you get with particular schemes how popular they are and whether you need to put further funding into that. As I said in my answer to Sam Kurtz, we're no longer having a rural development board. It was something that I had considered, but my focus really now is on bringing forward the sustainable farming scheme and that transition to the SFS in 2025.

Thank you, Minister.

The next item will be the topical questions. There is one question this afternoon, to be answered by the Deputy Minister for Climate Change. The question will be asked by Jack Sargeant. 

Thank you for the question. The UK Government should classify Northern Powerhouse Rail as an England-only project, with Wales receiving a population share of this funding. It would be completely unacceptable if the UK Government treats the funding for this project in the same way as it treats funding for HS2. 

I'm grateful to the Deputy Minister for his answer, and I agree with what he has said. As if it wasn't already bad enough for Cymru that Cymru has been denied the £5 billion it is entitled to from the HS2 consequential funding, it is now being suggested that the UK Tories are refusing us a further £1 billion from the Northern Powerhouse Rail programme, labelling it as a so-called England-and-Wales project. Six billion pounds we are now owed. Llywydd, I'm not sure if Members from the opposition here in the Senedd wish to provide the Prime Minister with a map, as it's clear that the Tories in Westminster don't even understand where Cymru is, let alone understand the needs of the people of Wales. Minister, do you agree with me that it is time to get rid of this broken UK Tory Government, it's time for a UK general election, and it's time to elect a UK Labour Government, working in collaboration with this Welsh Labour Government to deliver the infrastructure funding we need and we are owed?

Thank you. I agree with the analysis, clearly. For those listening who are not as familiar as my colleagues are with the way this works, when a project in a wholly devolved area is announced in England, we would expect to get a population share of that funding. So, when a £100 billion project like HS2 is announced, we would expect to get a 5 per cent share of that, some £5 billion, if it only applied in England. If it's classified as being of benefit to England and Wales, then we don't get any funding. The Treasury are stretching all credibility in saying that HS2, which doesn't have a single mile of track in Wales and whose own business case shows it takes hundreds of millions out of the south Wales economy, does benefit Wales. It clearly does not, and certainly with the chopping off of the leg to Crewe, any thin case they had to make has fallen away. It is diabolical. As the First Minister said yesterday, the fact that the Treasury can arbitrarily, on a whim, decide how this funding is allocated shows that the way that we deal with finances within the devolved settlement is clearly broken. 

There have been suggestions that the Northern Powerhouse Rail project will be similarly classified. That is not entirely clear yet. There are two options available to the UK Government: they could classify it as a Northern Powerhouse Rail project, in which case we would expect to get a Barnett share because it is an England-only scheme; or they could classify it as a Network Rail project, which would be outside of the Barnett consequential and we wouldn't get anything. We have not been able to establish which of these is going to happen. But the very fact it is opaque and not clear is in itself part of the problem. I met with the regulator this morning, the Office of Rail and Road, and it's clear right throughout the rail settlement that the decisions are made with an England focus and we then are given the crumbs from that decision. Our needs and our aspirations and our modal shift targets are not taken into account when rail spending across the UK is decided. So, this is yet another example of a broken system that needs to be reformed. And if the Treasury are foolish enough to do on the Northern Powerhouse Rail project the same as they've done on HS2, then they will continue to weaken the case for a sharing United Kingdom, because clearly they are not sharing, and it's an opportunity for them now to put it right.

On this side of the benches, it's our understanding that there has not yet been a decision regarding Northern Powerhouse Rail being classified as an England-and-Wales project. Today's topical question refers to rail, but the biggest rail story in the news today actually relates to Transport for Wales's announcement that commuters travelling between Pontypridd and Treherbert in Rhondda Cynon Taf will have to use a replacement bus service from the end of April until the start of 2024. This is going to cause huge problems for those trying to get on with their ordinary lives and get into work. This is all whilst the Welsh Government are trying to get cars off the road with the roads review and are cutting support for buses. [Interruption.] It's got a point. Of course we do support improvements in rail infrastructure, but I'd like to ask you today, Minister, why has this announcement been made with such short notice—[Interruption.] 

Can backbenchers give a chance to the speaker? I can't hear her. I'm sure the speaker is going to make sure the focus is on Northern Powerhouse Rail.

Thank you. I'd like to ask you today, Minister, why has this announcement been made at such short notice, and what assessment have you and Transport for Wales made of the disruption and inconvenience that this will cause? You mention the relationship between Westminster, but I'd like to know exactly what you are doing to build that relationship with Westminster if you want to see a change. You can't blame Westminster for everything, Minister. You're going to have to do something yourself to try and make sure that the needs of the people of Wales are projected to our colleagues in Westminster as well.

Dirprwy Lywydd, that's a poor response. I met with the Secretary of State for Transport in recent weeks, actually, and I'm committed to a constructive relationship with him, as our officials are. This is not about building a constructive relationship with Westminster. This is about the UK recognising the needs of Wales and the needs of the infrastructure of Wales. I thought her party had a change of heart and was supporting us in a cross-party case to get funding to Wales from HS2. Unfortunately, Natasha Asghar seems to find it irresistible to score petty points rather than focusing on the big picture.

On the point on which she had a topical question turned down but she's tried to ask anyway, on the decision to close the railway for metro upgrades, this is an example of investment by the Welsh Labour Government in modern infrastructure from within our funding to create a modern metro system for Cardiff and the Valleys. It is going to involve a transformational change of infrastructure for the upper end of the Valleys, which, for the huge inconvenience of the customers, will involve a temporary closure, for which there will be a significantly improved service. If she has engineering advice on how we can completely transform a railway line while still keeping it open, I'm all ears.

Thank you, Jack, for asking this question.

We knew the UK Government was without a moral compass, but the last few days seem to suggest they don't even own a compass. Ethical boundaries evade them; so too, it would appear, do geographical realities as well. Northern Powerhouse Rail cannot be classified as England and Wales. It would add insult to the financial injury of the HS2 fiasco. It would cost Wales, as we've heard, an estimated £1 billion, which is on top of the £5 billion cheque that we are owed from HS2. Wales will not benefit from these projects; it is a lie to suggest otherwise. Could I ask you, Minister—and I take on board what you've already said here—what conversations has the Welsh Government had to date with the UK Government about the possibility of this project being classified as England and Wales? And if they are not more forthcoming in their answer, would you please remind them where the boundaries of Wales actually begin and end?

Thank you for that. As I mentioned, we have been in touch with the Treasury, who simply tell us that this is part of the integrated rail plan that was published in November 2021. It remains unclear whether that will be administered through Network Rail or the Northern Powerhouse Rail project. As I mentioned, the consequences for us depend on that arbitrary judgment, which they don't feel the need to explain or elaborate on. I think that is part of the problem we have; we don't have a system of fiscal devolution and clarity and transparency on how decisions that affect the UK are made. As the First Minister has made the point time and time again, the UK Treasury should be for the UK, but it is in fact treated by the Government in London as a Treasury for England, and we have to suck it up. It's clearly not a sustainable position nor a defensible one. I've very sad the Conservatives in Wales don't see that and instead try and defend the indefensible yet again.

Finally, Alun Davies.

I'm grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. The crashing irony of the Conservative position on this, of course, is that the reason the Rhondda line is being closed is because it's nineteenth century infrastructure there that needs to be replaced in the twenty-first century. For a century, that line has not had the investment it needs. If anything, it's a condemnation of UK Government policy as regards to Wales. The fact of that closure stands as a rebuke to the current way in which these matters are conducted. The Minister is absolutely right in his analysis and his approach. [Interruption.] I welcome the conversion of the Member for Clwyd West as well to these matters. We very much welcome him. I hope that he will be more persuasive with his colleagues in London than he is with his colleagues on the backbench. We look forward to seeing that.

But can I ask you, Minister, in taking this forward—? Because we can rehearse the arguments. We all understand the arguments. This is a dishonest UK Government putting its hands in the pockets of the people of Wales in order to fund pet projects for their own Ministers and their backyards. It's not the way to govern this country. Will the Minister look to take this matter to the disputes procedure in the inter-governmental arrangements to ensure that this is done in public so that UK Ministers can justify why Wales is now a part of Yorkshire, and can justify why Wales does not have the investment it requires? And we can see if this disputes procedure works for Wales's benefit, or if it's simply broken for the benefit of pet projects in England.  

I think there's an opportunity for the UK Government to take stock of the arguments here. There's certainly a role for the Conservative MPs elected from Wales to make the case in the Treasury to make sure that the tone-deafness is not repeated. Because, as I understand it, the decision does not appear to have been finally decided. If it has, they're certainly not telling us. But let's take them at their face value, that no final decision has been made yet. Here is a chance to put it right, to not repeat the mistakes of HS2, and to make sure we get a Barnett consequential for the investment between cities and towns in the north of England. Nobody can credibly argue that this has any benefit for Wales. The decision to suspend HS2 up to Crewe completely pulls the rug from the position of the Secretary of State for Wales, who argues that HS2 does benefit Wales because of connectivity between north Wales and Crewe. That is no longer a position that can be credibly argued, and there is no credible argument to defend the reports that they're going to make the same mistake twice. Here's a chance for Welsh Conservative MPs to show that they have the interests of Wales at heart, to make sure the Treasury doesn't repeat its mistake.

I have accepted a last-minute request to ask a supplementary question on the topical question. Darren Millar.

You have wholehearted support on these benches for consequentials from the HS2 project and the Northern Powerhouse project coming into Wales. That is our position, and that is very clear. Can I ask you what you're doing to make sure that there's a fair share of investment across Wales, and not just in south Wales, from your transport budget? We already had a discussion earlier on in this Chamber about the fact that £800 million is being spent in the south on the south Wales metro versus £50 million in the north. We know that you're spending a fortune on the Heads of the Valleys road, quite rightly, because it needs to be done, yet you're postponing and scrapping projects in north Wales. When will we get our north Wales consequential that we need?

I appreciate that Darren Millar is committed to his divisive narrative of trying to pit different parts of Wales against each other. The facts, I'm afraid, don't support his position. We do spend investment roughly equivalent to population shares across Wales. We did an analysis of this some years ago and found that north Wales had a fair share.

In terms of the roads review, he also knows the position that the schemes that were altered or postponed fell right across Wales, and he forgets to mention the fact that the M4 in south Wales was cancelled before the roads review began. I know it won't stop him from his tune, because he thinks it plays well to his core vote, but I'm afraid it's not based on reality. He has the opportunity to engage, as I believe he's begun to do, with the north Wales Burns commission, which will set out a programme of work and a programme of investment that will need to jointly come from the Welsh Government and the UK Government to make sure that north Wales has a modern public transport system to match the best in the country. That has to come from both Governments, and I hope that he will put his support behind that too.

Thank you, Deputy Minister.

Item 4 is the 90-second statements, and the first statement this afternoon is from Luke Fletcher.

'One Ring to rule them all / One Ring to find them / One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them / In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.'

Dirprwy Lywydd, though I haven't read the full verse, the Ring verse will be read by many people, not just in Wales but across the globe this Saturday as people celebrate Tolkien Reading Day. Why 25 March? It's the chosen date for the destruction of the ring, completing Frodo’s quest. Tolkien Reading Day has been organised by the Tolkien Society since 2003 as a way to celebrate and promote the life and works of J.R.R. Tolkien by reading favourite passages.

Tolkien had a deep understanding and love for Welsh, and it played a key role in influencing the names of people and places in middle earth. One of the language's most arguably well-known influences was to one of the Elven languages, Sindarin, notably in its grammatical number and mutations.

Tolkien said that,

'The names of persons and places in this story were mainly composed on patterns deliberately modelled on those of Welsh.... This element in the tale has given perhaps more pleasure to more readers than anything else in it.'

So, whether we are travelling from Bag End to Erebor or Hobbiton to Mordor and the Cracks of Doom—

—this Saturday, we should remember our language's influence on some of the world's most famous stories.

I'll close by sharing my favourite passage. It comes after Gandalf and Frodo have found the ring.

'"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo. "So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us."'

And second this afternoon, Altaf Hussain.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Yesterday, we marked World Down's Syndrome Day, a day chosen to highlight the challenges still faced by people living with Down's syndrome. The twenty-first of March was chosen specifically to signify the uniqueness of the triplication of the twenty-first chromosome, which causes Down's syndrome.

World Down's Syndrome Day raises global awareness, which has been officially observed by the United Nations for the past 11 years to highlight the fact that, all around the world, people with Down's syndrome are treated badly; they are denied a quality education; they are denied good healthcare; they are denied the chance to work and earn their own money; they are not allowed to make decisions about their own lives; their voices are not heard.

We're making progress here in the UK, but the voices of the around 42,000 people living with Down's syndrome in England and Wales are not being heard loudly enough. The theme of this year's awareness is 'with us, not for us'. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities calls for full and effective participation of persons with disabilities, but many organisations exclude people with Down's syndrome from taking part in their work. They take decisions for them, not with them. I hope that, here in Wales, we can do better. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you.

Item 5 is next, a Member debate under Standing Order 11.21: prepayment meters and energy advice services. I call on Jack Sargeant to move the motion.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Deputy Presiding Officer. 

This motion is the culmination of months of campaigning. Since autumn last year, I have been calling for a ban on the forced installation of prepayment meters. This was because customers on prepayment meters are forced to pay more for their electricity, but also because of the growing evidence throughout the year that people were being forcibly switched onto prepayment meters on a scale never seen before.

Late last year, campaigning journalist Dean Kirby of The i newspaper wrote a story where he described sitting in a courtroom, where nearly 400 warrants were issued to forcibly install prepay meters in less than three minutes—400 warrants in under three minutes. Dirprwy Lywydd, suddenly everything made sense: 600,000 people switched last year alone, with only 72 of these warrants rejected, and the month on month increases in people being forcibly switched. Dean's story exposed the reason behind these numbers. Absolutely no checks were being done to see if any of these people were vulnerable. As Dean explained, not even their names were read out on that day in court.

Dirprwy Lywydd, let's be clear about what is supposed to happen: energy suppliers should give anyone who classes themselves as vulnerable the chance to refuse a prepayment meter. Instead, Ofgem allowed energy suppliers themselves to define what is classed as a vulnerable individual, and this has been exploited with catastrophic consequences. The UK Government and Ofgem were asleep at the wheel, and whilst the statistics I have stated already came into the public domain, they did nothing. The regulator, Ofgem, only conceded wrongdoing when a The Times exposé caught agents working on British Gas's behalf breaking the rules on camera. Any regulator who witnessed this explosion in warrants issued last year, including over 20,000 of them in one court in Swansea, should have acted. And even the current moratorium on the installation of prepayment meters is happening voluntarily, simply because of those British Gas videos.

Now, Dirprwy Lywydd, I note Ofgem's recent national call for evidence on prepayment meters, but I must say that I share real concern about whether those who have already been so badly let down by the regulator will engage with that process. In February, I launched my own survey to gather evidence, and this was because, at that time, Ofgem told me in the meeting I had with them that there was no evidence of wrongdoing outside of British Gas, even though the statistics prove otherwise. And the responses I had, Dirprwy Lywydd, in my report, entitled 'A National Scandal: The true cost of pre-pay meters' were very difficult to read. They paint a clear picture of just how difficult life on a prepayment meter is for so many families. One response said, and I quote,

'My husband is an army veteran with reconstructed ankles, PTSD and many more health issues'.

They went on to add,

'On one occasion, I felt so embarrassed having to ring and ask if they could put some credit on my meters, which they took back as soon as I had the money to put on the meters, basically putting me back to square one. I never rang them again and instead went without'.

Dirprwy Lywydd, how in twenty-first century Britain are we failing those who have served in our armed forces so badly that they are left in the dark and in the cold in their own homes? This gentleman is a war hero. He risked his life for each and every one of us, and yet, in his time of need, the system has totally failed him.

Another couple, both in receipt of personal independence payments, with three young children, were switched by their energy company in January. They said, and I quote,

'We felt bullied onto a prepayment meter because they gave us a lot of debt out of nowhere that we couldn't afford to pay. We're currently paying £10 a day just for electricity, and we're struggling financially'.

Their situation, Dirprwy Lywydd, has become so difficult that they have been forced to borrow money from a family to top up. Very sadly, multiple other respondents expressed that they too have had to borrow money just to keep the lights on. The toll that prepayment meters are taking on the health of those forced to live with them is so shockingly clear in this report. One person living with severe arthritis had a prepayment meter forcibly installed at the end of last year. Another explained how they regularly run out of credit on their gas meter and the extended periods of cold have made their asthma much worse. 

As I've said in this Chamber on a number of occasions, Dirprwy Lywydd, this is a matter of life or death. One survey respondent said that, despite being reliant on a medical device that has to be plugged into the mains, they have been put on a prepayment meter. Every day, they are having to make the choice to limit their energy usage, just so that they can be sure that they can use their medical device. Can you imagine the stress and the anxiety this must cause this particular family? It is truly heartbreaking that families across the United Kingdom are having to live this way. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, it's sadly unsurprising that many of those who responded to my survey expressed how their mental health has suffered as a direct result of their prepayment meter. This anxiety has been made worse by the treatment they have been subjected to by their energy suppliers. The Minister will remember that I recently highlighted the case of a mum who was on hold for over an hour, sat in the dark, sat in the cold, after their prepayment meter stopped working. When she finally got through to her call handler and she explained that they needed help, and that their six-year-old son was obviously very upset, very concerned, crying at home in the dark, in the cold, the person on the other end of the phone laughed, and then hung up. It's nothing more than a disgrace, Deputy Presiding Officer. 

Every one of these people who have responded to my survey, every one of these people we've described in these statistics, they have been let down by their energy supplier. They have been let down by Ofgem, and they have been let down by the United Kingdom Government. I want to be absolutely clear, Deputy Presiding Officer, I have absolutely no faith in Ofgem, but there is a clear role for the UK Government to legislate. Colleagues will remember that, at the end of the 1990s, it was recognised that private companies should not be allowed to cut people off from their water supply. Energy, too, Deputy Presiding Officer, is life and death. We should follow suit and legislate to stop being cut off, and this includes people being cut off because their prepayment meter runs out of credit. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, in the meantime here in Wales, we need to look at rolling out the in-home domestic energy advice pilot to ensure that people are empowered with access to the best advice possible. And we need to look at what powers we have to stop landlords being able to force tenants onto prepayment meters as well. Deputy Presiding Officer, in closing, I want to say this: people have been badly let down by those who are supposed to protect them in the energy market. Let's hope we see an end to this national scandal, and let's hope it ends soon. Diolch.

According to the latest available estimates from energy regulator, Ofgem, there were around 4.1 million electricity and 3.3 million gas customers on a prepayment meter, or PPM, in Great Britain in 2020, with proportionally more households in Wales using PPMs than in England. Wales has the highest proportion of gas PPMs compared to other GB nations, and they're often used by some of the most vulnerable in society, as we heard, on low incomes and already in debt to their supplier. Anglesey has the highest level of prepayment meters in Wales at almost 29 per cent, followed by Gwynedd at almost 22 per cent.

Despite a concerted effort from Ofgem in 2020, including introducing new supplier license conditions for identifying vulnerability, offering emergency and friendly hours credit, and considering ability to pay when setting up debt repayment plans, the global energy price crisis exacerbated the severity of the situation, with the number of PPMs in operation across the UK rising. In January, before The Times investigation revealed that British Gas was routinely sending debt collectors to break into customers' homes and force-fit prepayment meters, even when they were known to have extreme vulnerabilities, the then UK business Secretary wrote to energy suppliers, stating that they should stop forcing vulnerable customers onto prepayment meters, and that they should make greater efforts to help those struggling to pay their bills. He called for the urgent publication of the energy suppliers' recent investigation into vulnerable customers, and the release of data on applications suppliers had made to forcibly install meters.

In February, Ofgem asked energy companies to suspend the forced installation of prepayment meters, and Lord Justice Edis ordered magistrates' courts in England and Wales to stop authorising warrants for energy firms to forcibly install prepayment meters with immediate effect. On the same day, the then UK energy Minister met the boss of Ofgem and told him that the UK Government expected strong and immediate action where suppliers fall short of their obligations. Ofgem's temporarily suspended forced installations of PPMs includes ceasing of installation by warrant, ceasing of remote-mode switching of smart meters to prepayment without explicit agreement of the customer, and ceasing new applications to court for installation warrants unless theft is suspected.

During last week's UK Government budget, the Chancellor announced that, from 1 July, prepayment energy charges will be brought in line with customers who pay by direct debit on a permanent basis. Climate Cymru has expressed concern that this does not affect the standing charges, which is where the majority of the PPM uplift happens. In this context, the UK Government has asked Ofgem to report back on options for ending the higher standing charges paid for by prepayment meter users. At the UK Parliament's Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Select Committee on 14 March, Ofgem confirmed that all suppliers are now extending the suspension of forced prepayment installations beyond 1 April, which won't be lifted until Ofgem establishes that suppliers are acting in accordance with a new code of practice.

National Energy Action, NEA, believes there's also an immediate need to ensure that enforcement action is strong, including reversing wrongful installs and compensating households affected, to strengthen protections and licence conditions, and for a root-and-branch review of prepay, reducing the number of traditional prepayment meters in use and addressing debt. NEA believes that the delivery of energy-efficiency measures should be promoted and delivered alongside independent direct advice and assistance to vulnerable households in or at risk of fuel poverty on improving home energy efficiency, maximising incomes and managing or reducing energy costs and accessing the broader support available in the energy market.

It's been a year since the Welsh Government consulted on the next iteration of its Warm Homes programme, and we urgently need to accelerate the improvement of energy efficiency in fuel-poor homes. NEA and Fuel Poverty Coalition Cymru would like to see the Welsh Government setting out a timeline for the next demand-led scheme to be operational before winter, focusing on the worst first—those on the lowest incomes, living in the least-efficient homes—and taking an appropriate multi-measure, fabric-first approach. A constituent e-mailed me, stating that prepayment meters were intended to prevent people from getting into arrears, and that the problem here is that the utility companies charge a higher rate to those people using prepayment meters, and that that needs to change. Punishing someone for paying in advance, and punishing someone for being on a low income, cannot be justified. We will be pleased to support this motion accordingly.

I welcome this debate. While fully supporting the motion's contention that it is a national scandal that 600,000 people were forced onto prepayment meters because they could not afford their energy bills, I would point out that, while the distribution and supply of gas and electricity and consumer protection are reserved matters, we will never be able to be fully confident that we can protect our citizens from this type of damaging and shameful action until powers over these matters are devolved to Wales. The present temporary ban on forced installation of prepayment meters is not 'job done', and, as yet, the code of practice of which Mark Isherwood spoke for suppliers is not legally enforceable.

As the motion makes clear, fuel poverty is at severe levels in Wales, and this could deepen even further. Those who have been forced onto prepayment meters are usually struggling not only with the cost of living, but also with debt. The first committee inquiry I was a part of after being elected was that held by the Equality and Social Justice Committee in the autumn of 2021 on debt and the pandemic. As with the COVID crisis, overwhelming debt will certainly be one of the awful consequences of this cost-of-living crisis, compounding the worrying findings of that report, which was published just as energy prices were beginning to rise. 

As well as ensuring proper compensation by energy suppliers for those forced onto a prepayment meter, National Energy Action are right to call for the UK Government to also fund debt amnesty, using the funds that have become available by recent falls in wholesale prices, perhaps. The motion also speaks to the need to ensure advice and support for those at risk of fuel poverty, which is most welcome, but must be accompanied with energy efficiency measures to help prevent fuel poverty in the first place. I have tried in this Chamber, by written question, and together with my fellow members of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, to get clarity on the timeline for when the next iteration of the Welsh Government's Warm Homes programme will be operational—not procured, operational. We must, as Mark Isherwood said, accelerate the improvement of energy efficiency in fuel-poor homes in Wales. What we've had thus far, from both the Minister for Climate Change, and the Minister for Social Justice, has been a commitment that a new, national, demand-led scheme, focused on homes in fuel poverty, will be procured by the end of the year, and there would be no gap in provision between the new and existing programmes. 

So, I would ask again, Minister: when will the demand-led scheme, which focuses on those on the lowest incomes, living in the least efficient homes, be operational? Please answer clearly, as I hope all Members and the Minister agree that it is crucial that those in the deepest hardship are helped as quickly as possible to live in warmer, healthier homes, before next winter plunges people into even more crippling debt and even darker, colder nights. 

It is very expensive to be poor; almost everything costs more. If I'd been having this discussion about 20 years ago, I would have said that everything costs more, but the German discount-rate retailers arrived, so not everything does cost more, but very few things don't cost more, for being poor. It makes good business sense for the energy suppliers to have prepayment meters. They get a guaranteed income for energy used. They do not cut people off, because they cut themselves off. Citizens Advice has found in the UK that more than 2 million people are disconnected at least once a month, and that approximately one in five prepayment meter customers cut off in the past year have spent at least 24 hours without gas or electricity. No thought for those without energy.

It is clear that disconnection as a result of running out of credit regularly impacts the lives of those living with prepayment meters. We cannot allow a system to continue that sees vulnerable people's lives put at risk because they're constantly faced with being cut off. These are disproportionately the elderly, the vulnerable and people with young children. Older adults can lose body heat fast, much faster than when they were young. Changes in your body that come with ageing can make it hard for you to be aware of getting cold. A big chill can turn into a dangerous problem—before an older person even knows what is happening, hypothermia is setting in. 

For children living in a cold home, they are at increased risk of asthma, respiratory infections, slower development and higher risk of disability, mental health problems, as well as low self-esteem, low confidence, poor educational attainment, poor nutrition and injuries. We do a lot of things talking about children and giving them an opportunity in life—starting off in a cold home puts you at a huge disadvantage. 

If you're on a tariff that includes standing charges, you will always have to pay them, regardless of whether you're actually using energy or not. No money for the prepayment meter means no energy. What does no energy actually mean? It means no light. It means no heating. It means no tv. It means no hot water for washing yourself or clothes, no washing machine, no hot food or drink, no cooker or a microwave, no fridge or freezer, and a return to getting up and going to bed depending on the light outside. This is a world far beyond the life of Senedd Members, but it is the life of many of our constituents. 

Then there is the added cruelty of standing charges. A payment has to be paid on days when you cannot afford to use any energy, charges levied if you've used no energy at all. As of April 2023, customers in the UK will be paying an average standing charge of around 53p a day for electricity, and 29p per day for gas. So, if someone is without gas, that means that, if they use no energy for three days, which isn't unusual, they'll make a payment on their prepayment meter and instantly the money available is reduced by over £1.50 before they get charged for using. 

I've had a constituent tell me that it costs over £2.50 to heat a bowl a soup. I had to explain that that was mainly made up of the standing charges. In this example, a £10 prepayment sees over a quarter gone meeting standing charges on days that no energy is used. I just think that is absolutely wrong, and it really hurts the poorest. I know I keep on going about it, and I'm sure people are getting fed of me going on about it, but it really is something that has to have something done about it. If they had just put the lights on, they'd have still used their £1.50. Also, when it runs out, you have to reset the boiler, which, with an older boiler, can take a number of goes to reset. I would add that standing charges should be abolished. If they cannot be abolished, they should be added to the tariff. If energy companies will not abolish and meet the cost from their profits, it should be added to the costs, so those of us who have energy every day, which is everybody in this room, are not being subsidised, effectively, by people who can't afford energy every day. We've got to stop standing charges on days that no energy is used and that's got to be a first priority. It is hurting people, it's damaging children's progress, it's putting elderly people's lives at risk. 

In energy supply, we moved from a state monopoly to an oligopoly, where profits are large and the consumer pays. Whilst I would like to see energy taken back under public ownership, for those who remember the adverts of, 'It is now—tell Sid', it should be now, 'Tell Sid he's going to be forced on to a prepayment meter and will go without energy for days.' 

If you are poor, life is totally against you. You have no chance of having direct debit to pay your bills, you have to put up with a higher standing charge, and now we know the scandal of prepayment meters. We use the word 'scandal' here quite a lot, but it really is a scandal that, actually, shamefully, has only just come to light recently, and which has only just been acted on. If you are a Centrica shareholder, the owner of British Gas, you don't have any problem with paying your gas bill or any bills at all. Let's just remind ourselves about what Centrica made last year. They made £3.3 billion in profit, triple the £1 billion that they made the year before, and we know what they did. They forced their way into people's homes in order to install prepayment meters. We know also that the UK Government could have done more earlier, and I'm pleased that they have eventually come out, but, as we know, this is going to take some time.

These predatory schemes will continue, and I'm really pleased to be able to support this motion today and to hear from the Welsh Government what they're going to be doing. It's only right that energy companies that have raked in billions over the last year, while many people have faced total misery in having to disconnect heating from their homes, not having fridges, not having anything in order to heat their homes—. They are the people who now need compensation and repayment. 

ONS figures show that 41 per cent of people on prepayment meters struggled to stay comfortably warm. So, we also need to do more about that, and I'm following on from my colleague Sioned Williams in raising the question to the Minister, if I may, around energy efficiency and when we can see that operational start to the Warm Homes programme in Wales. We have been waiting some time, and, really, we can't afford to wait any longer. Next winter will soon be upon us, and the understanding is—I'm not an economist, but the understanding is— that the financial situation of poor people next year will be even worse—can you imagine—than it is this year. We must really accelerate the development of the Warm Homes programme. By my own calculations, if we look at insulation, it would take 135 years to insulate all of Wales's fuel-poor homes, on the basis of the performance of the scheme in 2020-21. So, I do hope that we're able to hear very soon that there will be an acceleration of the programme, but also that we will learn from the previous programme about how we absolutely can get to those, and target those, fuel-poor homes. Rapid investment in our homes would benefit all of those in fuel poverty as well as ensuring that we address, partly, the climate emergency.

I welcome the opportunity to sponsor this scheme brought forward by Jack Sargeant. Thank you so much, Jack, you are a champion of people who are in difficult circumstances, and I’m proud to be able to support this motion. I do hope that we can hear from the Minister what steps we are going to be taking in order to address not just the issue Jack has raised in his motion, but also that of the Warm Homes programme. Thank you, diolch yn fawr iawn.

There have been many great points made in this debate already. The perversity of prepayment is in many ways the perfect distillation of callous Westminster politics and the rigged energy market that we’re burdened with in the UK. How did we ever get to this situation, where people’s homes were being entered without permission on an industrial scale to fit prepayment meters against their wishes? To add insult to injury, those on prepayment meters would end up paying far more for their gas and electricity than someone paying on direct debit. This means that a millionaire would pay less per unit of gas and electricity that someone in receipt of benefits, struggling to make ends meet. How was that ever legal?

Families have gone cold this winter due to this scandal. Older people have sat in the dark due to this scandal. People have died due to this scandal. All of this has gone on while our energy companies have been making record profits, profits that have been made on the backs of people in misery. In a crowded field, this is one of the most shocking examples of unfairness that we can see in the UK today. It is right that we’re debating this matter in the Senedd today, and I commend Jack for bringing this debate to this Chamber and for his tireless campaigning work on this topic. He has the full support of Plaid Cymru in shining a spotlight on the injustice that has been allowed to go on far too long in the energy sector.

While I support Jack’s proposals, I think there is a wider debate to be had about the way people in debt are treated. Earlier this year, I met with the Enforcement Conduct Board, who provide independent oversight for bailiffs, and they shared with me some horror stories about the charges that are applied to people in debt. I’ve mentioned this case before, but it’s worth reiterating. I was given an example of a woman who lives in social housing in Newport and receives universal credit and personal independence payments. She was subject to a High Court enforcement case on behalf of a utility creditor. She asked the debt collection company if she could arrange an instalment plan, but the company refused and insisted that they visit her to see if she had any assets they could repossess. This meant that, in addition to the £75 charge that was added to her debt because of the telephone stage of enforcement, a further £190 was added to her debt for the visit. If she had not been at home on that first visit, a second visit would have led to a stage 2 High Court enforcement fee of £495 being added on.

The way people in debt are being treated by bailiff companies has the hallmarks of the way people are being treated by having prepayment meters forced upon them by energy companies. I’m pleased to hear that the Welsh Government is now engaging with the Enforcement Conduct Board, and I’d welcome an update on that. I hope that greater regulation can result from these meetings in order to clamp down on rogue firms that take advantage of people in poverty and plunge them into even greater poverty. Diolch yn fawr.

It is an absolute scandal, is it not, that over half our energy is now generated by renewables, yet we are still submitting poor people to this sort of treatment? The energy system is absolutely broken.

I wanted to focus on how effective the method of getting payments to people was. So, I spoke to Ofgem, who assured me that companies are adding credit automatically, where possible, if customers have a smart prepayment meter—if it’s working correctly. It should automatically add that £45 a week to the household’s credit balance. If the meter is faulty, I’m told households are sent a code by text or e-mail, so that they can use that to then top up their credit online. As a last resort, a voucher is issued to a customer by post, and I’ll come back to why that is a last resort.

If a household has a traditional prepayment meter, they either get a credit when they top up at their usual top-up point—and it's good to see exactly how much information energy companies hold about individuals; Sarah Murphy is not in the room at the moment, but this is a big data protection issue—or they get a voucher through the post as a last resort. And the reason why I describe this as a last resort is that we have huge amounts of evidence that people who are struggling financially stop opening the post—that is the way they cope with it. So, they think that every single letter that isn't from their granddaughter is going to be another demand for money that they haven't got. So, they never find out about the voucher that they desperately need to help them pay for heating.

Now, no information as yet is available of the cost-benefit analysis of different delivery methods of support, but there's clearly a lot of work to be done. So, for example, in Cardiff Central, between October and December last year, nearly 105,000 households should have got their money, but for 2,000 of them, it was simply never delivered. So, 2,000 never got the payments they were entitled to, and that is the payment that Boris Johnson got and that everybody else in this room got—2,000 of the poorest people never got that money. What is the explanation for that? And, equally, where vouchers had been issued to 6,800 households, there were just over 4,000 households where those vouchers were redeemed; 1,600 people never got them. Nobody ever knocked the door and said, 'Did you get the voucher, missus, or should we reissue you with a new one?'

These are really important issues and, thank goodness, on top of that, we have the Welsh Government fuel voucher statistics as well to go on, because the £200 pushed out by the Welsh Government was targeted at those who actually needed it rather than at those who could afford to pay. And the Fuel Bank Foundation has had a huge increase in the number of organisations that are now associating with them. They issued over 17,000 vouchers to support people who weren't able to afford to top up their prepayment meter; 44,000 people, of whom, over 40 per cent were children—the children who couldn't afford to have a bath or a hot meal or read a book before they went to bed. I think what's a worrying statistic for me is that only 148 households received help to purchase off-grid fuel. What are local authorities in areas where a lot of the dwellings are off grid doing to ensure that people, who should be getting that help, are getting it?

So, I think that all of this tells us that we need to—. Just as we need to regulate local authorities who use unregulated bailiffs to collect council tax debts, we clearly need to regulate energy suppliers who use unlicensed bailiffs to break into people's homes. The Enforcement Conduct Board has got to be given some regulatory teeth to enforce that and, frankly, the energy companies need to have some controls put around them in the way that water companies cannot cut off people's water. We need to ensure that the minimum amount of energy is being provided to every household in this country—as I say, the fifth or sixth largest economy in the world.

Thank you, Jack, for proposing this important debate that relates to an issue affecting so many people in our constituencies and regions day in, day out. And I won't repeat the points raised, but I think it is that personal connection: we've all had people come to us who are struggling; we all know of organisations that are trying to provide that support and are just unable to meet the demands. And I think in the period before, where Citizens Advice and so on were able to offer solutions in terms of how you could reduce your energy costs and so on, we're at a point now where essentials are no longer affordable, and it's not just a matter of being able to tweak here and there. As we've heard already from other contributions, energy prices have just gotten out of control, and it is an absolute scandal to see these companies make these vast amounts of profit, while we know—as others have mentioned—that people are dying because they cannot afford to heat their homes. That’s the reality here in Wales today.

It's easy for us perhaps to become a bit immune to some of those statistics, but we have to ask ourselves: why do we have excess death rates currently here in Wales? What are the reasons for that? Why do we see an increase in child poverty? All of these are interconnected. So, I think that, for us—. I remember doing my GCSE in history, and looking back at when you were told about how terrible things were in Victorian times, et cetera. Well, the stories that we are hearing now are just as bad. People are dying because they can’t afford basics. This, for me, is something that we need to look at as a society.

Obviously, there is an issue specifically around prepayment meters, and the fact that they have been forcibly installed, and that people are being cut off. But, fundamentally, energy prices are too high, and people can’t afford the basics, and that’s something that we need to address. I think that Sioned Williams was perfectly right to say that we need to have the power over power here in Wales. We need to be able to ensure that essentials are affordable. There are things that we can call for from the UK Government, but ultimately, there are solutions here in Wales, and that’s what we should be focused on as well for the long term.

I think that the issue in terms of Warm Homes schemes—I certainly echo those calls. But I just wanted to share with you what this means currently for people living in South Wales Central. I recently held a cost-of-living event in January, where organisations were telling me about those that they have been able to help—individuals—through fuel bank vouchers, but that the demand was just extortionate, and how they were going to keep up with that demand was a concern.

They told me of people who were coming to them who had been stealing, just to be able to pay energy costs; of returning to drug dealing, to be able to pay for energy. This is the reality in our communities now, that people are having to take drastic action, and that people are choosing to take those drastic actions just to heat their homes. I am very concerned about those most vulnerable in our society who are just going without—those who just decide, 'I am not going to be able to afford anything. I don’t want to ask anyone for help.' So, even the support available, they are not accessing.

Another issue that I’d like to focus on, in terms of prepayment meters, is how difficult it can be to top up, even if you do have money available. We have had examples of post offices closing in communities, which are often used as top-up points, meaning that people have to travel further, perhaps sometimes a few miles, to be able to top up. We know how frequently you have to top up because of costs. Some stores then only take cash, but there’s no cashpoint, or it’s not working. That then means that you have to walk, perhaps miles, back to your home, not being able to top up. We will be discussing buses later on. We know that, in some communities, if you don’t have access to buses, and if they don’t run frequently or don’t turn up, what are you then supposed to do in terms of reaching those top-ups? So, I think that there is, fundamentally, a problem in terms of access as well.

Emergency credit varies from company to company. It’s very much up to a landlord if they do install a smart meter sometimes, which means that that emergency credit is not always available if you don’t have a smart meter. There are so many difficulties when you are cut off during the night or weekends, when shops are closed, and you are not able to have that urgent support that we are told is there, but in reality isn’t.

I’d briefly just like to mention it in terms of period dignity as well. I think about the fact that we are striving as a nation to be a nation of period dignity, well, not accessing warm water and not being able to wash does have a disproportionate impact. And I have heard some colleagues mention bath time—that parents are having to ration bath time, and so on. These are very real issues, and we need urgent solutions. So, thank you, Jack, for raising this, but now we need to act as a Senedd and ensure that those changes come through, so that people aren’t suffering, dying or just not able to do basic things that we take for granted.

As a named supporter of this Member debate, I want to place on record the work of Jack Sargeant in raising this very critical issue, as many have said, both in this place and beyond. And it is, as many have said today, the sick and the disabled and the elderly and the young who this issue impacts the most upon. It is a result of sheer profit over people, and it's the sick face of privatisation unregulated, with billionaire energy owners riding bareback on those who are most frail and vulnerable. Estimates suggest that up to 45 per cent of all households in Wales could be in fuel poverty following increases to energy prices and consequent budget impacts now.

The shocking revelations in The Times last month exposed that climate of fear, as many Members of this Senedd today have articulated, with people unable to pay their fuel bills, debt collectors let loose, as Jane Dodds and others have stated, and prepayment meters being forcibly installed. But the sheer scale and immorality—I'll use that really strong word, it is immorality—of this issue is so profound. My constituents, as Sioned has also said, tell me this weekly. Some 200,000 households in Wales are using prepayment meters for their main gas and electricity, and 45 per cent of social housing tenants are using prepayment meters.

I do want to thank Jack here for this campaign, and I also do welcome the work of Jane Hutt, Minister for Social Justice, who has called publicly for Ofgem to extend the ban on forced installation of prepayment meters beyond the end of March. We must, as Mike Hedges states, stop standing charges. Indeed, collectively, the Welsh Government has acted strongly in its united response, with £90 million to provide support to vulnerable households to meet rising energy costs, including a £200 fuel support scheme on top of the UK Government's fuel support payments. This has come from other Welsh Government priority areas. And further, to meet the need, social justice Ministers have secured an extra £18.8 million in the draft budget, increasing the total discretionary assistance fund for this coming financial year to £38.5 million.

But it is a source of sadness that this is needed today, as others have mentioned, in a G7 country where we as the UK are languishing at the bottom. It is imperative that the UK Government now step up to the plate and use those resources available to them for those in fuel poverty in Wales who have all been made poorer by each consequent action of this callous UK Government. I know that the Minister will continue to lobby the UK Government, Ofgem and energy suppliers to finally rise to the moment and fulfil their moral obligations to the poorest in society, but, sadly, until we get a Labour Government in Westminster, working with us, the Welsh Senedd, it will continue to fall on marble as ordinary people continue to freeze. I say, 'Shame on Ofgem', and I say, 'Shame on the UK Government.'

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

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. I welcome today's debate on prepayment meters. It's a national scandal the way consumers, often the poorest in our communities, have been treated. Jack Sargeant has been at the forefront of the campaign to expose this scandal, and the Welsh Government not only welcomes, but supports this motion today. I thank all the Members who've spoken today and contributed. It's good to see the whole of the Senedd—you've united us all behind your motion with such powerful speeches.

The cost-of-living crisis is having a detrimental effect on all of our living standards, but it's having a more devastating effect on the households who are least able to pay. And yet the energy supply market, which provides an essential service, operates in such a way that vulnerable households, already struggling to pay their bills, face the threat of having prepayment meters forced upon them. In 2022, approximately 200,000 households in Wales relied on prepayment meters for their mains gas and electricity, and this represents 15 per cent of all households. Twenty-four per cent of tenants in the private rented sector use prepayment meters, and almost half of social housing tenants rely on prepayment meters. Dirprwy Lywydd, we were all shocked, weren't we, and appalled to see households, including those who are clearly vulnerable, being transferred to prepayment meters against their will.

Alongside Jack Sargeant's representations and other campaigners', it's of further concern that it took a journalist to highlight the issue, as Jack has said, when the regulator Ofgem has the regulatory role to prevent this occurring. It’s clear that the existing rules and how they are enforced and not working. This has been reflected in contributions this afternoon. They’re not protecting the most vulnerable in society. I’m meeting Ofgem on Monday, and I will reporting back in full on the contributions made on this motion today. I’ve been consistently clear: householders who’ve been subjected to forced use of a prepayment meter—either through the wholly flawed warrant process, or because they were encouraged to do so, perhaps not appreciating alternatives available to them—must be offered the opportunity to revert to their previous meter at no cost. I think that call is also being supported this afternoon.

As a result of the exposure of this scandal, the practice of forced installation of prepayment meters was halted, but only temporarily. It was halted and we welcomed that, but it was only temporary. I’ve regularly made the point to the UK Government and to Ofgem that it was premature to allow the warrant process to continue from the end of this month. If you recall, it was just halted to the end of March, risking further vulnerable households being forced onto meters against their will whilst the Ofgem investigation was ongoing. So, I think, colleagues, it is important to record today that Ofgem’s chief executive announced on 14 March that they will continue that ban and they’ll only lift it when and if firms follow Ofgem’s new code of practice. I shall be pressing for that ban to continue indefinitely. It’s been commented on about the code of practice—I think that ban has to continue indefinitely, and I’m sure you would support me with that.

It is vitally important that Ofgem regulate the industry effectively. I’ve sought assurances at board level and I’ve asked that if they don’t have sufficient powers and interventions, then we would like to help them to press for those powers. 

In your meetings with Ofgem and indeed with the UK Government, can you establish that the other scandal around prepayment meters, which is the so-called prepayment premium, which forces people to pay even more, is actually going to end in July? Can you get some assurances for that, if you haven't had them already, categorically?

Thank you very much, Jenny Rathbone. Clearly, there has been a change in the budget last week in terms of the premium. I’m clarifying what exactly that means, because it’s no good going back to the voucher situation, which you raised so rightly earlier on. Unless that premium is levelled and it is actually reflected in the cost, then that will not be good enough, and I will raise that on Monday.

Can I just say also that I’m pleased people raised the issue of standing charges? I think, Mike Hedges, you’ve raised this so regularly. It's a real injustice to prepayment customers. They continued the standing charges and put people in a more vulnerable position. Following a period of self-disconnection, when it becomes impossible to secure further credit, householders find they’re charged for all the days when it hadn’t been possible to obtain a supply. Again, thank you for joining and showing that call that I’m making that these standing charges should be removed for prepayment customers.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we do have to turn to look at ways in which we can improve things. It’s the UK Government who do hold the levers in the energy supply market and they do have the power to make a real difference to vulnerable households. We have called on the UK Government and Ofgem to introduce a social tariff to protect vulnerable households. It is important that they have now agreed to explore this. We must press for that change, because actually, then we could fund energy in a more progressive way. Social tariffs have received positive and broad support.

Legislation in the water industry—and this has been raised—prevents customers from being disconnected, even if in arrears. I’ve urged market change to prevent disconnection; I’ve offered immediate recommendations following on the advice from National Energy Action Cymru and Citizens Advice. I have been also calling on the Chancellor to use the opportunity in this budget not to increase the energy price guarantee, and welcome the fact that that is now remaining at £2,500 until July for a typical household.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, it is important that I pick up on some of the other points that have been raised in the motion. The Welsh Government recognises that trusted advice services are very important, and more than 176,500 people have received energy efficiency advice through the Warm Homes programme since its launch in 2011. That energy advice pilot also tests and measures the effectiveness of providing in-home advice as well. Can I just say that the Minister for Climate Change, on the Warm Homes programme, expects to procure a new demand-led scheme that tackles both the climate emergency and fuel poverty? It is crucial, the next iteration of the Warm Homes programme. There will be no gap in provision between the new and existing programmes, and it will take that fabric-first, Wales-first and low-carbon approach.

Finally, thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, for enabling us all to contribute. I met Jack Sargeant last week to discuss the findings of his survey and the shocking feedback from his constituents, and I have shared that survey with Ofgem. I'm meeting the chief executive of Ofgem on Monday, and I will be reporting not only on his survey and its outcomes but also on the contributions made in this very important debate today. Diolch yn fawr i chi i gyd. 

I call on Jack Sargeant to reply to the debate.

I'm grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I firstly thank the Minister, Jane Hutt, for her dedication on this matter, and the dedication of the Counsel General for the Welsh Government as well? You've both grasped the seriousness and have understood the seriousness of the situation we have in front of us from the very start. Your response today emphasises that, and your letter to Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State, on 14 March emphasises that again. 

I'm going to try to quickly go through some of the contributions before reflecting on one final point. Thank you, Mark Isherwood, because I didn't know where the Welsh Conservatives stood, really, until today on this. I do thank him for his contribution today and for the confirmation of the support of the Welsh Conservatives on this motion. The contributions and support from Plaid Cymru, the Liberal Democrats and my backbench colleagues here, and of course the Minister, prove that this is bigger than politics, it's bigger than party politics; this is a life-and-death situation in front of us. And that's why, Mike Hedges, I will never get bored of you continuously, tirelessly working to bring it up, calling out injustice where you see it and standing up for the most vulnerable people in society. Mike Hedges, I will never get bored of you standing up for those people and calling out those standing charges; rightly so. 

Jane Dodds referenced the incredible profits of suppliers and the stark difference and the stark contrast for those people who have no money to top up their prepayment meters. We heard from Sioned Williams and Heledd Fychan the realities of having no energy, the need for compensation, the commitment from the Welsh Government to procure that Warm Homes programme, as Jenny Rathbone and others, too, referenced. Rhianon, you are absolutely right; the scale of the programme, the sheer scale of the programme, deserves a response from the UK Government. I will finish, Dirprwy Lywydd, by just reflecting on some final remarks, setting out for you, as Peredur Owen Griffiths said, how rigged the market is.

Let me just explain to you how broken the system is. In that same meeting, the same meeting with Ofgem where they told me that there is no problem and there's no evidence to suggest any wrongdoing—apart from in British Gas because they were caught on camera—I told them a little story and asked them what I should say to my resident who was in my local surgery, in tears in front of me because they had been forcibly switched over to a prepayment meter. We've all had stories similar to that. We've heard them from all benches today. Ofgem told me that they should complain. Well, you know, we all know, I know, they know that the complaints process is ridiculous. You must write to your supplier with your complaint, you must give them eight weeks to respond, and then you might get a response back, but probably not one that's worth while. You then have to take it to the energy ombudsman, with no defined period for resolution. How ridiculous is that? That's why Ofgem is not fit for purpose. How can the regulator only have this to say to a vulnerable person who has been incorrectly and forcibly switched and, that very day, is at risk of going without heat and light? I'm pleased that the Minister responded with the rolling out of the energy service. It's the best advice we can offer to people that will stop people reaching crisis point.

Llywydd, I will end now on this one final comment. We are here in the Senedd, but this is much bigger than the Senedd; this is life and death—one thing's for certain. And it's good to see all political parties in Wales here today and the Welsh Government supporting this motion, because there's one thing that we can not do for sure: we cannot let this national scandal continue. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

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

Item 6 is next, and it's the Welsh Conservatives debate. I call on Sam Rowlands to move the motion. Sam Rowlands.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I move today's motion in the name of my colleague, Darren Millar. As our motion outlines today, on these sides of the benches, we are proposing that this Senedd states that it has no confidence in the Welsh Government's Minister for Health and Social Services.

Usually, at this point in a debate contribution, I would say something like, 'It gives me great pleasure to move the motion today', but actually, today, I take no joy in standing here to move this motion. This is because we're having again to point out failings, and in particular, failure, in taking responsibility for poor performance and poor outcomes for the people of Wales, especially when it comes to their health and their well-being. This is what today's motion is ultimately about. It's about accountability and the role of individually elected representatives taking responsibility when it counts. I say this because we've seen, so far through this Senedd term, a regular pattern of concern being raised from Members from across the Chamber as to the performance of our health service and the ability of our hard-working NHS staff to deliver on what is needed because of the decisions of this Government.

These concerns have not been raised in this Chamber flippantly, but these concerns have been issues that people have shared with their democratically elected representatives, their MSs, and they rightfully expect these concerns to be shared with decision makers to effect change. But these concerns, far too often, have been ignored, dismissed, or approached with indifference by the Government and its Minister. Sadly, in particular for my residents in north Wales, these concerns have proven to be true, time and time again. In north Wales, we now see a health board back in special measures; a £122 million fraud investigation; a region with just 62 per cent of health service buildings deemed to be safe; major concerns with vascular services; risks to patients, and significant concerns at A&E in Ysbyty Glan Clwyd. Indeed, across Wales, we see the results of the nettle not being grasped, with one in four people currently on a waiting list for treatment, compared to one in eight in England. One in eight people are waiting over 52 weeks between referral to treatment, compared to one in 18 people in England and one in 14 in Scotland.

But here's the important bit in terms of today's debate. Who is deemed responsible for these failings? Who can residents in Wales hold responsible when they are let down? Surely, as those who believe in the power and right of democracy, it is clear that those elected to take responsibility are also those accountable when they fail to deliver on that responsibility. In this case, it is clear that the responsibility to take a grip on delivering on health services in Wales rests with the health Minister—[Interruption.] I'm not taking any interventions in the opening of a debate. [Interruption.] Not in the opening of a debate. But what we've seen in recent weeks—[Interruption.] What we've seen in recent weeks is a disjointed position—

The Member is not taking interventions, so allow him to continue. Allow him to continue.

Llywydd, I think it may be useful for Members to hear the opening of the debate.

I can't hear the Member. It's the Member's decision whether he takes interventions or not. He has said that he's not taking interventions, so can we allow him to carry on and complete?

Diolch, Llywydd. What we've seen in recent weeks is a disjointed position on the issue of accountability, because the Minister has acknowledged the issues in the health service, but has chosen to not be accountable for them. And for north Wales, it has been the independent board members, those who've been highlighting the failings, who've been holding the executive to account—it is they who the Minister has chosen to hold accountable for the failings, not herself. Indeed, today we read in the Daily Post that the former chairman of the board, the one attempting to sort things out on the ground, was also being ignored, and I quote,

'A range of longstanding shortcomings and concerns were escalated formally...not just to the then CEO but also to the Minister and the Director General. Those escalations and the basis for them were simply ignored by government.'

Llywydd, I think all of this starts to bring into question the seriousness in which this place is held in the eye of those who elect us, because we know the phrase, 'with great power comes great responsibility'. As more powers have been moved to the Senedd over the years, and with many seeking further powers, the responsibility on elected representatives and the willingness to be held to account also increases. I for one certainly don't want to weaken the inherent trust that our electorate put in us by electing us to this place to deliver on what they need. That is why we must show respect to those who elect us, and take responsibility when things go wrong. That is why, again, I move the motion before us today. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Mike Hedges.

Oh, thank you, Presiding Officer. You caught me out there.

I don't often catch you out, Mike Hedges.

Russell George and I were both elected in 2011. Eluned Morgan is the best health Minister we've had in that time. This is the most difficult job in Government. The structure we have now is the one that she inherited. As merger mania hits the Senedd across parties, big is always better, isn't it? I've had Conservatives tell me that we should only have two health boards in Wales, and a former Plaid Cymru health spokesperson argued for one. Fortunately, the views expressed of putting social care into health have not happened—it would have made matters a lot worse. Too many Members identify problems without workable solutions. Why nearly everyone thought that joining primary care and secondary care would work, I cannot understand. Do you actually think it has worked? I take that to be a 'no'. Whilst the vast majority across parties supported the merger of primary and secondary care—no matter what goes wrong, let's make bigger and bigger organisations. Finally, we need the right sized health organisations. How has the merger of primary and secondary care benefited patients, who are they key?

There are problems in the health service in Wales. The structure of Betsi Cadwaladr is, I believe, unworkable. New chairs and chief executives are regularly appointed, but the problems are not resolved. The gap between the board and the ward is too big. I wrote that several years ago when no-one else actually had any point of agreement with me at all. Jenny.

I want to probe your proposal, Mike, because what you're saying is, if you want to divide secondary from primary care, you'd need to set up 22 local primary care organisations. That would just make the problem far worse. We already have far too many institutions in this country, so we have to go with the integrated system that we have and ensure that the health boards push the money down to primary care.

Well, first of all, I disagree entirely with what you just said, Jenny. I didn't say anything about having 22 individual boards; what I said is that primary care and secondary care don't work well together, and we've had a serious problem with it, and the very big board in north Wales hasn't worked. My advice is to keep Betsi Cadwaladr for back-office functions and primary care, not the 22, and bring in new arrangements for secondary care based upon the three main hospitals. There will be a need for the hospitals to work together, with their own management structure and board, reducing the gap between board to ward.

I'll just go through an e-mail I received on Friday, which shows the problems in health way outside the Minister’s control:

'We have called Llansamlet doctors for an appointment for my grandfather everyday, twice a day, since 27 February for an appointment due to a chest infection as he has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We couldn't get through for an appointment at all, despite calling twice a day. His breathing was deteriorating, and as he was not being medicated as he should have been, being a COPD sufferer, we had to borrow a nebuliser and solution to help him. He was uncomfortable and anxious about going to accident and emergency. We were finally able to speak to someone on 6 March. He was told that, because he was smoker, they would not issue antibiotics.

'Later that evening, he was so unwell, we had to dial 111. Then a paramedic came to the house to check him over, provided a rescue package of antibiotics and steroids. The paramedic advised to call the doctor the following day for a doctor to come out and check on him and issue a top-up of his antibiotics and steroids. As advised, we called the doctors, but we could only get through to general enquiries, where the paramedic report was sent by ourselves as the doctors’ surgery is not on online system, so that was the fastest way to get this report over to the surgery. We were told by general enquiries that a doctor would call back. We made them aware that he needed a top-up of his rescue pack, and asked a doctor to call back ASAP to issue this. Unfortunately, no doctor called back. We called again in the afternoon to check if the doctor was going to call back. We were told to wait. We did not receive a call back. We called again on 8 March—still no call back. We called again on 9 March, morning and afternoon—

and they only had half a day of his steroids left—

'we tried the pharmacy, but they hadn't been told that his prescription had arrived.

'On 10 March, we called the doctor's again and finally got through to somebody who was willing to listen to us. A doctor was sent out to check on him. The doctor provided us with a prescription for his antibiotics and steroids, along with nebuliser solution. The doctor advised he needed to go into hospital that day. He was admitted to hospital, and by 2 p.m. he was told that half his lung had collapsed. He had fluid drained from it. I was furious to say that this all could have been avoided if, on 27 February, a doctor had actually been prepared to speak to him. To add to this, when the doctor came out, they could not tell when his medication had last been reviewed. The doctor took water tablets off him, as he shouldn't have been taking them, but had been for years.'

This is what is happening. This is not the Minister's fault. There are administrative problems within the health service. This idea that making bigger organisations is going to make it better, it beggars belief that people could keep on saying that with all the experience we've had that these bigger organisations don't work. But, yes, we'll keep on making bigger ones, because eventually they will work. 

Finally, I think we need to right-size health and support the Minister, who I think is doing a very, very good job. I ask the Conservatives to withdraw this motion. It will achieve nothing, and we're working with the health Minister, who's trying to work with us.

The Welsh Government health Minister is, of course, responsible for holding health boards to account, and must make her views known, as she has done—[Interruption.] and she does, I agree, Jenny; she does make her views known—when she doesn't have confidence in them. And, in the same way, for those of us in this Chamber who are not in Government, it is our job to hold the Government to account and raise our concerns when we don't have confidence in decisions that are being made by Ministers.

It is undeniable that the pandemic has recalibrated what we can expect from the NHS, but it's not a coincidence nor an ignorable fact—and a fact is what it is—that Wales is far behind England and Scotland in seeing the recovery in waiting times—[Interruption.] That is true; I can hear, 'It's not true' being whispered behind me. This is also in the context of Wales going into the pandemic in a much poorer state than in other nations of the UK.

Now, we are awaiting tomorrow's figures for January, and I want to compare Wales and England to demonstrate just how badly short-changed I think patients are in Wales. I do so—[Interruption.] Yes, sure, Jenny.

Cardiff and the Vale have not had to cancel a single operation throughout this winter, despite the strikes, despite the continuing of COVID, and I don't understand how, therefore, you're saying that this is an underperforming health board. It's much better than many of the organisations you—[Inaudible.]

Well, the statistic you point at there, Jenny, I mean, perhaps that should be explored; perhaps Betsi Cadwaladr health board can learn from areas in that particular health board. 

But, I think what I'm going to demonstrate to you—I'm going to raise some statistics between England and Wales, and I'm doing so in the context that there's great frustration amongst patients up and down Wales—there is across the UK. There are difficulties in this health service right across the UK, but they're more predominant in Wales, and there are huge frustrations and upset across Wales from patients. We hear—I see it in my postbag. But there are also frustrations from Members in this Chamber as well, because we get frustrated when our constituents raise matters of concern amongst the health boards in their areas with us—[Interruption.] Well, let me just—. Okay, Jenny, I'll take another intervention.

So, what would you do differently? Because you're supposed to be the official opposition. What would you do differently?

Thank you, Jenny. I'll come to that in my contribution. I will come to that in my contribution.

So, let's have a look at some of the statistics: 24 per cent of the Welsh population are on a NHS waiting list, twice the proportion in England. One in five of those patients are waiting over a year for treatment, compared to one in 18 in England. Over 45,000 patients in Wales are waiting over two years; in England and Scotland, these have been virtually eliminated. Then are the A&E waiting times, and it's been a very long time since Wales saw a greater percentage of patients within the four-hour target than England. And of course, the Welsh target to get 95 per cent of admittants seen in four hours has never been met in the 13-year existence of that particular target.

And ambulance times—and to be fair, it's not all bad. The average red calls in Wales in January were reported to be 19 seconds quicker than the average category 9 call in England. However, amber calls were more than 20 minutes longer to reach a patient in Wales than a category 2 in in England—category 2, of course, includes stroke. And this I think speaks of a lack of confidence that we have in the Welsh Government in tackling the issues, because there are people in the United Kingdom experiencing an inferior level of healthcare simply because they live in Wales, not in England or in Scotland, and that is wrong. That is the opposite of what devolution was meant to achieve. We were supposed to be better off, but we're worse off, and I have lost count how many times I have read 'the worst on record'. I listened to Mike Hedges's contribution—I agree with a lot of what Mike said, not just the fact that we were both elected in 2011—but I agree with him that the job of health Minister is the most difficult job in Government. I agree with that, and I think, in fairness—Mike didn't say this; I'm not referencing Mike now, but—I think that the Minister's predecessor should also take part of the responsibility for the state that our health services are in today.

And to answer Jenny's point, even when we as Welsh Conservatives have offered our solutions—the GP access plan, the NHS tech bundle, surgical hubs—they have not been taken up, to the detriment of patients and staff across our nation, despite the latter in particular being instrumental in tackling those waits in England.

Now, I really did not want this debate today, and I heard, when Sam Rowlands opened the debate today, some jeers from some Members about crocodile tears. I really do not want this debate today. I really take no pleasure in it. Believe me, I look forward to the day—[Interruption.] 'Funding Wales properly' is being said. Wales gets £1.20 for every £1 spent in England. [Interruption.] Right? Now, if—

Will you take a quick intervention? Very quick.

I don't think I can take any more. I don't think I can. Can I take an intervention?

Yes, you can. Yes.

Okay. Janet and then Alun.

Right, okay. I've been made aware this week of an 82-year-old lady who was diagnosed with stomach cancer, very late stage, in December—not heard anything, and we're now at the end of March. Do you think that is the product of a well-functioning health board? Time after time after time I've raised these concerns with you, with the Minister, here in this place. Do you not agree with me, when we're asked what should we be doing, we would spend the whole £1.20, we would put patient care above looking after the executive board members, wouldn't we, Russell?

Yes. Okay. For balance, yes, one other intervention.

Russell, diolch—thank you for taking the intervention. I take you at your word, actually. I accept that you didn't wish to bring this motion in front of the Chamber today. But the point about funding is a fundamental issue, and you quote the £1.20—and I won't argue about that—but you know and I know, and the secret right around the Chamber is, that a needs-based formula would provide Wales with the resources required to meet the needs of the people. I'd be prepared to work with you to deliver that. Would you work with me?

Yes, Alun, I would. I genuinely would. Let's do that. Let's meet after and discuss that.

I will end my contribution, Llywydd, by saying I look forward to the day that I can stand here in a debate and talk about the success of our Welsh NHS and how it is performing much better than any other nation across the UK. I genuinely look forward to that day. 

Now, it's no small thing to ask a Minister to step down or to be dismissed, but, having seriously considered the issue, that's what I and Plaid Cymru did some three weeks ago, because we were convinced that the time had come for a new start. 

We can refer this afternoon to a catalogue of failings in the NHS under this Government's watch, this current Minister and her predecessors: the worst waiting times ever; the stubborn failure to change tack when it's been obvious that efforts to cut those waiting times weren't going to succeed, far from it; the crisis of ambulance waits; staff shortages; attitudes towards those taking industrial action; the mess that is the dental service, laid bare in the Senedd again last week. But it's the Minister's handling of the Betsi Cadwaladr issue at the end of last month that was the straw that broke the camel's back for us on these benches, and which did lead us to call for her to consider her position or for the First Minister to remove her, calls certainly not taken lightly. In that context, and despite it being a few weeks on now, we will support this motion here today. 

But most important to me this afternoon is the opportunity to emphasise what's at stake here, what it is we're fighting for when it comes to the future of the NHS. Joyce Watson. 

Thank you for taking an intervention. I'm a little bit puzzled as to what you're hoping to achieve here, so maybe you can explain it. Could you explain to me how you think the health services in north Wales are going to be enhanced overnight by removing the health Minister? That's what you're not actually getting to. Or is it just political posturing? 

The Minister won't be removed today because Labour will win this vote. What I've said is that I see the importance today of having the opportunity to emphasise what it is that we're fighting for. And to me, it's about accountability. And I would hope that the Government and those on the Labour benches would welcome the opportunity to show that they want to be accountable. We need to know that we have a Government, that we have Ministers, who are accountable and desire accountability. To serve in Government is an honour. It's an enormous responsibility too, and, no doubt, it's a difficult job. But there can be no ducking of responsibility because it's a difficult job, and admitting when you're getting it wrong is an important part of that process of seeking accountability. 

Now, I note the Labour response to this afternoon's vote is quoted on the BBC's news website today: Welsh Labour said Ms Morgan is doing a great job. Now, I know that's just politics, and that's the risk when a confidence motion like this is laid, or, indeed, when there was a rather casual call from another Conservative Member just yesterday for another ministerial sacking: there's a retreat to political trenches. But we somehow have to try to rise out of that. So, why did I— [Interruption.] So, why did I say some weeks ago that we need a fresh start in health? This is my opportunity to explain. 

I'm going to turn to the words of the former Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board chair Mark Polin, writing in the Daily Post today. I said I wanted to emphasise what's at stake, and I think he does it incredibly forcefully today. 'By any measure', he says, 

'patients across Wales, and in particular north Wales, are being placed at risk by an NHS system which is badly misfiring and arguably broken.'

And on that key issue of accountability, he refers specifically to that Senedd statement by the health Minister on 28 February, saying,

'the Health Minister engaged in what can only be described as an exercise in attempting to distance herself, her government and her officials from any responsibility for seemingly anything to do with improving healthcare across Wales and particularly here in the north.'

And that does cut to the heart of the matter. Remember the Minister's own words in that BBC interview about Betsi Cadwaladr: 'It's not my job to have a grasp of the situation.' Mark Polin goes on: 

'The government and the health minister also need to stop assigning failings to others and begin accepting and demonstrating responsibility rather than excuses.'

Damning words, but ones that echo comments I and others have made in this Chamber on many, many occasions, because there is a pattern here. This is a Minister and this is a Government that may well believe that they have a vision for the future of the NHS in Wales, but, if they do, it’s by now a hopelessly blurred vision, neutered by the constant firefighting, devoid of new ideas to see it through. Yes.

Thank you for taking the intervention. How would you respond to this comment from myself—that are you not, by doing this today and supporting this motion, playing two sides of the fence here? On one hand, you acknowledge fully the difficulties in terms of the lack of investment in Wales, the impossibility of what is trying to be done here from your point of view, but now today you are causing an agenda that is personal and political.

I’ll pick on one word: ‘impossibility’. I do not believe it’s impossible for us in Wales to run public services better than we currently do. I do not think it’s impossible for us to put together a vision and to deliver on that vision in a way that delivers better healthcare than we currently see being delivered here in Wales today, despite all the best efforts of our health and care workers. So, we need to see the ideas and the power behind them to see them through—on Betsi, the idea we need a brave Minister to drive through and to scrap the current health structure, start again. We’re clear on that, and we’re grateful to Mike Hedges for his support on that today. But in so many ways poor decisions have been made. We need better ones, put simply. As I say, taking responsibility for the things that haven’t gone well on this Government’s watch must be the first step to turning things around.

Finally, Llywydd, Mark Polin says that:

‘We are long past the point whereby patients and their families are entitled to expect a public enquiry or some other fundamental, independent review to be conducted.’

The health Minister brushed aside my calls for an inquiry, and again the conclusion many will come to is that this Government is doing all it can to avoid scrutiny. That has to change.

This debate should mark a line in the sand. We’ve had numerous debates over the years about poor performance by Welsh Government on the NHS. I don’t think this is the first time, and it saddens me to say that it’s definitely not going to be the last. For decades—yes, decades—the Labour Government has been in charge of the NHS and it has been in a managed decline ever since.

I’m going to be sincere with the health Minister: she’s picked up a brief that has been decimated by the now economy Minister, who presided over five of the seven health boards in special measures and targeted intervention, who took Betsi out of special measures too early and as part of his political point scoring before the 2021 elections, who saw over a quarter of COVID deaths as a result of ward-to-ward transmission, and who opened the Grange hospital too early, leaving it painfully understaffed.

He took over from the now First Minister, who was in place when Betsi Cadwaladr was first put into special measures in 2015, after the shocking fallout of poor mental health care at Tawel Fan. Sadly, the situation is still playing out in other health boards, such as Cwm Taf, which has recently been pulled up by Healthcare Inspectorate Wales for discharging mental health patients without even bothering to contact the local community mental health team.

Minister, you do have my deepest sympathies. You haven’t got to grips with spiralling waiting lists over the last two years and you’ve failed to meet your targets. I can now see the panic that is setting in with you, Minister. You’re quite rightly worried about waiting lists that are stubbornly failing to significantly reduce, unlike in England. In my constituency of south-east Wales we’re looking at nearly 5,000 patient pathways waiting over two years for treatment in Aneurin Bevan University Health Board. In Cwm Taf, this number doubles to over 10,000. That’s patients waiting in pain, in distress and frustration for over 105 weeks, 735 days, 17,520 hours. And it’s not just referral-to-treatment times that are out of control. Just over half—56 per cent—of patients at the Grange’s A&E were seen within four hours. One in five patients at the hospital are waiting for over 12 hours to be seen. In November 2022, Healthcare Inspectorate Wales declared that the A&E department at the Grange was in urgent need of improvement. This is despite the hospital being only two years old at the time. Is this acceptable in a flagship hospital?

I have a constituent who has laid bare the problems of your Government’s reorganisation of A&E services in Aneurin Bevan, relying on just one hospital, situated out in the back of beyond, to take the strain of health services in south-east Wales. They let me know their partner needed to go to hospital and, given no ambulances were available, despite the emergency, they drove to the Grange. On arriving, they found the waiting room full beyond its capacity, with relatives being told to go outside. During their lengthy wait, they saw patients who were being given infusions in every spare bit of space and they were told their partner couldn't be discharged due to a lack of bed space in other hospitals. Is this dignified care? Is this an NHS fit for the twenty-first century? I think not. 

Minister, we've given you the benefit of the doubt for the last two years and, yes, I wholeheartedly believe that you have inherited a really poor portfolio from your predecessors, being Mr Gething and Mr Drakeford. But you've taken so long to reach any decision: for example, you threatened Betsi with special measures in February 2022 if it continued to fail, and what happened? You saw services decline and still did nothing, even after a spate of Healthcare Inspectorate Wales reports that showed it wasn't managing. In Cwm Taf, things are going wrong—we have mental health services in crisis on top of the efforts to recover from the maternity scandal; no eating disorder target still; a lack of bereavement support services still and no support for adults diagnosed with ADHD still. These may just be drops in the ocean for you, Minister, and many others, but we're seeing through the warm words of support and lack of action, so are hard-pressed doctors and nurses, and so are patients. This is happening all over Wales and it's just not good enough, Minister. Enough is enough.

Well, the motion before us today is, in my opinion, a very unnecessary and, I have to say, a vindicative distraction. Yet another manifestation of an opposition whose only interest is unfortunately in grabbing a cheap headline. In the process, what they do is actually let down our public services and the people who rely on them by their failure to engage with the very real challenges that we do know we are facing. For example, we know in Wales that our population is older; we know that our industrial heritage brings with it a legacy of sickness and ill health. We know that responding to the coronavirus pandemic and 13 years of failed UK Government policies, which have increased poverty and have increased health inequalities, have therefore put unprecedented pressures on our Welsh NHS.

We know that this is leading to people having to wait longer than any of us are comfortable with to access treatment. But we also know that the Minister for health and the Welsh Government, working with those bodies responsible for the delivery of healthcare, are doing all they can to reduce waiting times. We know that this is paying off: waiting lists in Wales have gone down for the second successive month.

New ambitious interventions are planned to further encourage this direction of travel, such as the new diagnostics and treatment centre announced by the Minister just last month. Funded by Welsh Government, developed by three health boards working together and based in Llantrisant in Rhondda Cynon Taf, with an approach hinging on clinician and patient involvement, that centre has the capacity to deliver innovative services to thousands of patients each year, and this could not just reduce, but actually eliminate backlogs in accessing treatment for people in the Cynon Valley and neighbouring areas. And if it's successful in doing that, it's a model that can be rolled out across Wales.

I was fortunate enough to visit another project in my constituency at the start of the year to see another groundbreaking initiative implemented by the Minister. I went to Gwynns Opticians in Aberdare to find out about changes to the services that they deliver. Local opticians are being trained to become independent prescribers, able to diagnose and treat really serious conditions, like glaucoma and macular degeneration, and this eliminates the need for patients to be added to hospital waiting lists and instead allows for treatment in a local setting. This reform of the NHS, relieving pressure on services, empowering practitioners and ensuring that patients can access swift, safe and specialist care is a priority for this health Minister, as is valuing the professionals responsible for the delivery of these services.

I'm proud that, proportionately, we have more doctors and nurses in Wales than they do in England; that we are training more doctors and nurses; that we pay the real living wage to all NHS workers. And lest we forget, the health Minister is also responsible for social services. With her team, the Minister has delivered on our 2021 Senedd election manifesto pledge to pay the real living wage to all care workers in Wales. And this is a tremendous achievement, substantively changing our perception of what is a vital role with our ageing population, ensuring social care work and social care workers receive the just reward they should be able to expect. So, on behalf of my constituents who work in social care, on behalf of all of the women in Wales who work in social care, and on behalf of my constituents who rely on social care, I would like to say, 'Thank you, Minister.'

For the remainder of my time, I just want to change focus and offer an alternative perspective. Our Minister for Health and Social Services has been in post since the May 2021 election. In that time, in contrast, four different people have served as health Secretary in the UK Cabinet.

First there was, of course, Matt Hancock, dropped for arrogantly ignoring the coronavirus regulations, for which he was responsible; presiding over a regime that gave billions to cronies in dodgy PPE contracts; then trading public service for a stab as a reality TV star; and further notoriety via his shameful leaked WhatsApp messages. Then we have Sajid Javid. Probably the best thing that he did as health Secretary was to contribute to bringing down Boris Johnson—bringing Boris Johnson down for arrogantly ignoring the coronavirus regulations for which he was responsible. Then we had Therese Coffey, whose contribution was to put on record her commitment to illegally sharing prescription medication. And now we have Stephen Barclay, described in a health service journal as:

'A real nightmare, vindictive, arrogant, a bully, hostile to the NHS and all its works, a micro-manager of the wrong things'.

That is what this opposition has to offer. That’s why the people of Wales will never trust them to run the NHS, and that is why I will be voting against this motion today.

This isn't a debate, much like Russell George and Sam Rowlands, that I take great pleasure in speaking in, and it’s one that I have wrestled with internally throughout the day. [Interruption.]

I'm not going to sit down, as the Deputy Minister suggested. I'm not going to sit down because I need to contribute on behalf of my constituents in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire.

As colleagues have highlighted, Llywydd, the issue of good, reliable and safe access to healthcare remains one of the defining topics of correspondence in my inbox from constituents of Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire. So, with the immense privilege that it is in representing those people, I felt that I needed to contribute today.

I want to focus my contribution on healthcare in west Wales, and specifically two issues: the level of service received at our hospitals and the struggles facing the future of NHS dentistry. What truly hit home at the end of last week was the report from Healthcare Inspectorate Wales into the level of service offered by the A&E department at Glangwili hospital.

The report found that, despite the best efforts of staff, the independent body said that patients did not always receive consistently safe care. It went on to state that patients face long waits in the emergency unit due to problems with patient flow through the hospital. And in my eyes, most worryingly, it said that there was evidence of overcrowding and a lack of toilet and washing facilities. Inspectors witnessed some patients sleeping on chairs or on the floor.

What sort of health service is being presided over if that’s the inspectorate’s conclusion? I stress that none of these findings are the fault of our hard-working healthcare staff. The responsibility ultimately lies at the door of the Welsh Government and its health Minister.

Would you possibly take an intervention?

I will most certainly take an intervention.

Thank you so much for that. Bearing in mind the extreme challenges that NHS services are facing across the entire United Kingdom, why was there no extra funding for the NHS in the spring budget?

I'm grateful to the Member for intervening. I can imagine that the autumn budget released extra, additional funding for both education and the health service, by the Chancellor Jeremy Hunt, last October. But we are here to debate health services here in Wales. We are elected by the people here in Wales to sit in a Welsh Parliament.

I recently spoke—[Interruption.] Well, I'm very happy to join that meeting that you and Russell George will be having, Alun Davies.

Moving on, I recently spoke to a dentist who is a member of the Dyfed-Powys local dental committee. He told me that NHS dentists are facing large financial penalties if they fail to meet unevidenced and unachievable contract reform targets, which he described as a cliff-edge for NHS dentistry in Wales. A further quote from the Dyfed-Powys local dental committee reads: 'To be quite honest, Eluned Morgan's comments in January, showing a total lack of understanding of the situation, and her unwillingness to listen, has been the final straw for many of my colleagues, who will now vote with their feet and move to practise only in the private sector.'

Llywydd, I will close my contribution in the same vein in which I opened it. Russell George is a Member, politically, that I look up to immensely. Indeed, he was the first Member that came into my office after I was elected to ask for my advice on something, which filled me with great strength, and I'm very grateful to Russell for that. As a proud Welshman and a proud Brit, nothing would give me more pride than to look across Offa's Dyke and to think, 'Here in Wales, we have the very best NHS.' Unfortunately, at the moment, I can't say we can do that. Diolch, Llywydd.

I'd just like to start my contribution with this reflection on this debate: I feel this is a really poor way to do politics. This place, in my view, is much better than that. I don't see how spending 60 minutes, which we will do today, plus the time we have all spent, those of us speaking, in preparing for this debate, will resolve anything for the NHS staff and patients who have not received the care that they need.

I, as do the constituents who write to me, and I know, to many of you, week in and week out, want to concentrate on solutions and what we do next. What are we doing to tackle ambulance waiting times? What are we doing to tackle long waiting times for dentistry? And what are we doing to recruit and retain more nurses and social workers? I don't see how removing the Minister will actually do anything around those issues.

I have been critical, as many of you know, of the decision—[Interruption.] I won't, sorry. I'm not taking any interventions, I'll just be clear about that. I have been critical, as I know many others have, of the decision making around Betsi Cadwaladr. The Minister seems to have chosen the technicalities of the law and what authority she has or doesn't have in order to intervene at Betsi, rather than acknowledging that it is to her that staff and patients look to drive improvements. It was wrong to sack the independent members of the board, as it seemed they were the only ones who were actively raising concerns. This needs to be acknowledged, and the chaos that that decision caused as well.

I have been critical of poor performance across all of our health services, whether it's children and young people waiting months for mental health support, people waiting months and sometimes years for dental treatment, ambulance response times, targets being repeatedly missed. I've also disagreed with the Minister and other Cabinet members who deny that our health service is in a state of crisis. People in north Wales need to see a fundamental change in the improving of health services in Betsi Cadwaladr, and we all need to see and hear an acknowledgement of the scale of the crisis in our health service across Wales.

One issue that I've repeatedly raised is NHS dentistry, and I know some of you have touched on that as well. For the Minister to deny the existence of a different-tiered access to services to dentistry in last week's statement was, I'm afraid, quite astonishing. Again, it doesn't tell us, or the people we represent, that the problems in NHS dentistry are properly understood. The figures are clear: 93 per cent of dental practices are not accepting new adult NHS patients. In a recent survey of 250 high-street dentists, more than a third said that they would reduce their NHS contracts this year. Ninety per cent of dentists disagreed with the current reform measures, and there is no glossing over the rift in the relationship between dentists and the Welsh Government. I remain deeply, deeply concerned about the attitude towards the profession.

But, again, I say, 'Will changing who sits at the table resolve the issues in dentistry, with waiting lists, contract reform and investment?' In my view, this debate is an attempt to grab headlines rather than solve the issues at hand, and I think that it is dishonest and that the public will see through it. In closing, I make no secret of my significant concerns around the NHS in Wales, but I don't think a merry-go-round of Ministers around the Cabinet table will deliver the systemic changes that we need.

So, what could we have spent the last 60 minutes discussing? Extending nurse staffing levels to more parts of our NHS, progressing plans for a national care service, or whether we should consider the NHS executive being independent of Government to ensure scrutiny and accountability. I won’t be supporting the motion today, but I want to make clear that I’m not content with the performance of the health service. I will continue to ensure that I bring forward those challenges. This is an opportunity, I hope, for a reset, and that we move forward doing what people want and expect of this Senedd—to do politics differently, and better, and to shape ideas to tackle the challenges people face. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I usually start my contributions to debates saying, ‘It’s a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon’, but today, it’s not, and it’s with a heavy heart that I support this motion. I’ll share with you just a couple of reasons why I’m choosing to vote for this motion this afternoon.

I worked in Betsi Cadwaladr myself for 11 years on the front line, and I saw first-hand some of the failures on the front line from an internal perspective. That’s what tempted me to go into politics and stand for the Vale of Clwyd, because as you know, it’s got Ysbyty Glan Clwyd in the constituency, and having worked there and in north Wales all my life, I wanted to stand for office to make things better. I thought, ‘Well, I’ll stand for the Assembly’, as it was then, and now the Senedd, because I thought, ‘What I’ll do is I’ll take my transferable skills that I’ve learnt in my role in the NHS and project them to the people who make the decisions in Cardiff Bay.' That’s what I’ve tried to do so far in my short time that I’ve been here, and represent my home, which is the Vale of Clwyd. It’s always been my home. People say it’s just a constituency, but it’s more than that to me because I’ve always lived in Rhyl, Prestatyn, Denbigh, and I was born in St Asaph, so it’s more than just a constituency to me, and I care deeply about the issues that affect my people, I guess.

A lot of my inbox and things that I deal with on a day-to-day basis are complaints about the performance of the health board and Glan Clwyd Hospital waiting times, patients who have perhaps passed away due to medical negligence, and the failure to build north Denbighshire community hospital in Rhyl after 10 years of broken promises. But all of this—[Interruption.] Yes, certainly.

Since you worked inside the hospital, you must have surely come across people telling you that they were being starved of funds by your Government, the Government that you support. What did you say to those people when you outlined why we haven’t funded things? Did you tell them that it's because it was your Government, the Government that you support, that wasn’t providing sufficient funds so they could have their needs met?

I don’t really accept that, because health has been devolved to Wales for 25 years. You may have noticed that I’m the first-ever Conservative to represent the Vale of Clwyd, and I believe that the sole reason is because I put election leaflets and campaigned, and my number one priority on that campaign was that I’m going to hold the Welsh Government to account over some of the failures at Betsi Cadwaladr. That's what I’ve tried to do so far in my short time in this Senedd Chamber. I believe most of the things that I’ve said in this Chamber so far to the health Minister have always got good evidence behind them and they’re always projections of what constituents tell me on a daily basis. I try to project that to the best of my ability and what I’ve found in this time is that my issues that I’ve tried to bring here at times have been belittled and patronised. I get that you’re a Labour Minister and I’m a Conservative backbencher, and I know the natural political barriers in place with that, but I was elected on those pledges, and it’s my job in this Senedd to represent my constituents. I don’t believe that the health Minister has helped me at all in that process.

Yes, I’ve let my emotions boil over a couple of times in the Senedd; I fully admit that. But the only reason for that was because of the frustration and the passion that I’ve got for representing my home area. I don’t condone that sort of behaviour, but it’s purely on the basis that I don't feel that what I'm being told by constituents is being respectfully dealt with by the Minister. That was exacerbated—I think it was three or four weeks ago—when it was announced that Betsi Cadwaladr was going into special measures again. I got up and I asked a question and the health Minister just laughed at me. For whatever reason, you laughed at me and that is unacceptable. The fact that Betsi Cadwaladr has had so many issues and the Minister sees that as a laughing matter—[Interruption.]

He's not taking interventions.

I'm out of time. I will conclude by saying that I don't believe that the Minister has taken this role seriously so far. I think you will survive the vote, Minister, if my calculations are right, but what I hope for, as maybe a short positive to that, is that you will see this as a message that you need to up your game, basically, and take us on this side of the house seriously. Thank you very much. 

I heard one of the Labour Members referring to this motion proposing to remove a Minister because of failures of delivery as vindictive. Well, if the removal of a Minister for reasons of failure of delivery is vindictive, how would you describe the removal of an entire independent board? I wouldn't use the word 'vindictive', actually, but I would say it is troubling, and I think it should trouble all of us. There are concerns at the heart of what has happened here that, actually, we all of us, collectively, both Government Members and opposition Members, I think, need to address. 

It's certainly the case that the Minister and the Government, having received the auditor general's report—a damning and sobering report—had to do something. Indeed, I'm sure that we would have criticised the Minister had they not taken action. What is extremely perplexing and problematic is that it's a response that, while not wholly uncritical of independent board members, does point to the majority of the failings being on the side of the executive team, but then the Minister decides to leave them in place and sack the entire non-executive membership of the board. It just seems to me to run counter to natural justice to sack the non-executive board in its entirety when it's those board members, as Mark Polin pointed out in his piece today, who had commissioned the external reviews in a range of areas, like urology, vascular services, finance, which had corroborated what they were saying and actually proved that they were in receipt of inaccurate information. [Interruption.] And yet it was—

Are you taking an intervention?

—them who were sacked. Yes, I'll take an intervention.

There was a hole in your argument, which is that the Minister is not entitled to sack the executive board members. That is the problem. That is the job of the health board, to organise their own workforce. 

Your intervention deserves a good response, because that isn't true. The Minister has the power to remove the employee members of the board. Yes, not to terminate their employment, but what is at issue here is their executive leadership role, and the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006, section 27, sets out absolutely clearly that the Minister has the right to remove all members of the board, including employee members of the board. So, I'm afraid that we are being given an incomplete picture by the Minister.

Let me turn to the manner in which the independent members were removed. We've been told in the various accounts that we've heard, none of which have been challenged by the Government, that they were called to an early-morning meeting, they were presented with an ultimatum, essentially, 'Either resign or you will be sacked', and they were given 30 minutes to make their minds up, a very short period of time, with all of the implications for their professional reputations. NHS Wales has signed up to the principles of what they term 'compassionate leadership', and yet here we have an example where the auditor general, in a report published just a few weeks before, had referred to several board members showing

'visible signs of emotional distress, giving us concern about their well-being.'

The auditor general goes on to say:

'Urgent action is needed to address this situation.'

I suggest the urgent action he was not suggesting was that you get those people into a room, you put huge coercive pressure on them, and present them with an ultimatum. That is the absolute opposite of compassionate leadership. It is not the way to behave, quite frankly, and it is not acceptable. It completely lacks empathy. 'My way or the highway'—that is not the way that we should be running public services in Wales.

I'll turn to the special measures regime. It just doesn't work—the entire escalation and intervention framework. Betsi Cadwaladr in special measures for five years, taken out, that doesn't work and it's put back in. It entirely is a system that is failing, and we should actually accept and acknowledge that. 

The First Minister, in response to questions from me a few weeks ago, said that Betsi Cadwaladr was taken out of special measures in November 2020 because the auditor general said that they should do so. Well, my understanding—and I'm quite happy to see the documentary evidence—is that that is not the role of the auditor general. They provide the information and the evidence for Ministers to decide, because it is Ministers, ultimately, that should be accountable.

The Minister for health to contribute to the debate. Eluned Morgan.

Llywydd, it's not an easy job being health Minister after a pandemic when waiting lists went soaring everywhere and Tory austerity left our public services fragile and our older sicker and poorer population were left more desperate than ever. But I'm committed to delivering the best possible health service for the people of Wales, and I'm determined to support our health and care staff, who are under so much pressure as they deliver life-saving and life-changing care and treatment.

I wake up every morning worrying about the man who's been waiting for a hip operation, the woman who needs asthma treatment, the child who needs reconstructive surgery. I work tirelessly with my colleagues to ensure that the Welsh NHS provides high-quality, safe and effective care whenever possible. But chronic underfunding of this precious institution, caused by Tory mismanagement of our public finances, makes this extremely difficult. I'm disappointed that the health service is once again being used as a political football in this Chamber; disappointed at attempts to gain political capital from serious issues involving Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board; disappointed but not surprised that the Tories have chosen to launch this attack on me today, when on the day I put Betsi into special measures I was assured by the Conservatives that they would not be calling for my resignation.

But the timing of this vote today is convenient, isn't it? On the day when the so-called saviour of the Tory party, Boris Johnson, the man they all cheered for, the serial—how shall I say this—fibber, who promised us £350 million a week for the NHS if we voted for Brexit, the man who told us all to stay at home when he partied, denying people the opportunity to say their final goodbyes to their loved ones—[Interruption.] 

If the Tory benches are expecting me to rule at this point whether Boris Johnson is a fibber or not, I'm not intending to do that. I'll just leave that to hang out there, and I'll call on the health Minister to carry on.

Today, he's desperately trying to persuade us that he didn't knowingly mislead MPs over all those lockdown parties at No. 10. This technique, calling for a no-confidence vote, has become a desperate act of distraction by opposition parties incapable of standing up for the people of Wales. You ask for accountability; here I am today, as I am every week. And let me be clear: you won't see the same transparency and accountability in England, where 18 hospital trusts are in the equivalent of special measures, but the UK Government, from what I can tell, never brings a statement to Parliament.

In relation to Betsi, the opposition seems to be blaming us for enacting their demands. We were told, 'We need urgent change at the top.' You called for a fresh start. Well, here it is. Here is the fresh start. Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board was placed back into special measures. The chair and the independent members have been replaced. I took swift and decisive action to address the significant concerns that emerged from a series of independent reports.

But I have to say that the cry of 'toxicity', 'chaos' and 'dysfunction' at the top of an institution is really rich coming from Plaid Cymru after what we hear about their party. The confidence of local people in their health service would be helped enormously if this Chamber came behind our ambition to resolve past problems of the health board in north Wales. And don't take my word for it, for how important a united front will be; a leading nurse in Betsi contacted me recently and said,

'Thank you for standing up for me and my colleagues. The constant focus on the negative and the lack of acknowledgement of the hard work is having a significant effect on staff morale and recruitment'.

So, can we do that? Can we pull together? Can we stand with our workforce in north Wales? They don't want political posturing or empty gestures—they want our support. And I'd like to take this opportunity—

Are you giving way, Minister?

No, I'm not giving way.

I'd like to take this opportunity to address some of the false rhetoric being bandied about by the Conservatives today—that we voted to cut spending on the NHS. Many years ago, yes, we redistributed health funding to social care, and anyone who knows anything about health knows the absolute necessity of considering both these services together.

And I need to put them straight on something else. Our waiting lists here in Wales are coming down while they're going up in England, and the Tories know full well that we count far more conditions than they do in England. These are just some of the claims being peddled by a party with a curious relationship with the truth.

We're trying to address serious challenges in the NHS, but if our budget had kept up with the growth in the economy since 2010, it would have been £2 billion better off next year, some of which could have helped us with the NHS in Wales. I would love to have more surgical hubs, but how am I supposed to pay for them when we're given £1 million in capital this year? We can't work miracles.

This winter has been the most difficult in the history of the NHS, not just in Wales but across the whole of the UK. The system has dealt with extraordinarily high levels of emergency demand, high levels of COVID, flu, and a spike in scarlet fever cases. And yet, despite these intense pressures, our major emergency departments have been doing better on the four-hour target than those in England for four months in a row. And we've reduced the backlog of our longest waiters. We're employing more people than ever in the NHS. Every month, the NHS has 2 million contacts with the Welsh population. For a country with a population of 3 million, that's hardly performing poorly. We managed all this after a decade of Tory austerity and neglect by the UK Government, resulting in widespread industrial actions on pay and conditions. We've worked tirelessly with the health unions to find a resolution to the NHS dispute but, unlike my counterparts in England, I didn't wait until the eleventh hour to start negotiations after introducing a divisive anti-strike Bill, and neither did I have £4 billion tucked down the side of a flipping enormous sofa I could call on to help settle the strikes.

Being Minister for health after a pandemic is very difficult work, particularly when the resources aren't available after years of austerity as a result of the actions of the Conservatives. I have taken decisive action in terms of intervening in Betsi Cadwaladr health board, and I'm not going to follow the Plaid Cymru suggestion to restructure and to hold a public inquiry that will cost millions of pounds, will take years, and won't help a single patient in north Wales to be treated more effectively or more quickly.

I ask myself on a daily basis: can I do this thankless job? My response is: 'I have to, because I'm determined to see our NHS working effectively.'

Every day, I ask myself if I can continue to do this thankless job. But every day, I realise that I've got something to offer, and that is that I care. I want to provide the best possible health and care service for the people of Wales. I want our Welsh NHS to succeed. Llywydd, it's going to be my privilege to remain as health Minister for as long as I have the support and confidence of the First Minister. It's my duty to support the people of Wales, to support the NHS workforce, and I'll do my utmost to fulfil that duty. Diolch. 

I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate. Darren Millar.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I must say, I'm rather disappointed with the way that this debate has gone at times, because we tabled the no-confidence motion today with a very heavy heart, not because of politics but because, frankly, of poor judgment. And we've just seen some examples of that poor judgment being exercised, unfortunately, before our very eyes this afternoon in the tone and the style of response that the health Minister addressed us in.

I have to say, I had high hopes when you were appointed as health Minister by the First Minister. I felt that it would have given us an opportunity for a change of direction in the way that the health service was being run, an opportunity for a reset, particularly in north Wales, and for a fresh approach to the way that things were being operated. But, I'm afraid that those high hopes were very quickly dashed on the rocks. Over the period since May 2021, when you have been appointed, it is a matter of regret that you haven't listened to sensible contributions from all sides of this Chamber, including on your own benches, which we believe would have made a real difference to the quality of life for staff and patients of the health service across Wales.

We still haven't had an apology from the health Minister—I listened carefully to see if I would hear one today—particularly to those people in north Wales who have been badly let down since 2015, at least, when the health board there went into special measures. You are a Minister who has denied that the NHS in Wales is in crisis, when it's blatantly obvious to everybody that it is. 'Crisis' is a word that you've said you will not use in terms of the national health service. Now, if you can't recognise a crisis, then you're never going to solve it, and it's that sort of poor judgment, frankly, that we're concerned about, and that's why we've felt that we have an obligation to table the motion today—

Will you take an intervention?

No, I won't, Joyce. 

That's a shame. [Laughter.]

So, we've had no apology, there's no admission of a crisis, and we've seen poor judgment exercised in your refusal to positively engage with other political parties, and some on your own back benches, to try and resolve situations that we've been confronted with since you have been appointed as health Minister. And we saw the most despicable act, in my view, that we've seen from a health Minister in Wales in the years in which I have been a Member of this Senedd, when you hung out to dry decent people who were working hard as independent members of the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, trying to drive change without your support and without the support of some of your officials—trying to drive change—and yet, they were left as the scapegoats—the scapegoats—for the failings in that health board, when you know and I know, and everybody knows, that the real problem are the senior executives in that health board as an organisation. You've called into question the integrity, frankly, of those independent members, and tried to tarnish their reputations in doing so in the way that their resignations were demanded.

It may be an affront to some on the Labour benches that we are asking you all today to vote in support of our motion of no confidence. And when I say we don't table it lightly, you know the last time that we tabled a motion of no confidence in this Senedd was 11 years ago. That's the last time we tabled a motion of no confidence in this Senedd—11 years ago. That's the last time we did it, because we don't take it lightly; this is not a game. We're not playing politics. We're not playing politics. What we're trying to do is get better services and put someone in charge who holds themselves to account for the responsibilities that they hold when they have their hands on the levers of power when it comes to our national health service. You have failed to listen, I'm afraid, and you've tried to blame everybody else other than accepting some of your own responsibility.

I've heard the comments about finances, by the way, I just don't accept them. For every £1 spent on the NHS in England, Wales receives £1.20—[Interruption.] You're quite right: we need a needs-based formula. The last time that a needs-based formula was considered by an independent commission in Wales, the Holtham commission, they said that that fee should be £1.15 for every £1 spent in England. So, we're actually getting proportionately more.

So, what would we do differently? What have we called on you to do differently under your tenure that you haven't? Well, we would certainly have removed those executives from the board. You do have the powers, as has already been pointed out today, to remove any employee from the board of a national health service organisation in Wales. You didn't use those powers, even though you have them. We've called on you a number of times to establish a NHS leadership register, requiring everybody who's in a senior leadership position in the national health service to be registered with that in order to work in the NHS, in the same way that clinicians and nurses are required; you refused to do so. We asked you to put Betsi not into the same special measures as before, which is effectively what we've got, but a set of reformed special measures to try and turn the organisation around. You didn't listen to us and then ended up, months later, putting it into special measures. We asked you as well—and have made this point on a number of occasions—to split the role of chief executive of the NHS from that of director general of the Department for Health and Social Care, because we believe that that would also drive some better accountability into the system, but you haven't listened to us.

And when we've got a Minister who won't listen, who won't accept responsibility, who tries to body-swerve around every single person who comes to her and says, 'Well, aren't you responsible?' then, I'm afraid your time's up and it is time to go. And so, for that reason, for this lack of accountability in our health service, for your failures to listen, for your failures to positively engage, for your poor judgment during your tenure, I'm afraid time's up. The buck stops with you and I'm afraid you must go. And I heard what you said about while you have the confidence of the First Minister—what about the other 3 million-odd people out there in the country? What about their confidence? Because I'm afraid that if you come with me to north Wales to meet my constituents—and I would invite anybody to do so—you will find many people who have lost loved ones, who have experienced terrible trauma and pain as a result of the failings in our NHS. And if you would care to speak to them, you'll realise that you don't have their confidence either. I urge people to support our motion.

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

We move now to item 7, the Plaid Cymru debate on the bus emergency scheme, and I call on Delyth Jewell to move the motion.

I believe it was Gustavo Petro who said that the way to identify a developed country is not by finding a place where the poor have cars, but finding a place where the wealthy use public transport. And that is the crux of our debate this afternoon, in a way. It isn't just a debate raising urgent questions about funding public transport; it also raises related questions—fundamental questions about the level of respect that our society shows public transport. We as a nation are on a journey towards net zero by 2035. We need to be on that journey, but we can only cross that bridge if the use of public transport becomes the norm in our daily lives. So, that's the context in which we have to place our debate this afternoon.

But, to turn to the specific points in our motion, Llywydd, because we couldn't have this wider discussion without the bus industry existing, and this about the existence and survival of this industry. Our motion focuses on the need for certainty for the industry in Wales—certainty that will be particularly important for small operators, those without reserves, the family-run operators, and those on which their communities depend. We're asking for certainty about how much additional funding will be available to assist the industry, and for how long any additional funding will be provided. Our motion calls on the Government to extend the emergency scheme for at least 18 months, because there isn’t a great deal of certainty at the moment, and the providers cannot plan further ahead than the month we’re currently in. Since we heard that the future of the emergency scheme, the BES, was under threat, at the time of the budget, an extension of just three months has been offered. Now, of course, that extension is to be welcomed, but the time provided isn't sufficient to provide the certainty that is needed. Now, of course, we do need a debate on a sustainable future for the industry, an assurance that funding won’t merely be considered as an emergency measure, and our motion refers to those needs too. But it’s the current situation that is the cause of greatest concern.

As many of us who have heard directly from the bus industry in our areas will know, this exceptionally short period of time—three months—is not sufficient to enable bus operators to sustain their services in the long term. And the danger, of course, is that providers will decide to discontinue those routes that aren’t commercially viable, despite these being routes that many residents are dependent on to live full lives—to attend college, the workplace, or hospital appointments, or to see family and friends. 

And this is the thing, Llywydd: this isn’t just a debate about saving the bus industry. It is a debate that focuses on the need to safeguard and guarantee the way of life for many people in Wales. Almost 80 per cent of journeys by public transport are made using buses. The future of our bus services is a matter of social justice. This isn’t an academic debate about structures, funding and infrastructure, but an urgent debate about delivering fairness for our communities.

Would you like to give way on that point?

Yes, certainly. Oh, my gosh—who first? Huw. Huw, yes.

Diolch, Delyth. I have a lot of sympathy with your argument, because this is about social justice and environmental justice and so on. The challenge we have, however, is that there was nothing—nothing, not a penny—within the budget just announced about any uplift in bus services. The England bus grant has gone already. We've seen the effects of it. At least what we have here is a short-term thing. So, I guess my question to you is this: where will that money come from for an 18-month extension, and how much will it be?  

Thanks for that, Huw. In terms of—. Well, this is why we've got this almost two different perspectives—well, not two different perspectives, but two different—. The immediate and then the more fundamental questions happening at the same time. In terms of the immediate, we're asking evidently for the Government to look again at not just the transport budget that's given over to buses. The Deputy Minister has been honest with the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee in the past about how so much more, proportionally, of the transport budget is given over to trains. I appreciate the fact that these projects for trains are very expensive, but, at the moment, because of just how skewed actual passenger numbers are in favour of buses and those journeys at the moment, I think that does need to be looked at. 

But I think we also need to be having a much more fundamental conversation about how we learn from places like London, where they seem to be getting this. It's not often that I'll say we need to be learning from London, but I think, in this, we do need to look at how the balance works. I'm not pretending that this is an easy thing, but, really, I'm worried about the effect this will have on our communities unless something radical is done. 

Rhun, you also wanted to intervene. 

Just very briefly. On that very point, we are acting for the benefit of our communities here. I have a letter from the O.R. Jones company from Anglesey. Yes, they are calling for an extension of this funding, and for a longer-term investment in bus services, they're concerned about the jobs that would be lost if that didn't happen, but, at heart, they are concerned about the impact on communities. Does the Member agree that the bus companies themselves are truly worried about the communities that they serve? 

Yes, and I think that that—. I think both of you perhaps would want to see the same thing here, and the bus operators, particularly those small operators, the family-owned operators, they see that passengers are at the heart of this industry, and that's why I say that it's not just a discussion that's an academic one about structures; it's about maintaining people's ways of life. And I think we need to look again at our trends as a society, our attitudes towards public transport, and that dovetails with what Huw has asked for as well. But thank you for both of those interventions.

Now, the large-scale cancellation of services, as we’ve just heard, particularly those services that aren’t commercially viable, will leave communities across Wales isolated. That’s what we’re really concerned about here. It will leave people isolated, particularly in parts of the Valleys or in rural areas, places where people don’t have as many options in terms of different ways of getting from A to B. The point has been made previously that buses aren’t just vehicles; they're a lifeline for people and they bring our communities together. This is a wider question, which goes beyond transport alone.

Research by First Bus suggests that people choose buses for a number of different reasons, including awareness of the environmental crisis and the impact of the cost-of-living crisis. Thirty-six per cent use buses to save money, and a similar percentage feel that travelling by bus is beneficial to their mental health. And there is an appetite for even more. A recent YouGov survey found that 90 per cent of the population of these islands want to live within a 15-minute walk of a bus stop.

Now, buses do have the potential to play an even more prominent role in our daily lives, as we’ve just been discussing with Huw and with Rhun. But, without financial security for the industry in the long term, the impacts will be felt by the workforce, there will be impacts on education provision and, of course, in terms of how polluted the air that surrounds us is, because more people will opt to use their cars. And that will be a failure—not only a failure of policy, but a moral failure on the part of all of us. 

As I've said, travellers are at the heart of the bus industry, and how we do this in Wales. And of course the network isn’t perfect—the Government must have in-depth discussions with local government, with passenger groups, with TfW and other partners about the future of the current franchising model to ensure that the voice of our smallest operators is heard, and that the voice of the travellers and passengers is heard.

I'll conclude, Llywydd, with a list of questions for the Government. If the emergency funding scheme comes to an end in June, what additional support will be available to sustain those routes that aren’t commercially viable? Is sufficient funding available through the BES—or different sources of funding, as Huw perhaps was referring to—to create a new funding mechanism that is more sustainable? And does the Government believe that a deadline of the end of June gives the industry, local government and others—all of the partners—enough time to plan for the future? Because that’s the challenge.

I’m sorry, Mabon, that I’ve gone over time and you’ll have less time to respond to the debate, I’m afraid. But I do look forward to hearing the rest of the debate. Thank you.

I have selected the amendment to the motion and I call on the Deputy Minister for Climate Change to formally move.

Formally.

Diolch. Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you very much. We are in a very difficult situation here, and I think it’s absolutely right that we do debate this issue, so I thank Plaid for that. This is going to be a much more fruitful debate than the one we’ve just concluded.

The Welsh Government has put over £150 million of subsidy into the bus industry since the pandemic, and there’s absolutely no doubt that the numbers of people who used to use the bus services still haven’t come back to the buses. Even in Cardiff, where there has been a better than average return, it’s still only 75 per cent to 80 per cent of the people using the buses who used them pre pandemic. So, some people have completely changed the way they operate in their lives, either because they’re too scared to come out for a variety of reasons, or because they’ve either bought a bike—unlikely; we’d like to hope so—or they’ve got a private car. Of course, this is absolutely the wrong direction to the one we want people to go in, particularly as many people try and operate a private car when they actually don’t have the money to do it; they are living in transport poverty.

I absolutely congratulate the Deputy Minister for the heroic things he’s been trying to do to keep the bus services going, because we are facing a real cliff edge of crisis on this one. But we’ve heard yesterday that there’s only £1 million in capital in the budget from the UK Government for everything, for all the services and things that we have to fund. So, there is no more money at the moment, and how we're going to manage to get through this and still have the bus services that we need to make the transition away from the private motor car—it's really, really difficult to see how we're going to do that.

We are absolutely between a rock and a hard place, because most of the buses that are being used are using petrol and diesel, ergo the price of these fuels has gone up exponentially. Very few local authorities have actually managed to get the grants to electrify their buses. I know that Cardiff and Newport have been able to be successful in doing so. Other local authorities either haven't applied or have been turned down, and I can't say which that is, but, clearly, that's a very good question.

We have no central direction of where our buses go. Private companies will cherry-pick the routes that they want to go on in order to maximise the amount of money that they can make out of x or y. That means that they are undermining the viability of public sector bus services, which were in a position to cross-subsidise, if you like, the better used services with those that were socially important but not very well used.

We've had years and years of under-investment in rail, which makes it seriously difficult for us to develop the sort of amazing integrated public transport system that London has. But that is because we have a system of Government that's completely unfair. London and the south-east have had way more money invested in public transport than we have had in Wales. At the moment, we have a Government that is providing us with a fiction that, somehow, HS2, which runs between Old Oak Common and Birmingham, is benefiting Wales. I invite you to look at the geography.

So, until we get a change of Government with a little bit more sanity in the arrangements around fair funding, we have the following situation: we have a private company who operate the C8 from St Mary's Street in the centre of Cardiff, and they've suddenly announced that it's not going to run after 4 April. This is important to you guys, because people who provide the services to us in the Senedd, some of them have to start at 7 o'clock in the morning. After that bus is withdrawn, they have no way of getting here by 7 o'clock in the morning, because there is no other bus service. Unless they're suddenly, after 40 years, going to acquire a bike, they are simply not going to be able to. Their rotas are going to have to change to accommodate whatever still exists of bus services. 

Equally, the other huge, massive issue in my constituency is the cost of school transport. Children are not attending school because even those on free school meals are having to pay £400 for the privilege of going to school if they live too far away to realistically walk, and we simply don't yet have the alternatives of active travel, because most secondary school students should be able to travel by bike. So, we have a really difficult situation, and I don't know how we're going to resolve this one and I'm interested to know who has got the solutions.

I think it's clear that we all want to ensure that we have a good public transport network here in Wales. I don't doubt that the Deputy Minister will deny this, even though we know that he prefers to use his private car, to the tune of 12,000 miles over the last four years. But, sadly, we're facing a public transport crisis. From the messaging the Welsh Government has given us during the pandemic, which has scared the public away from using the vital service, to the lack of funding that it's getting to recover from COVID-19, what we see is a Welsh Government failing to incentivise local bus use.

Across the Chamber, Minister, it's clear that we are regularly seeing the Minister actually say something and mean something else. The front line is a totally different story from the picture that we often have painted here of the Welsh public transport network, including the collapsed roads review here, where often the Deputy Minister tells the Welsh public not to drive on roads and to rely on public services, and yet the Government has utterly failed to invest in buses or the public transport network right here in Wales. [Interruption.] Local bus use is now approximately 75 to 80 per cent of pre-pandemic levels, and these aren't scheduled to rise until around about 2030. And I'm not saying it— 

Are you giving way? 

—this comes from the Confederation of Passenger Transport. 

No.

Deputy Minister, this is your problem to solve, and you haven't been seeming to solve it. Yes, it's really welcome that the Welsh Government is providing extra emergency funding for bus services, but it seems that this was a panicked response—just another short-term reply to a long-term issue. And this is despite the Deputy Minister warning that there was no cash to help last month.

I also listened carefully to the First Minister's response about the subject just the other week, and I felt like, again, it was something he may not have run past the Deputy Minister, much like Labour's vote against the roads review a few weeks ago. Distances covered by buses in Wales have fallen significantly over the last 10 years, and, yes, this includes years that are under the Deputy Minister's watch. He may sit here, he may shake his head, going forward, pull faces at me and remain in denial, but it's your responsibility, Deputy Minister, no-one else's. While we saw 123 million km travelled by buses in 2010, this halved to 64.2 million km in 2021. What are you going to do about this shameful decline, Deputy Minister, going forward? For many users of bus services, reliability and punctuality are top priorities—

Will you take an intervention?

No. You don't want to use public transport just to turn up late for work or to get up at some extremely early hour for your commute.

In my own region of south-east Wales, more than one in 10 bus journeys are not on time according to bus users, and this will no doubt increase with the roll-out of the 20 mph speed limits. As a result of these shameful figures, are we seeing huge investments in the bus service network? No, not anything. Instead, the Welsh Government believes the solution will be to make buses public again. But do we trust the Welsh Government to be up to the job? Not on this side of the Chamber, sadly. We've seen the botch job you've done over the NHS, the economy, so what's going to be different about bus services, going forward?

It's also laughable about the 20 mph speed limits that are going to be costing around about £30 million when that money could be invested into public transport. As ever, you seem to preside over a shocking waste of money on an issue that no-one is in favour of.

You're also about the decarbonisation of transport, and yet, the figures tell a different story. What's new here? Electric buses were introduced with great fanfare by the Deputy Minister in Carmarthen, but we're still here waiting for a Government-funded scheme on this, unlike Scotland and England, whose councils and operators have enjoyed assistance with the costs of green vehicles and infrastructure. Just two local authorities in Wales, as my colleague mentioned, Cardiff and Newport, have made great strides in this area, and while we see plans for extra buses that meet your own Government's criteria, we don't see any tangible support.

So, it is my pleasure to support Plaid Cymru's motion today. There are many things wrong with the Deputy Minister's stance on public transport. On the one hand, he tells us he's obviously going to be increasing our use of public transport, and on the other hand, he's putting roadblocks in our way. Thank you, Presiding Officer.

Getting bus services right is something that will be transformative for Wales, and, certainly, in terms of the long term, I know that the Deputy Minister shares the passion that many of us have to ensure that we have a bus network that works for Wales. That will take time, it needs investment, but what we are talking about at this point in time are the services that people in our communities currently use and rely on, and the risk to the future of that service. That's why we're putting forward this debate, because of representations by those directly affected by proposed cuts to services.

Looking at census data, which is really interesting, when you drill down in terms of car ownership, you get a picture of those isolated communities, where car ownership—. You know, it's not something that people just like to use every now and then. There are no other options. They're not close to train stations; bus travel is the only travel. Car ownership rates in the region that I represent vary greatly. If you look at the Vale of Glamorgan, very high car ownership in many places; Cardiff is variable. You'd expect the city centre itself, about 90 per cent in some wards have no cars, but, obviously, that's very much in the city centre—no surprise.

But you look at communities like Glyncoch, just outside of Pontypridd, where there hasn't been a decision to extend the metro line, despite local calls in terms of the halt there, but car ownership's amongst the lowest in Wales. For people there, what it means when they don't have a bus service or buses are less frequent or don't show up, which is a huge problem currently, because of the shortage of bus drivers, is missed hospital or doctor appointments; late to school or college; late to work, or not getting to work; fewer wages; losing employment; late collecting children from school; waiting in the rain only for no bus to come; feeling isolated, disconnected, restricted to their homes; unable to be independent.

For children, buses provide absolutely essential access to education, but also to breakfast clubs, after-school clubs and extra-curricular activities. Buses allow their parents to live their lives too. But we are seeing, increasingly so, that people are missing out on school, as illustrated by Jenny Rathbone, because of not being able to afford transport if they fall outside of that bracket in terms of getting free school transport, or simply that bus services are not there.

So, if you look at some of the investment going into trains at the moment, it was mentioned earlier in terms of the Treherbert line, which is also in my region. If you see the responses from local people to the announcement in terms of the scheme that will close the railway for at least eight months—a significant amount of time—well, for many people who are along that train line, they know the bus services are either non-existent and are hugely concerned because they also have seen when bus replacement services are used, demand has risen in other buses, because people know the bus replacement schemes have not been working. In theory, they're supposed to work, but that's not been the reality, because people have been waiting maybe an hour, an hour and a half, to try and get on that bus replacement, and then the journey taking so much longer than what is said on paper.

So, we've seen an increase in demand, then, for local buses, on many of the services that are at risk, unless the scheme is extended. So, we really are talking about ensuring equity of access. I know that many of us see, in terms of our response to the climate emergency, that we need to encourage people to try and transition from cars to using public transport. But that's not to accept the reality for the majority of people in many of those communities, where they use buses daily.

Another issue that has been raised with me in terms of South Wales Central is that many machines have been broken on buses, and they can be very expensive to replace, and it often takes weeks for the machines to arrive, if they are able to get them from Europe. That means we don't have an accurate picture of some bus routes in terms of passenger numbers, and I wonder if this is something that had also been raised with the Deputy Minister, because we do talk about not having the numbers for some routes, but actually, there isn't an accurate picture for some bus routes that are crucial in terms of connecting areas like Pontypridd to other parts of RCT.

I am glad that we have been able, through the co-operation agreement, to agree on some key priority areas where we would like to see greater investment, and this is one of them, but I think crucially, we must think about all the ways we can address the immediate issues here, and what we're asking is for an extension, so that we can secure the services that people currently rely on for the reasons outlined, whilst we work on long-term solutions. Diolch.

Can I just begin by thanking Plaid Cymru for bringing this debate, as Jenny indeed did, and also to agree with many of the comments that have been made, both by Delyth in her introductory remarks, and also by Heledd? They stressed very much that this is a matter of social and environmental justice, or if you want to put that into layperson's terms, it's the individual at the top of the Garw valley who works in a social care job, who needs to get there for a late evening shift and then get back very early morning to their family and get into bed, so that they can get back to the next shift. So, I agree with all of that.

The questions that they put are the right questions. The problem is—looking to the Minister—I'm not sure we have heard the answers. Because the question that I put to Delyth, and it's a genuine question—and I held back from intervening, asking you exactly the same, Delyth—is to recognise that the emergency fund has already been withdrawn in England and we've seen already the impact there on services in England. It was a pity that I couldn't actually intervene on the Conservative speaker to ask that, as she wasn't taking interventions. I welcome interventions, by the way, if anybody would want to.

The problem is there was no uplift whatsoever in terms of bus services or transport within the provision of the budget that we just heard. There should have been. There should have been, absolutely, to absolutely give us a longer transition, so we could have these discussions, but there was none. So then, 18 months, the question is: how much additional will fall on Welsh Government to do it, and where do Plaid Cymru believe that should come from? Because that is the real hard choice. So, I agree with the questions you posed. The answers are not, unfortunately, that straightforward.

It is undoubtedly true—as anybody who's been involved with the bus operators over the last two and three years in tense discussions, as I have been in Rhondda Cynon Taf and Bridgend with First Cymru and with other providers, as we've seen services go, by the way—but none of those services would be there, frankly, at this moment, unless that £150 million of additional support had been put in by Welsh Government. That's a simple fact. They would have gone to the wall. There would have been none of those people, even with the reduced service, accessing their jobs, accessing their surgery appointments, being able to socialise, to deal with the issues of isolation we often talk about in this Chamber. It has kept it going, and it's welcome and it isn't reflected, curiously, in the Plaid Cymru motion. It was reflected in Delyth's comments, but not in the motion, that, actually, Welsh Government has gone further and has extended it to have those further conversations. [Interruption.]

I will indeed give way to the Member, although noting that she didn't want to enter into a debate earlier, but I am happy to enter into a debate.

Thank you very much for the intervention opportunity. I don't like to intervene, purely because I want to give everyone the opportunity to speak. That's why I didn't accept the intervention myself—that's the only reason why. It's my own personal preference, Presiding Officer. That's absolutely fine; that's my personal preference. I'm entitled to have it, as are you—

Yes, yes, carry on with your intervention on the subject.

But coming back to the point, you wanted to ask me the question about the funding for this. Now, I'm fortunate enough, and I've said this on many occasions. You speak about £150 million, but I'll tell you exactly where you could have saved £155 million: if this Government, the Welsh Labour Government, had bothered to pick up the phone and call Westminster just to clarify where they could have spent the extra £155 million they were given by Westminster in the first place, you wouldn't have lost that money back to Westminster, which was here for the people of Wales, but didn't make its way there. So, thank you very much.

I think I've heard the intervention now, Llywydd. It was a long intervention. Maybe the Member wasn't here yesterday in the debate that we had in First Minister's questions, where the hard reality is that, at this moment, in real terms, we are £900 million down—£900 million down—and in terms of actually developing a new fleet of electric buses and so on, we've been given £1 million uplift. This is scandalous. So, I thank you for the intervention because it shows the paucity of the Conservative argument in terms of supporting public transport. 

I have to say—I know I don't look this old, Llywydd—but I recently had my bus pass through—

No. [Laughter.]

Thank you. [Laughter.] I genuinely feel more like a citizen of Wales because of that universal provision, but the challenge the Minister has is to work over the next few months—and he is working hard with those bus operators and with local authorities—to actually use this very short breathing period to find a way forward that is sustainable. I don't envy him his task in that. 

Let me just make a couple of points, because we did have a long intervention, with your discretion, Llywydd. Long term, we do have to get on with reversing this disastrous deregulation, because at least then we can have the democratic argument with people who have a stake directly in deciding where services go. Long term, we have to do that.

Long term, we have to find a more sustainable funding package as well. But do you know also what we need to do? Use the buses. Because there's the biggest challenge of all, and it's not just for the public out there, because if you demand a public service and buses that are only for poor people to use, you will end up with a poor service. It's for all of us—every one of us, myself included with my bus pass—to get on those buses now and use them, because that's the way you deliver a very secure future for buses—not just trains, but buses—is if every one of us actually gets on them as well, otherwise, if we don't use it, we will lose it.

In the Swansea valley where I live, there are no trains—none. The same is true for the neighbouring Dulais valley, the Neath valley and the Afan valley. And although there are some great cycle paths, the geography and terrain of these valleys make active travel more challenging than in other urban areas of Wales. They are areas that are completely dependent on buses for public transport. And I want to make this point crystal clear, because this debate is sometimes framed around rural populations versus urban or the use of rail transport versus bus.

And another factor I also want to throw into the mix, as Heledd Fychan did here, is car ownership, or rather the lack of. Buses serve those without cars, and the Valleys communities I represent in South Wales West have below-national-average levels of car ownership. Buying and running a car is simply unaffordable and so, the bus is the only choice—the only way many people of all ages can access work, education, healthcare, shops, leisure and social activities. So, if you live in these areas and do not own a car, the way you can get around is already limited. And the number of complaints I receive about cuts to already skeleton services is huge, and I'd like to share some of them with you, because the voices of these people, as many Members have said, rightfully belong in this debate.

One 37-year-old woman told me that she relies completely on bus services. She used to use the bus to go to work every day: one bus from her village in the Neath valley into Neath and then one from Neath to her place of work just outside Port Talbot. But frequent delays resulted in her missing her connection, getting to work late. She no longer works there. Recent bus cuts and reduced Valleys services have meant that if she'd still been employed there, a journey that already took over an hour would now take even longer, if the bus turns up at all. As she is currently seeking employment, she says she has to take current levels of service into account when considering opportunities, which limits the jobs she can apply for.

Another woman, whose health is deteriorating, uses a car at the moment, but worries it won't be long until she can no longer drive, and she says she's really worried about getting old in her community. A woman who lives in Godre'r Graig told me service is already poor. She feels she's going to be completely cut off if there are any further reductions to services. She's really concerned for her son, who is due to start Neath college in September. Loss of service would mean that he would not be able to attend. Her sister works in Morriston Hospital. She doesn't drive, and regular and reliable bus services are vital for her employment.

And it's not just the Valleys communities in South Wales West. Dyffryn Clydach is a community in Neath, but it's on a long, steep hill—very long. Many residents have told me there they feel completely cut off on the weekend because there's no bus on a Saturday, and they can't even get into Neath town centre, therefore, to go shopping or meet people because of the lack of buses. 

But if buses are a lifeline, then the cost of a ticket is also often a barrier, and I think this is also something we must consider. A mother from Neath says she struggles with the cost of the fare if she has to go and pick up her child from school if she's sick or has a practice after school.

So, the absolute state of bus services in areas like mine is nothing new. South Wales West is predominantly served by First Cymru, with a number of routes served by South Wales Transport, Adventure Travel and Stagecoach. While a lot of the services between the main urban areas of Bridgend, Port Talbot, Neath and Swansea are run on commercial grounds and are well used, many of the Valleys areas, as I've outlined, have a lesser service. And in the Swansea and Amman valleys in particular, services are extremely patchy and infrequent. A 15-minute journey in a car can take well over an hour by bus, and sometimes even more. And, as I've said, many places have no weekend services, or very limited weekend services. And the availability of bus in the evenings can result in people not being able to attend events that go beyond 6 p.m. or get home, as Huw mentioned, after shift work. Any cuts to bus services will exacerbate these difficulties, limiting the mobility of even more people. 

In the summer holidays of 2021, Swansea Council launched their free bus initiative. Since that initial trial, it has been repeated many times during school holidays. In correspondence with the council, asking if they'd evaluated this and the impact of it, I was told that anecdotal evidence from a customer survey undertaken in December last year indicated that 25 per cent of people who've used the scheme would not otherwise have travelled. While it is clear the scheme proved popular and saved people money at the times it ran, Swansea Council stated that the nature of the initiative has made it difficult to assess longer term impacts. With similar schemes being pursued or explored in other parts of the country, what efforts is the Government taking, in conjunction with service operators and local authorities, to monitor and analyse the longer term impact of these schemes on passenger numbers? Given that one of the problems facing the bus sector is reduced passenger numbers, should we not be looking at the impact interventions like this can have on the number of people using buses, and exploring ways they can be scaled up if they prove to be successful in encouraging modal shift?

Meanwhile, people like those who live in Cwmtawe, Cwmnedd, Cwmdulais and Cwmafan are feeling forgotten about, devalued and anxious. They don't understand why there are shiny new buses and trains in some areas, constant talk of a greener, cleaner Wales in this place, when the communities they are living in are being left behind. Llywydd, a solution must be found, and I really want to hear what action the Government can take to address this, because they need to address this. 

Thank you, Plaid Cymru, for this debate today. I will support the unamended motion, which rightly notes the serious concern that we are facing in Wales, with mass cancellations of transport services leaving communities across Wales feeling very isolated. That public transport crisis has already hit us in Aberconwy, and we, my constituents, have been left without the means to get to work, schools, university, the doctor, to buy food, et cetera, et cetera, and at very short notice. And, I've got to be honest, I don't like pointing fingers, but I do lay this blame at your table, Lee Waters, because you've had every opportunity to deal with this urgent issue and you've just completely ignored everybody.

Will you give way?

Yes, of course.

I wonder if you could tell me how the UK Government—sorry, the England Government—has dealt with this, with the cancellation of the emergency bus scheme and the 10 per cent drop now in services being provided immediately?

Right. As a colleague here, we are elected as Members of the Welsh Parliament, Senedd Cymru, here, so my concern is—. I would imagine that MPs over in England will be holding to account, if they need to, the UK Government, but it's my job to scrutinise this Government and Lee Waters in particular.

Now then, I do remain disappointed, Deputy Minister, that, alongside Transport for Wales, Gwynedd Council—Plaid Cymru—Conwy County Borough Council, you allowed the T19 between Blaenau Ffestiniog and Llandudno to be terminated at such short notice. Three weeks—three weeks—have passed since your Transport for Wales officials made a promise, in my virtual meeting of stakeholders, to look into the Conwy valley Fflecsi service and the 19X as potential solutions. These bus operators have come forward with solutions just to be ignored. It's shocking. To quote a bus company in Aberconwy, 'TfW lacks communication, correspondence and expertise in the marketplace. From the tracks to tarmac, TfW are seriously overwhelmed.' Those are their words, not mine. This is affecting the most vulnerable in society, and TfW know it. They themselves have said that 13 per cent of Welsh households do not have access to a car. Twenty-five per cent of bus users have a disability or long-term illness. And Sustrans Cymru—you'll remember Sustrans Cymru, Lee—has reported that transport poverty is a widespread experience here in Wales. Plaid Cymru's thrust is about the bus emergency scheme, and I support that—yes, of course I do—but that isn't enough. I have no objection to extending BES funding for at least 18 months, but, let's be clear, such action would not provide longer term financial security to bus operators across Wales. To quote a stakeholder, 'The BES scheme is a financial sticking plaster, designed to make good losses for businesses that are doing little, if anything, to actually attract customers back on board'.

Now, I know it's rather like a post office with buses. If you don't use it, you're going to lose it, and I don't think you get that message out enough. It's usually far too late and people are left feeling stranded and isolated. Local bus use is only approximately 75 per cent to 80 per cent of pre-pandemic levels, so tell me today what is the Welsh Government doing about that? We need a major campaign involving Welsh Government, TfW, local authorities and every single operator to market services, not just to get bottoms on bus seats, but to convince the public that using public transport is the best way to access places for retail, social and work. BES should be reliant on an ability to prove growth, investment, improvement in the quality of service and major marketing. However, bus operators I have spoken to have warned of a massive problem only a few stops away, and that is this idea of franchising. One bus company has written to me, and I quote, 'We have zero understanding of what franchising means to the sector'—[Interruption.] Do you want to intervene? [Interruption.] All right.

'Being completely in the dark means that we cannot plan or invest in our businesses or in maintaining critical services'. Now, as someone who emerges from the private sector myself, the number of people in the private sector who are in dismay at the lack of business acumen that your department holds—. Even more worrying is that there is concern in the sector that even you, Deputy Minister, and TfW, don't know either. Individuals working in the sector have suggested to me that the implementation of a London-style—come on, Plaid Cymru, you won't like this—a London-style franchise model across Wales will cost at least £300 million a year. No surprise, then, that the sector is rightly calling for a clear explanation as to why you think franchising is considerably viable. [Interruption.] I did take an intervention.

Across the bus and coach industry, there is huge scepticism as to whether Welsh Government and TfW are actually capable of designing, contracting and managing a pan-Wales franchise framework. Llywydd, we need to hear from the Deputy Minister today not only how he will support bus companies in the short term, but assurance that the longer term plan of franchising is even affordable and deliverable. You don't need me to remind you just how the Welsh Government have handled the actual ownership of an airport. Diolch, Llywydd.

Most of us here will know someone who is entirely dependent on buses to get around—be they members of our families or constituents, people need buses to get to work, to go to the shops, to attend school and medical appointments, or to access leisure opportunities. It is certainly true of my region—communities that are underserved by the rail network, for example—that people are dependent on buses to live their lives, and to live them well. As has already been mentioned, access to bus services is just as much a matter of social justice as it is a matter related to climate change, but, on top of this, it is a matter of vital economic importance. It affects people’s ability to access employment opportunities and the kinds of opportunities that people can reach, but it also dictates what services are available to people. With the increase in online shopping and the slow decline of our high streets, buses are going to be crucial to enable customers to support businesses in town centres.

I and colleagues have brought this matter up time and time again. Communities in my region are underserved when it comes to public transport. It doesn't help that there's a lack of investment in rail from the UK Government, for example. If we look at Ogmore, the vast majority of the constituency isn't covered by rail. And this isn't a unique characteristic of Ogmore; this is something that is seen across Wales. As I’ve said before, valleys in my region are solely reliant on bus services for public transport—from the Ogmore valleys to the Neath valleys and to the Swansea valleys. A lot of these areas are reliant on these services and, despite this, services are under constant threat of being cut or being altered because they are no longer profitable.

Now, the reality is that so long as bus services are in the hands of companies that are driven by profit, they will never be driven by the needs of our communities. That's the bottom line. Another failure of Thatcherite policy and one we need to grapple with. We know that, where services are needed, largely in low-income communities, they are pretty much non-existent and of poor quality, but where people can afford to pay more for these services, then the quality of the service is great. Huw has made the point already—and both Huw and I often bump into each other on public transport—but we do need to prioritise its use. We need to encourage others to use it. We are on the verge of simply making this problem worse, and, ultimately, if we want to realise a vision of a green Wales where public transport is the primary mode of transport, we need to get buses right, and we need to encourage their use above all else. That means publicly owned, that means community involvement in mapping routes—power anywhere where there's people.

I'm also glad to hear school transport being raised, an issue that we desperately need to resolve. The rain we've had over the past few days, and kids have been walking in that rain, over an hour, getting to school soaking wet. On school transport, I would appreciate clarity on two points. First, does the Welsh Government have a role here? Depending on who you ask, you get different responses. Secondly, typically, how are contracts paid for? Are they by route or are they by child? We have examples of half-empty buses passing kids, for example, and we have examples of buses stopping on streets with some kids on that street able to access the bus and others not because of a sibling rule, which I know is in use in Bridgend; it could be in use in other local authorities. They cannot access the service, fundamentally, and parents are desperate to see their kids arrive at school safely and dry, and I would hope for some clarity on that issue from the Minister.

Thank you to Plaid Cymru for this motion. I'm going to be supporting the motion unamended.

Just let me tell you a little story about door-knocking in a village called Llangynog, which is just south of Llanwddyn, near lake Vyrnwy. I came across a lady who told me about the bus service that she took every week with her friends, run by Tanat Valley Coaches, based in Llanrhaeadr-ym-Mochnant. Once every Tuesday, the bus would pick them all up at about 11 a.m. They would go to Oswestry, actually—in England, I'm afraid—to have their hair done, to do their shopping and to have a cup of coffee, and they would come back. That was the only bus service, once a week. But, to go back to Delyth's point, it was so important for that community. It was run by Tanat Valley Coaches, who I actually visited as well. Tanat Valley were a service that offered bus services to schools as well, and, actually, they told me that they made a loss, but they felt it was so important that they continued with this community resource. I do praise them and support them for that. We know that, for those rural communities—. Many of us represent them and we've heard from many Members here how vital they are. The bus emergency scheme was so vital to them as well to protect those services, and we're now facing a cliff edge around funding. I totally agree with everything that's been said about deregulation as well, but, in rural areas, we do need a solution. I agree with the Minister that long-term funding is needed. It would be devastating for our communities to lose the bus emergency scheme in its current form. It has been a lifeline. Graham Vidler of the Confederation of Passenger Transport has said that some communities in rural west Wales would be cut off altogether. We need to ensure that important routes linking communities to services, as you've heard, in rural locations, like local hospitals and schools, don't see a significant reduction in services. 

Rural areas need certainty, and our communities need investment. We all want to promote a sustainable economy in our rural areas, but it does depend on decent public transport links, and turning around the long-term decline in bus use. I do pick up Huw Irranca-Davies's point as well: we do need to use them, or we will lose them. I look forward to the roll-out of the Fflecsi bus service, which has been piloted. I've been very impressed with that, having seen it in Pembrokeshire, so I do look forward to hearing more about that.

We know we cannot achieve net zero without increasing bus use. The effect of the cliff edge now means that the bus industry could face catastrophe for passengers and for the industry, and it does undermine the Government's commitment to environmental aims. Wales already has the highest rate of car commuting of any nation in the UK, and we need to ensure that we look at the language of climate emergency through that lens. I do applaud the roads review. I think I was probably the only Member here who supported the roads review without any conditions at all. So, I thank you for that, and we need to move forward on that; that is really important.

I've long advocated as well the introduction of free bus travel for all under-25s. It would have a transformational effect on the lives of many young people, again, particularly in those rural areas. I hope that the Minister will match his ambitions with action. We need to give bus operators the certainty they need to deliver the services that we need for sustainable growth in the kind of rural areas that I represent. I don't believe we can withdraw the emergency support until we have at least a proper funding plan in place, because that's what the ladies of Llangynog need. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

I think it is important that we have an opportunity to debate these points in this forum, as we do this afternoon. And it's important, I think, that we debate these points, that we listen to what each other has to say, and then that we take interventions from each other so we have a debate, rather than just reading out a preprepared contribution. Because if this debate is to mean anything, it means listening, that we're in receiving mode and not simply transmission mode. This Minister, to be fair to him, is. Sometimes the First Minister wishes he wasn't. But I'm sure he does listen to all these different things, and then replies in his own way. [Laughter.] 

There are three things I would like the Minister to address in his contribution to the debate this afternoon. The first is Government policy, because the Government has been very clear in outlining what its policy is, and we’ve heard Jane Dodds just describe some elements of that, and Sioned Williams beforehand addressing that. But surely, if the Government is serious about the use of buses and public transport, then it will ensure, when it is planning the delivery of public services, that public transport is a part of that. For five years I’ve come to this place and argued for bus services linking my constituency to the Grange hospital, and for five years not a single Minister has ever disagreed with me. Not one. And not one bus has been delivered. Not one. To be fair to the current Minister, he replies to my correspondence, and points out there are buses running from elsewhere, and that’s very comforting, of course, but it’s not the answer to the question. If the Government is serious about what its ambitions are then it must ensure that public transport—in this case, buses—links in to all the delivery of public services, and public services should not be reorganised without a public transport plan to sustain and to support that reorganisation. That means the lady I spoke to in my constituency this week, who told me that when her mother was unwell and in the Grange hospital over the last weekend she not only felt vulnerable and unwell, but isolated as well, and nobody should feel like that when they are facing treatment in a hospital. The Government needs to recognise that.

The second issue I’d like to address to the Minister in this debate—. I smiled when Jane Dodds mentioned how impressed she was with Fflecsi. I would also advise her to come to Ebbw Vale, because in Ebbw Vale, where we’ve had the programme on Fflecsi over the last couple of years, there have been some good elements to it. Let’s not beat about the bush: the access to industrial estates and to more outlying communities has meant there’s been a service that wasn’t delivered before. One of the issues, of course, with the use of a bus pass and subsidised transport is that passenger patterns have changed, and so there isn’t always a commercial model available to us to deliver public transport for people who are going to work early in the morning and coming back late at night. Fflecsi has worked there, and it’s worked to connect areas such as Garnlydan and the Rassau industrial estate. It’s worked there. But what it hasn’t done is to deliver the public transport needs of the town of Ebbw Vale during the day. The local authority there is saying, ‘Actually, what we want is flexi Fflecsi, so that we have the Fflecsi service at the beginning and the end of the day to enable the service to deliver’—[Interruption.] I will give way—'at those times of day, but during the core hours of the day, we want the town circular back’, which is just a bus running round the town providing opportunities for people to catch that service, which gives them the certainty of knowing when the buses will be there. I’ll give way.

Alun, thank you very much for giving way. Would he agree with me that, as we try to transition to this better future with public transport, what we do need to do is to join up all those modes, including not just Fflecsi bus but community transport as well? We put several hundred thousand pounds into the very good Bridgend volunteer-run community transport, but linking those into the scheduled service, into the trains et cetera et cetera is what we need as we move to this reregulated system, with democratic input to say, ‘This is how we pull it all together.'

That’s exactly what we need, and that is actually my third and final point. I hope the Minister will respond to my point on Fflecsi in reply to the debate. But it’s quite an extraordinary thing that Janet Finch-Saunders was able to speak for nearly six minutes about the future of bus services without mentioning the disaster of deregulation. It’s been catastrophic.

You said that you’d take interventions. Alun, you cannot deny that we’ve had 25 years of devolution. Public transport is devolved. You cannot throw this one back at the UK Government, however much you try.

I don’t know where to start sometimes. Janet, you’re absolutely right that we’ve had 25 years of devolution, but we’ve had nearly 30 or 40 years of deregulated bus services that have failed. They’ve failed the country. This Government is going to change the law in the next couple of years, and I expect you to vote for it, quite honestly, and I hope that all your colleagues will vote for it.

Presiding Officer, I’ll bring my remarks to a close now. What I hope the Minister will be able to do—perhaps not this afternoon, but I hope this debate will contribute to his thinking—is to articulate his new vision for bus services. Because when the manifesto was written, when we've had these debates in the past, they were all about bus services that had been unaffected by COVID. COVID has clearly changed the context in which we're now operating, and I hope that the Government will bring to this place a statement on their vision for the future so that we will be able to understand where they see bus services developing. The extension to the current bus funding is a good thing, but I want, for example, to see a role for the smaller operators. I don't want to see all our bus services bought up and chewed out by profiteering larger organisations that really don't care about the people they serve. I want to see that role. I want to see services delivering for the smaller communities, the isolated communities—and they're not all in rural communities, they're in the heart of our cities and our towns. That means that we have to have an all-encompassing vision, and then the delivery for it, where the budget will be and what the legislative framework will be within which these services will be delivered. And then I expect the Conservatives to take our interventions, to listen to what we're saying and to vote for the policy.

The Deputy Minister for Climate Change. Lee Waters.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. I'd like to thank Plaid Cymru for tabling this afternoon's debate on this vital subject and for the many excellent contributions across the Chamber setting out the stark challenges that we are facing. I think there's a strong consensus on the need for a comprehensive and affordable bus service. But as Huw Irranca rightly pointed out, the list of challenges is clear; the list of solutions is less clear.

I think there are four main forces at work here that lead us to where we are today, and then I'll come to the points raised in the debate and our next steps. The first, I think, is one recognised by the analysis in the roads review, that for 70 years, we as a country, over generations, over many Governments, have prioritised the private motor car instead of mass transit and giving good-quality public transport alternatives to people. When you look at successful public transport networks across the continent, they consistently spend more than we do, and have done for generations, on public transport. We're now starting from a legacy standpoint of that base lack of emphasis on public transport.

The second factor I think we're dealing with here is the impact of privatisation in the early 1980s. There is no doubt that the bus system going into COVID was extremely fragile. Over half of all the revenue of the private bus operators came from the Government. Delyth Jewell pointed out in her contribution the lessons to be learned from London. Well, the main lesson from London is not to privatise your bus service. London was the only part of the country that didn't deregulate its buses in the 1980s, and you can see the results of it. Buses are a public service, but they are run for profit.

And this is the third factor: COVID blew that model apart. I think that's our problem; a fragile model going into an existential crisis has tipped over the operating model. The Confederation of Passenger Transport say that passenger levels are consistently 15 per cent lower than pre pandemic, when they'd already been declining. This is not just a problem in Wales, this is a problem right across the world. I was listening to the BBC World Service in the wee small hours the other night, hearing about similar problems in Japan, where, in Tokyo, bus services are being withdrawn because passenger numbers have not returned since COVID. So, there is a global problem here with people having confidence to go back to mass transport.

The other thing, of course, COVID did was knock over the workforce that the bus industry relied upon. One of the consequences of privatisation is we have seen suppression of wages in the bus industry since privatisation. We've relied on an ageing workforce, many of whom decided not to return after COVID, and the problem that Sioned pointed out about buses not turning up on time is primarily a factor of staff shortages as a result of that workforce challenge.

So, those are the three main challenges I think we're dealing with. The fourth, which has really put the kibosh on on the whole thing, of course, has been austerity. As Huw Irranca-Davies pointed out, not a single penny was announced in last week's budget for public transport. We have dug deep into our financial budgets to support the bus industry; £150 million during COVID, without which, the bus industry would have gone bankrupt. It's worth noting that, in England, some 20 per cent of bus routes have disappeared. In Wales, 2 per cent have, because we have invested in the bus industry and stopped it from going to the wall—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, I will.

In regard to the data that you've just given us about the bus numbers in England, do you feel that the emergency bus subsidy that we have placed in Wales has had a significant impact in terms of that?

Well, the bus industry says it themselves; they're very clear that, without it, the bus industry would have collapsed. And I would say this seriously to the Conservative speakers: we have made choices in this Government to support bus, and we would like to continue making those choices, but in the face of the continued austerity budget that we have, we simply do not have the resources available to continue funding the emergency subsidy at the rate that we have. We've already spent over £100 million a year subsidising privatised companies to run buses. On top of that, a quarter of the education budget is spent on school transport. So, there are significant sums of public money going into private companies into a broken model, that has not delivered us the system that we need. And I think that this current crisis shows more than anything—it makes the case for reform of franchising that we set out in our White Paper.

So, I'm confident that we have the right medium-term plan to put many of the flaws set out this afternoon right. But, of course, we have a gap, and that is what we are currently grappling with. Now, I am meeting regularly with the bus operators, we're meeting weekly; I met them on Monday, and I'm meeting with Transport for Wales and the Welsh Local Government Association, and we are trying to come up with a way forward that bridges that gap from where we are to get to franchising. The money simply isn't there to keep all the current services running, and as Janet Finch Saunders rightly pointed out—this, I do agree with her on—the incentive built into the current BES system, which was an emergency response, disincentivises a recalibration of the bus services to meet the demands of today's passengers. We're running a bus network based on the pre-COVID footprint, with a guaranteed 7 per cent profit that operators have been protected from the market realities from, and that is not something we wish to continue to do. So, we want to bring the bus emergency scheme to an end in June, but we do want to create something in its wake that allows us to get to the next stage in a way that is rational and sensible and affordable.

The Conservatives say nothing about bus services in England which are collapsing; the UK Government, as a consequence of not spending any money on buses in England, we are then not getting a Barnett share of that. So, we have a real financial challenge here, and as Plaid Cymru know very well from the discussions they've been having with us about the rest of this year's budget, we collectively have prioritised really important other public services, but we can't spend that money twice, and I think that is something that they need to acknowledge about the choices that, collectively, we have made and the consequences of those choices. There are no easy options here. So, we face a real problem, there's no denying the fact. We are working through, with the industry, a way of making the best of the money that we do have, so we've extended the funding for three months; the First Minister has made clear that we are prepared to make further funding available, and we are trying to co-design with them a way to do that that protects as many services as possible, but there is simply less money than there was last year, and so, there will be a reduction in the bus network. It's not something that I want to see; it's not something anybody in this room wants to see, but it is a consequence of those four forces that I set out, and particularly of the austerity budget that we face.

To try and pick up some of the other points made in the wide-ranging debate, I would say to Janet Finch-Saunders that I also agree with her on the need for a major campaign, and with Huw Irranca-Davies too, to get people back onto buses. One of the biggest problems that we have on the bus network is that the fare box is down because passenger numbers aren't there. The revenue is not coming in and the model we have will not work. So, I'm very keen to work with the industry to get a campaign going to get people back onto buses.

I agree also with what Luke Fletcher said about the role of school transport in this. We currently have a really inefficient system where we are treating school transport as a separate entity. What I'd like to do as part of the franchising is to bring school transport into the scheduled links and we are working with Monmouthshire in particular to see if we can trial that with their school buses, as we build up to franchising. 

To Alun Davies's point on the Grange, it's a point he's made strongly and correctly for some time. I have written to him again today, setting out one of the reasons we've had, and one of the reasons we've had, as I've mentioned before, is because the current system of deregulation is broken. And we have tried to introduce publicly supported services, but they've been challenged by other operators, which prevented us, under current competition law, from bringing that in. But we think we've now found a way around that and we hope to be making announcements in the coming weeks on a service for his constituents to those key public health services. And on the Fflecsi, of course, he's right that it's had strengths and weaknesses, and that is the point of a pilot—it's to trial things. And we're evaluating it, and he is correct that, in many areas, a scheduled service is what is needed, and Fflecsi does that extra bit that the scheduled service hasn't done well. 

I can assure Jane Dodds that the ladies of Llangynog have not been forgotten, nor have the people of the Neath valley or the Gwendraeth valley or of any other part of Wales. We have a genuine problem here that all of us need to confront: for too long, we have not invested enough in public transport. We are dealing with a legacy of a broken system; COVID has tipped it over the edge and austerity is preventing us from coming to the rescue. Even given those very real constraints, I will do my utmost, working with the industry and local government, to come up with a solution that gets us from where we are to franchising, which I think offers us many of the medium-term solutions that we all agree are necessary.

Mabon ap Gwynfor to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you to everyone who participated in this discussion. Well, if public transport is the Cinderella of public services, then the bus service is her forgotten little sister.

Thank you very much, Delyth, for opening this debate so eloquently, painting a picture for us at the outset. We've heard that many of these companies that provide these services are community companies and how important the community is at the heart of that provision.

Now, if we look at our communities, for far too long, people who are far more knowledgeable than me have been asking why we are seeing depopulation in our rural and post-industrial communities. The response, of course, is complex, but one undeniable fact is the lack of public transport. Our communities can't afford to lose more services, but as things stand, that's what will happen, and if we don't see the BES being reintroduced, then we will see more services disappearing. The Deputy Minister just mentioned that we'd seen the number of staff in bus services disappearing during COVID, well, I'm sorry to say that, if the BES is not reintroduced, the rest of those staff will also disappear, losing jobs because of the routes that are lost. 

This Government, I'm afraid, has a bad practice of developing policy based on urban experiences, and trying to force that on other communities. Health and leisure are perfect examples of this. And when this model fails, then, rather than drawing up a new fit-for-purpose model, what happens is that our communities are deprived of services. In reality, it is a colonial model—our rural and post-industrial communities are being exploited for their valuable resources, particularly our young people who are being extracted from those communities, and then there is no investment in those areas to replace them and to keep them viable. That is the definition of a colonial process at work here in Wales.

During the last 20 years, we have seen health services, post offices, banks and other services being centralised away from our communities. The result of all of this and more is that people are expected to travel for these services to the nearest town or city, as we heard from Luke earlier. And we also heard in that contribution about the impact of this on the economies of our communities.

This has been a process that's been ongoing here in Wales and the loss of this BES puts the cherry on Margaret Thatcher's cake. But, I was very pleased to hear Huw Irranca and others calling for the reversal of Thatcher's deregulations in the 1980s and I was pleased to hear the commitment of the Deputy Minister to try and push in that direction.

I've noted examples from my constituency in the past—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, go for it. 

As somebody who was a bus traveller before deregulation, I can assure you that it wasn't the golden age of public transport. But, nonetheless, do you recognise that, in England, for six years under the 2017 transport bus services Act, they've already been able to choose three options, including franchising, which haven't been available in Wales because of the non-colonial model?

Well, I'm very pleased to hear of that good example. In fairness to the Deputy Minister, I think he did mention the need to look at good practices elsewhere, and to try and adopt those. And those are some of the medium-term solutions that have been put forward, and I will come on to that. But this crisis is happening here and now. 

And, as I was going to mention, I've talked about some examples in my own constituency. Take the constituent in Harlech who has to travel four hours to go to Ysbyty Gwynedd in Bangor for treatment. Or the old lady in Blaenau Ffestiniog who now has to move to Llandudno because the T19 service has disappeared. Or the gentleman from Caernarfon who has to sleep in a tent in Pwllheli, because there is no bus to take him home in the evening after his shift. These are the kinds of examples facing us. We've heard of others—Jane Dodds mentioned the woman from Llangynog who goes to Oswestry; I was convinced that Oswestry was actually in Wales—perhaps there's another debate to be had there at a future point. But those are the kinds of examples facing all of our communities, and we've heard about them today.

Huw Irranca and Jenny Rathbone talked about the just transition. And, of course, as part of the Deputy Minister's response, we've heard about these medium-term solutions that are being introduced. And that need for a just transition is at the heart of getting people away from private vehicles and on to public transport. But people can't make that transition because of the lack of investment here and now. And that is the weakness that is facing us. We are seeing the loss of those services. We are seeing decreases in the funding provided to these bus services. 

We've heard some good ideas about Fflecsi buses, for example, and here, I have to praise the door-to door, or drws-to-drws Fflecsi bus services in Nefyn around the Llŷn peninsula. There is good practice there, and I know that the Minister is aware of that. But this crisis is facing us now. The question was asked—'Well what is the solution? How are we going to fund it?' There is a question—the bus emergency scheme was funded in the original budget, but, for some reason, it has disappeared—so there is a question there as to where that original funding that was contained in the budget has gone. Now, we, on this side of the Chamber, have made proposals on taxation, and how the tax system in Wales can be used to fund public services, but the Government doesn't agree with us on that. And in the longer term, of course, the HS2 has taken £5 billion out of the Welsh budget. The Northern Rail Powerhouse—or whatever it's called—is taking another £1 billion out of our budget, and the Conservatives refuse to fight for that funding, and, I'm sorry to say that the leader of the UK Labour Party has refused to say that he will commit to providing that funding to Wales. With that funding, we could invest in our public transport. 

So, I want to see the Deputy Minister, and the Government here, committing to ensuring that a Labour Government in future, in Westminster, will provide that funding to Wales, and that we will see that investment in our public transport. 

So, to conclude, thank you to everyone who participated. There are challenges facing us, but the solution is to invest, not to cut. 

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

That brings us to voting time. And unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time. Nobody seems to want the bell to be rung, so the first vote will be on item 6, the Welsh Conservatives debate on the Minister for Health and Social Services. And I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 29 against. And, therefore, the motion is not agreed. 

The next vote is on item 7, the Plaid Cymru debate on the bus emergency scheme, and I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 28 against. And therefore the motion is not agreed.

The next vote is on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

So, the final vote this afternoon is on the motion as amended. 

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, no abstentions, 27 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

That concludes voting for this afternoon, but we have one remaining item of business.

That is the short debate, and this afternoon's short debate is on fire safety in high-rise flats, a clear timetable for remediation for residents. I call on Rhys ab Owen to present the debate. Rhys ab Owen.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. My colleagues Janet Finch-Saunders, Mike Hedges and Jane Dodds have asked for a minute each in this debate. Oh, I think Mike has gone, so maybe Mike doesn't want a minute now.

We are discussing building safety in this place because of the Grenfell tragedy. Unfortunately, it took 72 people, and the homelessness and the trauma of many others, to expose the building safety scandal in the UK. In 2017, the then Prime Minister, Theresa May, declared that,

'We cannot and will not ask people to live in unsafe homes.'

Yet, here we are in 2023, with people only a stone's throw away from this Senedd still in fear for their safety and feeling trapped in their own homes. Yesterday, as part of the co-operation agreement between Plaid Cymru and the Welsh Government, we heard a welcome suite of announcements about measures to move things forward. However, what residents still want to know is: when will their homes be safe? When will they be able to move on with their lives? They feel in limbo. And the statement yesterday, despite taking significant steps forward, did not address that concern. What we as elected representatives hear time and time again is, 'When will this nightmare end?' I would like the Senedd to hear the words of those affected.

'I became involved with the Welsh Cladiators because my mortgage finishes at the end of the year. I am 69, and because a lack of an EWS1, it is unlikely I will get a buyer or remortgage. I make no apologies for it being an investment for retirement, however, I have very few options. I must seriously consider walking away from it and having the apartment repossessed. If this happens, money that would've been used for the security of my wife, if anything happened to me, will no longer be there. It's a source of worry and failure.'

Those are the words of Rob Nicholls, a Swansea Cladiator.

I was pleased to hear yesterday of your work, Gweinidog, with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, but when will we see that guidance come into place? Also, we know that guidelines do not need to be followed; they are suggestions. In addition, we also know that, until remediation work happens, there will still be issues with the devaluation of the property, there'll be issues in attracting buyers and issues in securing mortgages. The crisis has had a huge impact on the mental health of residents. Again, the lack of timetable is a key factor. They have no idea if this nightmare will carry on for years to come.

Becky Ashwin from Cardiff says: 'I've been living this crisis for over three and a half years, and it has shattered my mental health. I've spent entire days crying due to the bills I have received. I've had to have counselling, as all the structures I believed were there to protect me have turned out to be missing. In fact, doing the right things of earning and saving have actually put me under a disadvantage. It has entirely undermined all that I believe is right and wrong in life. I live with my life on pause, and on the verge of a panic attack. A number of times in the last few months, I've stood outside in the freezing weather for hours, clutching a bag of my most important belongings, watching as my building is on fire. I feel absolute panic and helplessness, wondering if this is the time when my home actually burns down. If not this time, will the next time be before the Government is able to do something to assist me? It is all-consuming, as the place where I should be able to retreat in safety is the main source of my worry, and there is no escaping it.'

A leaseholder in Victoria Wharf, across the bay from here, has sent me this: 'I am not only concerned by the lack of progress with regard to cladding remediation, I'm also extremely concerned by the fact that the managing agent, FirstPort, has no corporate policy in place to ensure the regular checking of compartmentalised single fire escape routes. Over and above this, FirstPort took around two years after acknowledgment to repaint faded emergency access markings within the development.'

These people are paying a huge amount of money, and they want to know what steps are the Welsh Government taking to tackle poor management agents. It is easy to forget that these apartments have people living in them, people whose lives are on hold, people who are trying to get on as best as they can.

Hannah, from Celestia, just around the corner from here, says this: 'In 2016, I made a substantial investment in my future by purchasing an apartment at the age of 26 and beginning my career as a teacher. However, since 2017, my dream investment has turned into a financial nightmare that has left my family financially stuck. I'm now 33, married to another teacher, and a proud mother to a beautiful 22-month-old daughter, Ada. Unfortunately, due to complications arising from cladding, we're being forced to raise our family in a one-bed apartment that is woefully inadequate. We are now expecting a second child in August, and, while this is an exciting time for us, we are constantly plagued by the black cloud of uncertainty about how long we can survive in a one-bed flat as a family that is soon to be four. Our apartment is deemed unsafe, and we are unable to sell or lease it to tenants, leaving us with limited options. We have already moved our bed into the kitchen area to accommodate our growing family, and we feel trapped, with no means of escape.'

This is a pregnant woman facing this level of anxiety. That's unhealthy for her and unhealthy for her unborn child. The lady in question is a daughter of an Aberfan survivor, and she is acutely aware of the long-lasting effect that that catastrophe had on her father. She believed her father died an early death because of issues relating to post-traumatic stress disorder. The late historian, Dr John Davies, told me after a lecture once that the dry dock where this Senedd is built was filled by slag heap from the Aberfan disaster. And that is incredible, isn't it, that the foundations of Welsh democracy have been built on the disaster of Aberfan, something that still reiterates, still impacts us, today. And as we debate in this Chamber time and time again, on the slag heap of Aberfan, we cannot allow delay to potentially create another tragedy. 

Another Victoria Wharf resident had this warning: 'There have been 350 fires in Welsh flats this year, so it's only a matter of time before a major fire occurs. Victoria Wharf, my apartment block, has had three fires this year, and between seven to nine pumps attend. So, you would conclude this problem should be fixed quickly, but I don't expect my flat to be made safe in the next three years.'

May I conclude, Deputy Presiding Officer, by quoting my friends, Non and Gwenallt Rees? I've known these two, Non and Gwenallt, for my whole life. These are two people who've contributed a great deal to a number of communities across Wales—they've lived in a number of places across Wales; they've served their communities and the nation. These are two people who deserve to enjoy their retirement, but this is what they have to say: 'Why are we, as residents in flats, responsible for facing huge costs for problems created by others?' I very much hope that Gwenallt and Non will forgive me for revealing that both of them are in their 80s now. This isn't the way that they should be spending these years. And that's why, Minister, we need to offer some kind of timetable to these people. Even if we can't adhere to the timetable to the letter, we need to give them some kind of idea of timescales so they have some hope and have some idea of when this nightmare is going to come to an end. Thank you very much.  

Diolch, Rhys, for bringing forward this debate on a truly awful situation, and for speaking so passionately and eloquently on just a few people of the thousands that this is affecting. Now, the Minister, as you mentioned, provided a helpful update yesterday, but our Welsh residents deserve a clearer timeline. We know that £375 million has been allocated to fund remediation work between 2022-23 and 2024-25. But, Minister, it would be really appreciated today if clarity could be provided that the aim of your Welsh Government is to have all buildings in Wales remediated by no later than 31 March 2025. 

We have been informed that works have been completed on 26 social sector buildings, and are under way on a further 41. In fact, it was announced that £40 million has been made available to undertake fire safety works on an additional 38 buildings in the social sector. And you know my views; this has to be treated. You do make the excuse that it's much more complex to deal with remediation to private sector leaseholders. Well, I'm sorry, their lives are equally as important as anyone, and you should be actually looking to have a very all-inclusive policy when you're looking. 

Now, in terms of your orphan buildings: are these private leaseholders or are they public sector, or is it a mix? 

Janet, you should—you only have a minute. 

Yes, yes. You have a rolling programme of surveys. He has 15 minutes, doesn't he? He's on 10. [Interruption.] Yes, I know. Okay. Some leaseholders have been given the impression by their developers that they may not accept the outcome of the surveys. I've got one lady who I've mentioned before—£75,000 18 months ago, and has not received a penny back. These people deserve better, Minister. Working cross-party—well, I say cross-party; it's fair to say that I'm disappointed with Plaid Cymru—not so much Rhun, because he's here—but they've refused to sign the statement of opinion, and I do feel that Rhys is the champion of his group on this issue. 

Jane Dodds.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to Rhys for raising this issue this evening. 

I just really wanted in the very short time that I've got just to ask the Minister about two specific issues around developers. We know that developers have been dragged literally kicking and screaming to the table, and, really, as I said, I think it was yesterday, we have no sympathy for them, and I think, I’m hoping, that there will be demands made of them. And there are two specifics that I wonder if you could comment on. Firstly, could you tell us exactly what are the sanctions that you will be placing on them? What assurance is there for people in this predicament that developers will not wriggle out of their agreement, that there is no chance that they will draw back and take their time? As Rhys has said, what people want here is a timetable.

And my second and final point is: how will the negotiations with the developers include—and I’m taking a risk here, but I would like to hear your views on this—a stipulation that they cover the significant outlay that leaseholders have made to date in the quest for them to be safe? We know that many of them have spent hundreds if not thousands of pounds on, for example, waking night staff, in order to make sure, literally, that there isn’t a fire in their building. So, I would like to hear whether that has been part of the negotiations as well. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I call on the Minister for Climate Change to reply to the debate.