National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon and welcome to this Plenary meeting of the Senedd. The first item is questions to the Minister for Climate Change, and the first question is from Sioned Williams.

Diolch, Sioned. We are shaping healthier urban environments through our Transforming Towns programme. Green infrastructure is encouraged in placemaking support proposals, improving biodiversity, quality of life, whilst helping tackle climate change. We continue to support the enhancement of community green spaces where people live and work through our Local Places for Nature projects. 

Diolch, Weinidog. Recently published research by Professor Ross Cameron of the University of Sheffield highlights the environmental importance of natural gardens. They play a vital role in cooling urban areas, absorbing rain, thereby reducing the risk of flash flooding, and offering much needed refuge, of course, for wildlife. The report outlines some of the trends of garden design and maintenance that are damaging for the urban environment, and one of these is the use of artificial grass. Artificial grass is made of plastic and other synthetic materials, which, despite the perception of being maintenance free, requires regular cleaning and has a life span of eight to 15 years, after which sustainable disposal can be challenging. Aside from reducing the benefits of natural gardens, using artificial grass carries other environmental implications, such as hindering the habitat of earthworms and insects, while the leaching of microplastics can harm wildlife. 

I wrote to Swansea Council, in my region, about this issue after being alerted to the fact that artificial grass had been used in the city regeneration work. They answered saying that this would not be used by the council in the public realm, even on a temporary basis, going forward. So, will you commit, today, Minister, to following the good example of Swansea Council by committing to the banning of the use of artificial grass in spaces over which the Government has control, with the exception of sports fields? And will you also consider supporting some of the suggestions by Professor Cameron, such as providing financial incentives to encourage and reward sustainable garden management?

Thank you, Sioned. It's a really important question for a number of reasons. Artificial grass really does have a very, very bad effect on the local sustainability of a large number of areas in Wales. As you rightly said, there is a short-term focus on, maybe, it being lower maintenance, but, actually, weeds come up through artificial grass. It can be very difficult to clean, if an animal has been on it, and, actually, there are quite worrying reports from a number of university sources, saying that the toxicity coming off artificial grass, if it's played on by children and so on, is quite alarming. So, actually, I really do think we need to get a public information campaign going about why it isn't the short-term solution it looks like for people. I've also noticed a slightly worrying tendency for artificial hedges and pots and things. You only have to look at those after one autumn of rain to see that they've leached the colour out of them and they've gone into the environment. So, I think it really is an important issue. We will be looking at all of our guidance and working with our local authorities to make sure that it isn't used in any publicly funded space, but I also want to get a piece of evidence going to (a), do a public information campaign about the problems with artificial grass, and (b), explore whether our new single-use plastics Bill, which got the royal seal—. I was at the sealing ceremony on Monday, and I hope it's on its way to you, if it hasn't arrived already, Llywydd. That gave us the ability to add in other plastics for banning, so I really want to explore proactively whether it's possible to do it through that route as well. 

In 2007, the world passed a little noticed but critical landmark, the point at which, for the first time in history, more humans were living in towns and cities than in the countryside. In Wales, two thirds of us live in urban areas. It is therefore vital that we do all we can to improve the urban environment. That means not just tackling air pollution in our towns and cities or tackling the travesty that is the dumping of sewage into rivers like the Towy and the Ogmore, but also improving access to green spaces in our urban areas. Minister, what steps are you taking to protect green spaces in urban areas and ensure that every community has free and ready access to such spaces?

Thank you, Altaf. It's a very important point. It's very much front and centre of our Transforming Towns initiative, where we look to create green infrastructure, as it's called. Green infrastructure is where there's a network of natural and semi-natural areas and features that contribute to high-quality environments, particularly important in urban and peri-urban spaces. One of the things I didn't respond to in Sioned's initial question was the issue about financial incentives to get people to have sustainable gardens. We're very keen to ensure that it's easier to do the right thing than it is to do the wrong thing, across Wales. My colleague Joyce Watson has on a number of occasions in the Senedd raised the fact that, actually, strictly speaking, you need planning consent to pave over a front area in an urban environment. It's not very often enforced in Wales, but we have been writing out to local authorities regularly to remind them that they need to consider the run-off point from that, because it's not just about biodiversity; it's actually about sustainable water systems as well, so it's very important for that.

We need to find a socially inclusive way of making sure that people have access to green spaces, not if you're just lucky enough to have a garden—you obviously ought to use that in the most sustainable way possible—but, also, we need to make sure that everyone in an urban or peri-urban area has access to that kind of sustained green space. You simply cannot do that by having hard-paved or, indeed, artificial grass areas—that just does not produce the same quality in the environment. So, we need, as I said to Sioned, to look at a range of interventions that we can undertake, and I personally would be looking very seriously to see whether we could actually do an education campaign to make people understand the problems, and then actually look to see if we can include it in a ban.

Thank you for the question.

I have asked the north Wales transport commission to consider the resilience of access to and from Ynys Môn in addition to its original remit. The commission's interim report is due to be published this week, with final recommendations to follow in the autumn.

Thank you for that response. I look forward to seeing that report. There are two bridges, of course, at the moment. I would like to ask for an assurance, first of all, that everything will be done to reduce difficulties locally in doing the work on the Menai bridge. There are traffic lights now; I would like an assurance that the restrictions will be in place for as brief a period as possible.

But there are two. As regards the second bridge—. I would like to extend my sincerest condolences to the family of a man who died in an accident on 23 May. Safety, of course, is one of the main arguments, along with resilience, in the case for a third crossing. What happened in this case was that the Britannia bridge was closed for nine hours, and people couldn't get to Ysbyty Gwynedd, school pupils couldn't get to their GCSE and A-level examinations. We must resolve this situation in terms of resilience. I've written to the Minister, recommending, as an initial step, although we do need that third crossing, having a zipper system in place, where a barrier is placed to allow two lanes of traffic in one direction in the morning, and then moving that barrier so that traffic can move in the other direction in the evening. Can I have an assurance from the Minister that work is being done to look at that seriously?

Thank you. I too would like to pass on my sympathy to the family of the person who died on the bridge.

We absolutely are looking at the issues that Rhun ap Iorwerth sets out. As he knows, we've asked the Burns commission specifically to look on this. We have also commissioned a study into resilience and traffic flow issues on the Britannia bridge, and the potential impact this will have on the carriage layout. We specifically looked, as he has suggested, at the examples of the Golden Gate zipper bridge, and the Tamar crossing. And in fact, we've been in touch with the company, Tamar Crossings, and National Highways, who operate the tidal flow of traffic on the Tamar bridge and the Saltash tunnel in Plymouth. And traffic and operational information that we've gathered has been passed on to the north Wales transport commission for them to consider. So, I agree with him—I think the zipper situation looks interesting and, potentially, very useful in the context of Ynys Môn, and that work is ongoing.

I also extend my condolences, of course, to the family of the bereaved.

The Welsh Government carried out a consultation in 2007 over proposals that included eight options for easing traffic congestion to and from Anglesey, including a new bridge. Reports were published in 2008, 2009, 2011, and a strategic business case was submitted in 2016, which found the scheme would meet local and national needs, including journey times, reliability and access for non-vehicle road users. This need has been intensified by the announcement of the Anglesey free port. In 2017, the previous First Minister told me the Welsh Government's aim was to see the third Menai crossing open in 2022. Then, earlier this year, the Welsh Government announced it was scrapping more than 50 road-building projects, including plans for a third Menai bridge. At a press conference last month, however, the First Minister said, 'The Menai crossing remains a project we continue to explore.' Last Friday, I met again with Ynys Môn's MP, Virginia Crosbie, and businesses in the Menai Bridge area, who raised with us issues including traffic, parking and a need for a third Menai crossing. How will you therefore engage with them regarding this, as the Welsh Government continues to make up its mind about what it is going to do?

Well, thank you for taking us through the history of the bridge and the discussion of options to replace it. As Mark Isherwood knows, we published our roads review and our amended roads policy statement, which he welcomed insofar as it applied to the red route in Flintshire. We've consistently applied that same lens across all road schemes, not just ones that he wants to scrap, but all of them, and we've tried to apply that logic consistently. And that, as he said, suggested that a third crossing wasn't justified, but it did set out a series of other alternatives. And that's why I've asked the Burns commission to look seriously at that, in the context of its study of north Wales as a whole, which was indeed part of the recommendations of the Sir Peter Hendy union connectivity review, commissioned by his Government. So, I think it's good that we've worked together to take forward those recommendations. And I would expect, once the interim report is published this week, that all stakeholders across north Wales will engage with the commission to feed in their ideas, and there's an opportunity for all elected Members, and other stakeholders, to do that. 

Questions now from party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Janet Finch-Saunders. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, six of the UK's top 20 most polluted rivers are here in Wales—the Rivers Teifi, Usk, Wye, Towy, the Menai strait and the River Taff. Now, according to Natural Resources Wales, sewage pollution is the top pollutant in Welsh bathing waters. Locals and visitors have been taking to the waters during this glorious weather, and I know that you're fully aware of your own responsibility and wish to ensure that it is safe for people. Now, since 2016, there have been around 450,000 storm overflow discharges in Wales. Since 2016, NRW has only sent out—only sent out, and I say that loosely—350 warning letters to Welsh Water, but, as a result of sending out 350 warning letters, Welsh Water have only been prosecuted six times. Now, that strikes me as a massive enforcement failure. What steps will you take to independently assess whether NRW have actually been taking their own responsibilities seriously and that they have been enforcing correctly?

Thank you, Janet. I'm afraid there's a very fundamental misunderstanding of the correlation between warning letters and prosecutions in your question. Obviously, NRW will prosecute somebody who isn't doing the right remedial actions. You don't prosecute somebody who's done something and then takes the right remedial actions. Prosecution is the last step where no other remedy is available. 

But, turning to the substantive point, which is the question of what we are going to do about improving the water quality of the rivers—which prosecution is never going to do, actually; it's just a last stand for somebody who really isn't doing the right thing—what we need to do is to get people to do the right thing. You consistently list the things that are happening in our rivers, but you always leave out land use and agricultural pollution. Land use and agricultural pollution are big contributors to the river pollution that we experience right across Wales. There's no point in shaking your head at me, it just is; it's a matter of data. It is a combination of a whole series of things in every river in Wales. I can produce, and I'm very happy to circulate, Llywydd, for the Senedd the analysis on each river in Wales and what the top polluter is on each river in Wales, and then a sliding scale of what the issues are. But the point is it doesn't matter. We have to fix all of the issues. So, we've been running a series, as you know, of summits and then task and finish groups coming out of the summits, where each sector has looked to put its own house in order and not throw brickbats at the others.

So, the First Minister has been very clear—and all of the sectors signed up to this—that what you have to do is look to see what your sector can do to improve its problems in contributing to water pollution. So, that is, of course, the water companies, and we're in the middle of the price review, which the UK Government needs to pay particular attention to because, at the moment, it's still insisting on bill payers picking up the tab for that and that's clearly the wrong way to do it. But of course, we have to make the investment that we need for our water reserves to be right for a whole range of reasons—water quality is one of them. But actually, we're about to face what is probably a very hot summer and a very dry summer, so we've already stood up our drought teams, for example.

So, these are very complex things. It's far too simplistic to say that if NRW were to prosecute everyone they sent a warning letter to, the problem would be solved overnight. It quite clearly would not. So, I would say to you: engage with the process, engage with the active participation of each of the sectors to put their own house in order, and that includes land use and agriculture; it includes water; it includes house builders; it includes food producers; it includes absolutely everyone who relies on and contributes to our water quality in Wales, because without everyone doing it, we will not get to where we want to be.

Thank you, but I think you've missed my question: 350 warning letters went to water companies, so, at the end of the day, perhaps the Minister wants to elaborate and tell me how many farmers you've sent warning letters to about pollution.

Now, when you hear that almost 0.5 million discharges have resulted in only six prosecutions, there can be little confidence in your own regulatory and enforcement regime. In fact, this is a problem that the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee noted last year when we stated: 

'NRW must be able to respond timely and effectively to pollution incidents, and must be prepared to take enforcement action when permit breaches occur.'

You're not telling me that only six permit breaches have occurred in Wales. Even Dr Christian Dunn from Bangor University has said that altering the rules around sewage pollution would create rapid change. He wants water bosses to face criminal investigations if a company is responsible for dumping raw sewage into rivers and seas. I agree with the principle of tougher enforcement action if it saves our rivers. Do you?

Well, I think perhaps, Janet, you could actually listen to the answer instead of just reading out the question that you've got in front of you. I've just told you what we are doing in Wales to tackle our water quality. It was pretty straightforward stuff. So, of course I care about it—you know perfectly well that I do. But I am telling you that that is not the only solution—just prosecuting the water companies. You do not want me to prosecute everyone who has committed a pollution incident in Wales. We would commit huge amounts of resources to the prosecutions and it would have little or no effect on the actual water quality. You do not feed a pig by weighing it.

So, you have to get to the root cause of the problem. The root cause of the problem is that every single sector in Wales contributes something to water pollution and water quality. Every single sector in Wales has to pull its weight in putting that right. That absolutely includes NRW and both water companies, but it also includes all of the land users right along the banks of every single one of our catchments—every single one of them. So, that means the house builders, the councils, the parks, the farmers—absolutely everyone. All of those people must play their part in reducing pollution. I can show you the statistics if you like, but apart from one river in Wales, the top polluter for all of our rivers is agricultural land use. There's no getting away from that—it's the raw data; there's no getting away from it.

But of course the water companies have to play their part—of course they do. And as I said to you, we're in the middle of the price review. They have to be able to pay to be able to play their part; they have to be able to invest to be able to play their part, and unless the UK Government changes its stance on what that investment programme will look like, then the water companies will not be able to invest at the level they should be able to invest in any part of the UK. Because the current plan from the UK Government is that all that investment will go on to bills and the companies that are polluting that are dividend payers—which Welsh Water is not, of course—will then still be able to pay dividends out despite the fact they haven't got themselves into the position they want to be in. So, rather than concentrate on the end, on which I completely agree with you—people who do not put their house in order should be prosecuted, but we need them to put their house in order; I agree with that—people need to put their house in order. But, instead of concentrating on beating them with a stick, you need to concentrate on putting them into a position where they can in fact tackle the pollution at the front end.

Thank you. I have to say I actually disagree with your answer. It's not that I haven't listened to your answer, I have to agree with Dr Christian Dunn. Now, be that larger fines or criminal convictions, I believe it is timely to look at strengthening the current regulations when it comes to how water companies are operating. Nobody here should be able to defend 0.5 million situations. We need decisive action that proves that your Welsh Government is using its might in the fight against sewage. The Welsh Government needs to plunge the block on progress. Now, you yourself, Minister, promised us a report on storm overflows by March 2023. I am correct that we're now in June. Three months later, we are still waiting. Why, and for how much longer?

Minister, whilst you dismissed the fact that water companies should be facing tougher penalties and more prosecutions, will you at least have a look and review the side of NRW that is actually carrying out this enforcement action, just to see whether any actual enforcement fines have been missed? Thank you.

I'm very happy, Janet, to circulate to all Members of the Senedd the list of enforcement actions that have been taken by NRW. I'll very happily do that. But, just for you to understand what I'm talking about in terms of the contribution towards pollution, I have the list here. So, by SAC catchment: eastern Cleddau, by percentage, water 11 per cent, rural land use 84 per cent, storm overflows 2 per cent, 'other' 2 per cent, for example; western Cleddau, 22 per cent water, 65 per cent pollution, 5 per cent storm overflows, 8 per cent other; Dee, 34, 48, 11; Teifi 66, 30—that's the one that's different—3, 1; Usk, 21, 67, 1, 11; Wye, 23, 72, 2, 3. So, you're tilting at the wrong windmill.

[Inaudible.]—enforcements have gone out to farmers, then. Answer the question.

Farmers don't need a permit, of course, and that's one of the things we're currently looking at. If your party wants to suggest that all land-use users need to have a permit to put stuff on their land, you go ahead. I'd love for one of your spokespeople to get up right now and tell me that you think farmers should have a permit for putting stuff on their land.

I asked a question.

They can't be prosecuted because they don't need a permit, Janet.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Delyth Jewell.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to ask you, please, about some national issues that I think arise from what's happening in Ffos-y-fran mine in Merthyr. A few weeks ago, the local authority rejected an application for an opencast mine to continue operating. Campaigners, in the weeks since, have released footage seeming to show that mining has continued, and, last week, the local authority said that an enforcement notice had been given to the company, saying that it had to cease mining. But that will take effect on the twenty-seventh of this month, and the developer will then have an extra 28 days to comply, and there's the possibility of an appeal. So, there is a minimum of, I think, 56—. Well, from when the enforcement notice was released, there would have been a 56-day minimum period where more mining could continue past that date. Now, I realise you can't comment on individual cases like that, but could you set out whether you think, keeping in mind what's happened in Merthyr, the planning system we have is fit for purpose in that context, where a local authority can make a decision based partly on responding to the climate emergency, and a developer can find so many ways of ignoring or circumnavigating that decision?

I can't comment on that case. It's an ongoing case and, actually, the Welsh Ministers are party to the case. So, I can't.

But, it is a general tenet of planning law—and it's very difficult indeed to change this—that if you have an extant licence and you're subject to an appeal, you can continue to do the activity that you are appealing against while the appeal goes ahead. That is a standard point in planning law across the whole of the UK, as far as I know—I think it's true in Scotland as well—and for obvious reasons. Because, if you're building a house extension and a local authority serves an enforcement notice on you and you appeal that, you can continue to build that extension. It's not until the appeal comes to its end and is clarified by the court that you understand what the position is. It doesn't act as an injunction, effectively. So, that is just the standard position.

There are a number of other frustrating things about the planning system, which we are actively looking at. We have managed to change it for some of our new building regulations, but not for older ones. For example, once you start building a planning consent, you can carry on building it to the same standard for 100 years. We've managed to change that for new building regulations, but not for older ones. What we're looking to do is to try and make sure that you have some certainty when you get planning consent that you can build what you've been consented—because that's the problem, isn't it—and then if the rules change three years down the line and you're starting a new bit of the planning, that you have to comply with the new regulations. But you can see that if you're two thirds of the way through building a house, you can't retrofit it because the rules changed a third of the way in. So, it's a problem. I agree it's a problem. We are exploring a number of ways across Wales to see if we can clarify and simplify that, but it continues to be a problematic area.

Thank you for that, Minister. I wonder if thought could be given to seeing, where decisions are made planning-wise that are in the context of the climate and nature emergency, whether any change could be made or whether there's a global precedent for something like that happening. It would be interesting to know.

I'd like to ask you as well about the reclamation of land that's contaminated in cases like this—again, not specifically about this case, but arising from it. It's been known for years in this case—again, this case in Merthyr—that the mine was going to close, and there had been an understanding that millions should have been set aside for restoring the land and so on. After any project like this there should be training and transitioning provided for as well for the workforce. In Ffos-y-fran, there are significant questions as to whether there's enough money that is left for that restoration. My question to you is, on a national scale, firstly, please, how the Government prioritises the development of training programmes that would enable workers in fossil fuel-dependant sectors to transition into new jobs, and finally, what changes you think should be made—again, to the planning system—to ensure that developers are compelled to put right the damage done to land at the end of large-scale projects like this. I know this is something that you do care a lot about. Diolch. 

Thank you very much for that, Delyth. There are a number of things there. We've just issued, via Vaughan Gething's department but in conjunction with me and with my colleague Jeremy Miles, the net-zero skills plan, and that has sections in it about how to proactively retrain people who are in industries we know we want to phase out, so that we get the just transition that we talk about. We aren't in the business of putting whole communities out of work, as was done in the past, as industries change. So, we absolutely are looking to see how we can get those training programmes and opportunities in place. We talk constantly with the incoming green infrastructure bodies about how they can be sure to be recruiting people coming out of old industries and so on. So, we're absolutely looking very proactively at that.

In terms of the remediation of contaminated land brought about by industrial use, unfortunately we are often stuck with contracts that were signed back in the day when life was a very different thing. Again, I'm very carefully not commenting on the specific case, but there are a range of issues—where opportunities have been sold on or where accounts have not been maintained or where single-purpose vehicles have gone out of business, and so on, where company bonds are no longer effective—that we need to learn from. But it is extremely difficult to do that retrospectively. You can do it on an ongoing basis from now, but unfortunately a lot of those were things that were signed off in the previous century, so it's very difficult to see how you can change them proactively upfront.

Thank you, Mike. Protecting and enhancing our water environment is a priority for the Government. We are improving water quality by moving towards designation of inland bathing waters, strengthening river water quality monitoring and by maximising the benefits for nature through sustainable drainage systems. Natural Resources Wales is undertaking a project in the River Tawe to improve water quality, targeting the Swansea bay opportunity catchment.

Thank you. I have previously raised the problem of raw sewage entering from the Trebanos treatment works. People will probably be pleased to hear that I'm not going to do that again today. But we're in a period of prolonged dry weather, meaning water levels are unusually low. From American studies, we know that excessive phosphorus in surface water can cause explosive growth of aquatic plants and algae. This can lead to a variety of water quality problems, including low dissolved oxygen concentration, which can cause fish to die and harms other aquatic life. The link between agriculture, excess phosphorus and excess algal growth in freshwater ecosystems is well established. What action is the Welsh Government taking to measure and reduce phosphate levels in the River Tawe?

Thank you very much, Mike. Natural Resources Wales monitors the River Tawe's condition under the water framework directive regulations. The latest data from the Tawe has 'good' ecological status and I'm very pleased to say that Swansea bay also achieved an overall bathing water quality classification of 'good' in 2022 for the fourth consecutive year. At this point, Llywydd, I should say that that's obviously my own constituency as well.

NRW is working closely with Dŵr Cymru and Swansea Council to promote the green infrastructure solutions to reduce the silt pollution from construction sites, domestic misconnections, and impact on water quality from contaminated land. They will also increase the capacity of the main sewer system and help reduce the combined sewer overflow discharges right along the Tawe basin, Mike. Of the 58 water assets that discharge to the Tawe and its tributaries, 29 of them are scheduled for full investigation under the storm overflow assessment framework, seven of them have completed investigations and 22 are scheduled for completion during this investment period, so that's up to 2025 and then there'll be another plan for post 2025. I know you already know that. And I know you know about the Trebanos works as well. 

We've already stood up the drought action group for Wales. It's a timely reminder, Llywydd, that while we're all enjoying the very lovely weather that we've had over the last two weeks, I'm sure you will have noticed that water consumption goes up during periods of that sort, and whilst we were very lucky over this winter and most of our reservoirs were completely replenished or very nearly replenished, it really does not take very much for them to be back into the condition they were last year. There's apparently double the possibility of a very hot summer than usual this year. Although we're not currently predicting prolonged dry spells to go with that hot weather, it is a very timely reminder to people that husbanding water resources is something that you should do as a matter of course, all the time, because otherwise we will have severe problems, as Mike has outlined.

I agree with you, Minister, and others in this Chamber that river pollution does need to be addressed, and I agree with the comments of the First Minister that no single measure will solve this problem. I'm very interested in the work that's been going on within the summits that you've been having, because you've said to this Chamber on a number of occasions that there have been measures identified to deal with water pollution and how we can address it through natural measures and others. I'd like to know if you could outline what measures they are and when they're going to be implemented, because the sooner that we can do that, we can clean up our rivers and also unblock the planning system across Wales.

Thank you very much. It's very difficult to do that globally for Wales because, obviously, each catchment has a different set of solutions. But, by and large, the river basin management plans that we have in Wales give us a mechanism to identify and prioritise actions on the particular catchment. Then we have a whole series of working groups and action plans from the better river management quality groups and the nutrient management boards that work on all of our special areas of conservation rivers across Wales. Each of those has an action plan, signed up to at the summit, to work on the specific river catchment that they're looking at. So, those actions are ongoing.

The summit process is a summit chaired by the First Minister approximately twice a year. It's not exactly accurately twice a year, but approximately twice a year, co-chaired by me and Lesley Griffiths. And then there are individual action groups chaired by myself or Lesley Griffiths or the chair of Natural Resources Wales, on an ongoing basis, to make sure that the action plan is kept fresh and alive and that we're learning from each other. We also have a system in place to make sure that we aren't reinventing the wheel, so that nutrient management boards understand what each of them is doing and if they have work that can be shared across the piece then that's shared, and then we come together at the summit to make sure that the learning is shared across Wales.

As I've said on a number of occasions, multiple interventions are necessary. We are re-meandering, for example, in some areas where faster water flows, which were thought to be the solution at the end of the twentieth century, have proved to be very problematic. We have all the work that we are doing on combined sewage outflows, and some of the remediation that I just talked to Mike about on the Tawe is happening on a number of rivers across Wales. But we also have to address agricultural and land-use pollution, pollution from house builders, so we've got the sustainable drainage systems regime for that. One of the big issues we have is that we've allowed house building for years without a proper contribution to the sewerage network to go with those houses. And a lot of our cities are built on Victorian sewerage networks, which are not fit for purpose. So, you know, there isn't a short answer to your question; it's a complex set of intertwined actions right across Wales that we're working on to get us to where we all want to be.

Good afternoon, Minister. I note your responses to Janet Finch-Saunders, and I do think there is cross-party support for the position that you and the First Minister have taken, which is that all of the agencies are responsible for river pollution; there isn't one that we should single out and attack. And I note that the First Minister has said that he doesn't want to hear that another group is to blame, and I think there is cross-party support for that. I also agree, and I think most of us would agree, that it's about proactive action as well as reactive action. So, I wonder if I could ask you—and I do stand here a little bit in my tin hat—about the review for funding for NRW, because ultimately, in terms of the reactive responses, they are responsible, as I understand. We do know that they are struggling, so I wonder if you could just give us some information around the funding and the review that's going on around their ability to be able to carry that out effectively. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Certainly, Jane. A very good question, as well. We did a baseline review with NRW that allowed them to give us unit costs for the very first time. And off the back of the unit costs, we've been able to work with them to build up what is possible with what level of funding across the piece. We've been able to help them prioritise what they should prioritise, given the funding envelope. We've just come through the worst budget round that I've ever experienced in the Welsh Government, so it's obviously in that context.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of being one of the invited speakers at the launch of NRW's new corporate plan. I don't say this lightly, Llywydd, because corporate plans are often a difficult read—something you approach with a heavy heart, late at night, that you have to get through—but it's genuinely an uplifting read. That and the new corporate plan for Bannau Brycheiniog, I hope, are the new standard for corporate plans. If Members haven't read it, it's genuinely worth reading. It is actually quite a page turner; I started with a heavy heart and found that I was actively enjoying reading it. And it's because they've done it completely differently; they've put their visions and their mission front and centre of it and then they've talked about nature and people thriving together all the way through, and they've related each one of their activities back to it in a way that I think has really put a bit of oomph and hope through the whole of the organisation, rather than the kind of embattled feel that they had before, and I really welcome that. I think that is as a result of an improved relationship with NRW, because of the joint working that we've done. NRW are wholly owned by the Welsh Government; we're not adversaries, they're our delivery arm. And I think the new relationship with them has really made a difference. So, on an ongoing basis, we will continue to review where they put their resource and how we can feed more resource in. My colleague Lesley Griffiths has just put more resource in for the agricultural pollution regulations monitoring, for example. And together, I think we can get our set of priorities calibrated in the right way.

You've given us a weather forecast for the summer and a reading list for the summer now, Minister. [Laughter.] 

Question 4, Russell George.

Thank you, Russell. The Welsh Government does not support shooting of live animals or birds as a leisure activity. However, we absolutely understand that the control of certain species is sometimes necessary for wildlife management purposes such as to prevent serious damage to sensitive sites or species.

Thank you for your answer, Minister. A few weeks ago during my colleague James Evans's short debate on shooting and conservation, I intervened on you to ask you a straightforward question and you said to me that you would come to answer my question later in your contribution. You then went on not to answer my question and refused to take a second intervention. So, I hope that I can now ask you the same question again. So, yes, of course I'm aware of responses to my colleagues and others when you've outlined that you don't and the Welsh Government doesn't support activities linked with shooting. However, I know that there are a number of events that the Welsh Government does support. The Welsh Government supports a number of agricultural shows that are linked to the shooting of game, so the Welsh Government does financially support events that are connected to the shooting of game. So, can I ask for some clarification on what the Welsh Government's policy is on financially supporting events connected with the shooting of live game?

We absolutely do provide support for the game meat industry, which is an important industry in Wales and the rural environment, and the Welsh Government has supported that for some years. I personally think, and I think quite a lot of people in Wales think, there's a big difference between having to kill something because you want to eat it or put it into the food chain and taking some pleasure or leisure activity part in that. I think there's quite a big dividing line between those two things, and that is the distinction I was drawing, Russell. So, I personally do not think that it is edifying to watch somebody actively enjoy killing something. If you have to kill it, for various reasons, then you should do so with a heavy heart, and that is the position that I currently maintain. That does not mean we do not support a game meat industry in Wales; of course we do. Of course, we support a large number of meat industries, which require the killing of animals in order to exist, but we think that those animals should be killed as swiftly and as humanely as possible, and not because you're enjoying yourself.

Question 5 [OQ59618] has been withdrawn. Question 6, Tom Giffard.

Thank you, Tom. It's the responsibility of each local planning authority to assess the need for housing in their area and, based on this evidence, to establish a housing requirement within their local development plan.

Thank you, Minister, for your answer, and you'll know, I'm sure, the Welsh Government estimated between 6,200 and 8,300 additional dwellings will need to be built annually just to meet current housing demand. But with significant historic lack of supply in the market, it does raise the question of whether that target is ambitious enough in the first place. Even so, some councils are still consistently even failing to hit these house building targets. For instance, Bridgend County Borough Council promised in their LDP to build 505 homes per year, but, since the publication of that LDP, they've failed to hit that target once, and, last year, only managed half of it. And we know the consequences of that inaction, Minister: a lack of supply in the market drives up the cost of new homes for people, particularly younger people, who desperately need them, who want to start their lives and get on the housing ladder. But, to me, it doesn't seem to be that there are many consequences for councils from the Welsh Government for those councils that don't meet those LDP obligations that they've set out in the first place, so what action have you taken against councils who consistently fail to meet those LDP targets, where they're unwilling or unable to do that, and what consideration have you given to encouraging councils, if they get to the end of an LDP process and they've not met the target they've set out, to force them to put even more houses into their next LDP? Thank you.

Thank you, Tom. That's quite a complicated set of interventions that we undertake. The LDP estimate for housing is, of course, for all housing, combined-use housing. So, we then divide it into what we fund—so, the houses we fund are houses for social rent and some affordable and mixed-use housing—and houses that are brought forward by the private sector, some of which also, of course, become social or affordable housing.

We did an exercise with every local authority in Wales over the last couple of years—it might have been three; I don't quite remember, but over the last few years—where we went through the allocated housing land in each LDP and asked why it wasn't possible to bring it forward, because in some LDPs there had been land allocated that hadn't been brought forward for very many years, and it became obvious that this was land that was never going to be suitable for housing. In places where we found that the land was suitable for housing but had barriers—so, it had contaminated land, or it had specific access problems and so on—we put two grant-funded schemes in place: so, the stalled sites funding and the—I can't remember the other one—contaminated land one—it's not called that, but that's what it's for—basically to de-risk some of the land to be able to bring it forward.

But we've also been working—. Because of the phosphates issue in Wales, we have a large number of planning applications stuck behind the phosphates issue. We've been working with the house builders in Wales, and with local authorities affected—I don't think Bridgend is one of those, but, anyway, quite a few authorities in Wales are—to work out how we can bring those sites forward with specific solutions to those kinds of issues on those sites. And then we ask the local authorities to revisit their LDPs and redo their local housing assessment allocation if we think it's not working in the way that it ought to. So, there are a number of different interventions that we undertake to assist the local authority to make sure that it does have the right allocations in its land in a sustainable way and that enable us to bring it forward.

And then the last thing is that we've been working with central Government for pretty much the whole of this Senedd's life trying to bring forward a vacant land tax. That's proved far more problematic than we'd hoped, because what we hoped was to be able to make sure that people didn't land bank, and so that allocated sites for LDPs actually were actively being progressed, rather than land banked against increased prices.

Thank you. As the Member knows, Denbighshire council as the highway authority is responsible for road safety in their county. Since 2019, we have provided them with over £1 million of road safety funding. This year, their funding will include over £197,000 to implement the new default 20 mph speed limit—the biggest road safety initiative in a generation.

Thank you very much for your response, Deputy Minister, this afternoon. The reason I ask this question is because I want to raise the issue of the B5119, and if you’re thinking, ‘Well, what’s the B5119?’, it’s known locally as the dizzy bends, and it’s a narrow road that links Rhyl and Prestatyn. The area has seen significant housing development over the last 25, 30 years, but the road itself hasn’t been developed since the days of horse and cart, unfortunately. So, as a result of the development, obviously as a consequence of that, we’ve seen the increase of traffic using the B5119. I know, as a Welsh Government, you’ve committed to banning road building under the roads review, but I just want to distinguish the difference between road building and road safety, and what negotiations you could possibly have with Denbighshire County Council to make widening the road and road safety improvements a possibility for the B5119, as over the last few years, we’ve seen an increase in near misses and a fatality that unfortunately happened last year. So, on behalf of my constituents, can I ask you what possibilities we can look at in terms of improving that road safety for the dizzy bends, as we call it locally?

Thank you very much for the question. Every time I hear the Conservative benches misrepresenting our policy I get a case of the dizzy bends. Just to be explicit, for the fifteenth time, we are not banning road building. We are building new roads now, we will continue to build new roads, we've agreed with Gwynedd Council to build a new road in Llanbedr. So, I appreciate it's a nice little issue for them to put on social media, but it is completely untrue. The Member doesn't even blush when he trots out this misrepresentation time and time again. It's not true. Just to be very clear, okay? We're not banning new roads. So I hope that that is now understood by all.

We are applying a new roads policy based on the independent roads review, and in cases of road safety, it says that we need to go through a process, and one of the first things we should be doing, before looking to infrastructure changes like widening roads, he says, or increasing the speed of roads, we should be looking to cut the speed of roads as a first step to make roads safer and to reduce the likelihood of cars crashing. 

Now, I believe this is a road that is the responsibility of the local authority, and he needs to address the road safety concerns with them, and they're able to apply to us in the normal way, within our new roads policy framework, which does not include banning new roads. 

Thank you for the question, Llyr. 

Local planning authorities have a duty to prepare a local development plan, as set out in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Following adoption of a strategic development plan by a corporate joint committee, local planning authorities within that region will be required to prepare a lighter touch LDP.

Yes, thank you for that, because a lot of people are asking how things might be different in a future scenario. Because you will know about the current impasse in Wrexham, where Wrexham council now finds itself in a position where a consortium of developers, actually, have issued a legal challenge against the council for voting not to adopt its LDP. Now, the council will be voting again next week on whether to reverse that earlier decision because, now, of the threat that a judge could force the LDP on them against the wishes of democratically elected representatives, and what that says about the concept of local democracy, I’m not sure. Will you accept that this mess has been a long time in the making? I’ve raised it—I raised it back in 2012, of course, when the Welsh Government and the planning inspectorate first refused, or insisted that the council submit a second LDP. I’m coming back again to a point that was touched upon earlier in relation to numbers of houses; they were forced to inflate the numbers of housing in the LDP. Now, those have turned out to be totally at odds with reality. Wrexham’s population is decreasing, not increasing, and to many local people, in the current circumstances, they feel that the Welsh Government, the planning inspectorate, are working hand in glove with large property developers to force this housing on a community that clearly doesn't want it. So, will you accept some responsibility for this mess? And, more importantly, in light of what's coming down the line with a lighter touch LDP, et cetera, will you work with the council to try and resolve this situation, rather than what feels like just allowing developers to have their way?

So, Llyr, I would very much like to have a discussion with you about where we are on the Wrexham LDP, but I fear, Llywydd, that we are right in the middle of a series of judicial review processes, which the Welsh Government is a party to. Therefore, I fear that I cannot discuss it on the floor of the Senedd. But, if the Member wants to request a private conversation with me, I am more than happy to do that. I will say this, though, Llyr: I don't think that your characterisation of what's happened in Wrexham is entirely fair, and I would very much like the opportunity to have a proper discussion with you about it.

And finally question 9. Cefin Campbell.

Diolch. Transport for Wales is taking forward work under the co-operation agreement between the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru on transport links between north and south Wales, including travel corridors on the west coast of Wales, on an integrated transport system for north-west Wales, and on our metro developments.

Thank you very much. I want to focus specifically on the St Clears station in Carmarthenshire, but I will return to that in just a second. Everyone in this Chamber will understand, of course, the importance of developing the railway in mid and west Wales in order to connect people in these rural areas. It's important for many reasons, of course, and we've heard you talk about that on a number of occasions.

It will encourage people to make less use of private vehicles if we can upgrade our stations in these areas and develop the railway. It will also respond to the climate emergency agenda. It will also boost the economy, including tourism, of course, and will encourage more active travel. So, in terms of St Clears station specifically, I know that an estimate of costs has been made, and around half of the costs have already been contributed by the Westminster department for transport. But there is a gap of some £6 million, as I understand it. So, what's the latest news—if you could share that with us—in terms of the Welsh Government's contribution to meet these costs in order to ensure that there is a fit-for-purpose station in St Clears?

Thank you. Well, as the Member has said, the Welsh Government want to see a station in St Clears as part of an upgrade of our overall public transport system, for the reasons that he very articulately set out. He's also right that the costs of the St Clears proposal have increased significantly, as indeed have all infrastructure projects, and our capital budget has simultaneously been cut by 8 per cent in real terms by the Conservative Government as part of their chosen  austerity drive. So, there is a gap, as you said.

We are in discussions with Hywel Dda health board, as part of their planning for a new west Wales hospital. A station in St Clears could be an important part of that, and how we look to include that within the planning and the budgeting of that hospital—. But in the short term, we do have a financial gap without a very clear way of addressing it. These are conversations that are ongoing with Network Rail and the UK Government.  

I thank the Deputy Minister and the Minister.

The next item, therefore is questions to the Minister for Education and the Welsh Language, and the first question is from Peredur Owen Griffiths. 

The promotion of Welsh-medium education underpins our 'Cymraeg 2050' strategy. I have agreed local authority Welsh in education strategic plans to support this work. We are implementing an ambitious Welsh workforce plan and funding organisations and various projects to support promotion activity across the country.

Thank you very much for that response. I hope that the census data of 2021, as well as the warnings set out in the culture and Welsh language committee, will be an incentive to take action with regard to Welsh-medium education and the learning of the Welsh language. There aren't enough teachers to teach the Welsh language and Welsh-medium teachers to teach in our schools and colleges. On top of that, the number of Welsh speakers is declining, according to the census figures. Unfortunately, the downward trend is particularly prominent amongst young people in my region, particularly in Blaenau Gwent. Without a doubt, the target of reaching a million Welsh speakers by 2050 will be harder to meet or will be missed entirely without radical steps being taken and more ambitious steps being taken. Minister, do you acknowledge that the situation is concerning as it currently stands, and are you confident that we can turn a corner to see the situation improving? Also, how do you intend to tackle, particularly in south-east Wales, the shortage of Welsh-medium teachers and teachers able to teach through the medium of Welsh that exists in primary and second education? Thank you.

I thank the Member for the question. The census figures, of course, do demonstrate a decline in some age groups, but as the Member will know, we've also been looking at the national survey data, which shows, for the first time, in the same period, an increase in numbers. So, we need to do some work to look at what the data from both sources tell us. We've agreed with the official national statistician that there will be a work programme undertaken to tackle that. It's very important that we have reliable data as a Government, so that we can understand the context. So, that work is very important indeed.

I was, of course, disappointed with the census results, although there might be broader reasons for them. I am confident that we have a good plan in place to reach that challenging target, as the Member recognises, it is very ambitious. Teacher numbers, of course, are at the heart of the success of the Welsh-medium education strategy. Increasing the number of Welsh-medium teachers is crucial if we want to see more learners in Welsh-medium education. We have a 10-year plan, and thanks to all the partners and stakeholders who've worked with us on that, a number of creative steps have been taken.

The Member is right in saying that there are areas within his region where that decline appears to be at its worst, so there's specific work to be done in that regard. We're pleased to have been able to approve funding for a Welsh-medium education promotion champion to work regionally, focused specifically on the south-east of Wales. This is in collaboration between the mentrau iaith and the local authorities, and if that is successful, we will look to expand that at a national level.

Minister, sometimes it does feel that we're falling into the trap of thinking that Welsh is about to die out, when, truth be told, figures published by The Scotsman newspaper demonstrate that there are over 15 times more Welsh speakers than there are of Scottish Gaelic, and Wales has almost half the population of Scotland. So, we do need to be more optimistic about the language and its future, particularly as we move towards Cymraeg 2050. With this in mind, how is the Welsh Government looking to be more positive and optimistic in its own wording when it tries to encourage more teachers to join the workforce and teach through the medium of Welsh? Thank you.

I am an optimist by nature, so I agree with what the Member has just said. I think it is important, although we often discuss the challenges in terms of recruitment and so on, that we also celebrate the contribution that teachers can make and the demand for Welsh-medium teachers, and that we encourage people to come into the profession, because teaching is one of those rare professions where you can have a very substantial impact on the course of hundreds if not thousands of lives and encourage people to learn Welsh.

Enabling more children to walk, scoot and cycle to school is a key priority for the Welsh Government, and we are working closely across departments and with other partners to achieve this aim.

Thank you, Minister. I recently visited Pencoed Primary School—another example of the largest ever investment in schools in Ogmore, and across Wales, indeed. As I arrived, I saw 30 or more bikes and scooters in the all-weather storage outside the school. The head, Mr Raymond, explained that staff and governors at the school are working with parents and the children to encourage walking, cycling and scooting to school. This happens more often now, thanks to huge investment made by the Welsh Government in safe routes to school and active travel facilities in schools too. But we need to do more. We need to get every school to do more of this, and all of our children, and teachers and governors and parents, have to be a part of that. So, as we celebrate the hundredth National Bike Week, which celebrates a centenary of cycling every day for everyone, what message will the Minister send to schools across Wales, and what further practical steps can the Welsh Government take so that our pupils derive the benefits to their health and well-being, there is less congestion on our roads because there will be fewer school runs, and our air is cleaner for everyone?

I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for the opportunity to encourage our schools across Wales to do everything that they can to encourage not just pupils, but, as he said so very importantly in his question, school staff too, governors, and the wider community too, in their engagement with the school, to use alternative forms of transport in accessing the school. And may I thank him for the work that he's been doing as chair of the cross-party group in this area, which has encouraged many of the things that we have in mind—investment in schools is more and more reliant on having active travel programmes of the kind that he described in place, but also new resources on Hwb to support schools and the school community to do everything that they can in the way that he set out in his question, and the excellent investment in the School Streets programme, which is making a significant difference, I hope, to make it easier for schools to make use of active travel to school? And may I also thank him for reminding us that it's Bike Week? I'll be cycling to work tomorrow to celebrate that week.

Minister, while any move to encourage active travel by school pupils is to be welcomed, we also have to address the fact that, quite often, safe active travel routes don't exist for many children. I have often raised the fact that, in my own village of Pen-y-fai, we have very few safe active travel routes. We also have an issue where pupils living within the walking or wheeling distance of a school are not guaranteed entry into that school, with the allocated school often unsuitable for active travel for younger children. Minister, how are the Welsh Government working across departments, in collaboration with local authorities, to ensure that active travel is a viable option for Welsh school pupils?

I refer Altaf Hussain to the answer I just gave to Huw Irranca-Davies, which I think sets out the steps that we are taking. On the question about routes to school and making it easy for people to be able to use walking, cycling and scooting to get to the physical location of the school, we're encouraging local authorities—he asked me what we're doing with local authorities—we're encouraging local authorities to introduce School Streets, which I just mentioned in my answer to Huw Irranca-Davies. And they involve road closures around schools at the start and the end of the school day, in order to improve conditions for walking and cycling and scooting, reducing air pollution, obviously, improving road safety, also obviously. We've funded authorities to bring forward plans to do this; 13 authorities have been awarded funding to do that, and we've invested almost £5 million on those plans. I think it's a very exciting development, to make it as easy as possible for people to get to school using active travel options.

Questions now from party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson first of all—Laura Anne Jones.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, I want to ask you about a seemingly hidden crisis within our Welsh schools. Thousands of violent incidents in primary schools, and hundreds in secondary schools, have been recorded in Wales. The University of Roehampton, in London, recently published a report into violence towards teaching and classroom assistants in mainstream UK schools. The report found that 53 per cent of teachers and TAs had experienced physical violence in a year, and 60 per cent had experienced verbal abuse. After submitting freedom of information requests to all the councils in Wales, my office and I managed to find the Welsh results; however, there were a few councils where it wasn't possible. Minister, since 2018-19, there have been 3,872 violent incidents recorded in our schools across Wales that we know of, and this doesn't include verbal abuse. My question to you is: why hasn't the Welsh Government addressed this issue and has allowed it to escalate in this manner?

She'll know from her work on the committee that the Government has been working with teaching unions in relation to this very question, and it is an important question. What has not been entirely clear is the scale of the issue. She has some figures there, but, as she points out herself, it's not entirely clear that that is the full picture, or that what is being reported reflects the context as well. I had a meeting yesterday, actually, where I discussed with teaching unions, with the Welsh Local Government Association, with local authorities, what we can do to understand both the scale of the issue—. She'll remember from the correspondence that the committee received from Unison that they had a survey that showed 41 per cent of their members had some experience, across a range of behaviours. And this had not, in fact, been discussed previously at the school partnership forum, so I asked for it to be brought forward. We had a good and positive discussion yesterday. There are some emerging themes about why there may be an increase in the numbers, and there certainly is a trend to show an increase. What isn't yet clear is exactly the reasons why, and the exact scale of it, but we are working with our partners to understand that and make sure that the support is there for teachers, if it's not already there. 

Thank you, Minister, and I'm glad that something is finally starting to be done about it, because, with Wales already experiencing a Welsh Government-made teaching number crisis, thanks to consecutive lacklustre Welsh Government efforts, it is clear to me that violence is going to push people away from the profession. Minister, instead of bringing the issue to the fore, your Government has allowed it to quietly spiral in the background for decades now. To make this worse, in Wales, we have no reporting standard—which I'm sure you'll be aware of from your meetings yesterday—and no requirement to report abuse or violence in the classroom. So, Minister, the stats I read out to you are just the tip of the iceberg, and the actual picture, as you said just now, is probably far, far worse. So, why hasn't the Government introduced a reporting standard across Wales, and why is there no requirement yet to even report violent incidents in the classroom?

Well, they are reported; the question is what they're being reported as. And there will be, certainly, examples when they are not reported. So, I obviously accept that. That is a feature of reporting requirements across the board in other contexts as well. What we need to understand is what is the scale of the issue and why is it happening. There are particular pressures in schools at the moment, partly caused by the response to COVID and some behaviour challenges that have arisen, no doubt, as a consequence of that. What we need to do is work together with our partners to understand the issue in its entirety, so that we can respond fully then, and that's obviously what we're doing, as I mentioned. 

Thank you, Minister. I know you're always keen for me to bring ideas to the floor of the Senedd to help you, so here we go. You said here, just now, that we need to understand the scale of the problem. So, why don't you host a national summit on violence in schools, secondly, issue new guidance to teachers, staff and school leaders, (3) reform exclusion procedures, so that pupils who are excluded then go on to receive the support they actually need, (4) ensure extra funding for meaningful interventions to support victims and perpetrators of violence, and (5) create a national helpline to support teachers and staff who are afraid to report violence and disruption? So, Minister, will you agree to look at those suggestions that I have made today, and finally give the issue the attention this clearly deserves? Our students deserve better, and our teachers deserve better. Thank you. 

Well, thank you to the Member for bringing some positive suggestions to the discussion; I absolutely welcome the new tone in her contribution. So, what we will be doing is working with our partners who are the experts in the field on this—so, with our teaching union partners, with our local education authority partners, and with other experts, to understand the points that I made earlier in my previous answers to the Member. It is an important issue, and we all want to understand, together, what is happening and why, so that we can have an informed response to that.

She made a particular point about exclusions. She'll know that, earlier in the week, I issued the attendance guidance for consultation. Alongside that, there is already work happening in relation to exclusions to refresh that guidance, and it will encompass some of the points that she's actually made today. So, that work is already under way, and I'll be very happy to update the Senedd on that work in due course. 

Plaid Cymru spokesperson now—Sioned Williams. 

Thank you, Llywydd. Good afternoon, Minister. The Higher Education Statistics Agency data for 2021-22, which was released recently, shows a further education sector in Wales that finds it difficult to cope with increased costs. The end of this academic year has been dominated by concerns about energy prices and inflation, industrial action over wages and pensions, concerns about hardship among students, and the value of the home fees cap in Wales is declining swiftly, and the sector has been having to cut back on expenditure to make savings in the face of frozen fees for several years. The inevitable result of this is that staff have to face doing more without the proportionate increase in wages or resources. It’s only through increasing income through recruitment that providers can maintain their current capacity, but without the ability to invest to ensure that students receive a high-quality experience, it is a vicious cycle.

So, can the Minister outline what steps the Welsh Government is taking to tackle this income gap, this concerning gap, which is demonstrated in the HESA figures for universities in Wales? How are you going to support higher education institutions in Wales as a result of this in future?

And, Llywydd, I should have declared an interest that my husband is employed by Swansea University.

Well, I don’t know if the Member was criticising me for not increasing fees; I don’t intend to do so. It’s a difficult time for students at the moment, and I’m certain that we need to support institutions, but we also need to ensure that students don’t pay more too. So, the budget for the sector this year is around some £212 million, so it is a very substantial budget. We’ve done our very best to ensure, given the huge pressures on Welsh Government budgets, that we continue to prioritise investment in our higher education institutions, and that’s what we have done this year. I don’t for a moment doubt the points that the Member has made; they are important points. There is pressure on our institutions, as there is elsewhere in society and our economy. I am in ongoing discussions with our vice-chancellors at the moment to see what the implications of this are, and what more we can do together in order to work differently, recognising that the financial pressures upon us are very real indeed, and those discussions have been creative and encouraging and will continue.

Diolch. The Government’s youth work strategy states clearly the important role of youth work to Wales, to promote and actively encourage opportunities for all young people, in order that they may fulfil the potential as empowered individuals and as members of groups and the community, thereby improving their life chances. Welsh Government have invested in this strategy and its youth work implementation board is committed to promoting youth work as a profession and as a career. It’s therefore concerning and disappointing that Wrexham university has officially withdrawn its undergraduate youth and community work programme, and, as a result of this, there is now no coherent route from the level 3 youth work support qualification to professional qualification in north and mid Wales; only a Master of Arts provision will remain. There’s widespread concern about this in the sector; the MA, they say, is unsuitable for many of the potential undergraduate candidates who come up through work in their local communities. Graduates from Wrexham mostly go on to practice in the north of Wales, and training elsewhere runs the risk of them remaining in the south of Wales or even elsewhere in the UK, and then also, of course, unable to benefit from local Welsh-medium opportunities across the region. So, could you please outline what discussions you’ve had with Wrexham university regarding the withdrawal of this undergraduate programme, and what assessment has been made by the Government of how the withdrawal impacts the number of undergraduates who go on to practice professional youth and community work in north and mid Wales?

Well, the Member’s right to point out that supporting and strengthening youth work provision across Wales is a priority for me as a Minister, but also it’s a cross-Government priority. It’s part of our programme for government, and that involves a number of things. It involves seeking to review the funding structure for youth work provision right across Wales, which is, I think, variable in different parts of Wales. We’ve made significant financial commitments as well to the sector. The work of the implementation board is really extremely valuable, and continues to help lead the way through the reforms that we are seeking to undertake, and we’re also—as the Member will know—looking at the legislative basis for youth work service provision right across Wales. I have not myself had discussions in relation to the particular undergraduate course that she refers to in her question. Obviously, the provision of courses is a matter for universities as autonomous institutions themselves, but I will seek to find out more in relation to that particular course, and I’m very happy to write to the Member in light of that.

I will indeed. As with all staffing matters, of course, schools are responsible for making decisions on how they recruit teaching assistants. Decisions will differ depending on the individual needs of the school and its learners. Schools are able to employ cover staff directly or they can engage them via their local authority or an employment agency.

In February 2022, you announced the creation of a teaching assistant professional learning steering group to develop further resources for school leaders and governors on the deployment of TAs. I understand that the steering group has been considering the issue of minimum entry requirements for TAs as part of its work—if you can confirm that's the case. And it's been brought to my attention from a constituent of mine that some agencies are advertising TA vacancies in schools for pupils with ALN that require no qualifications at all, and we are a little concerned about that. Can you please comment on this and provide an update on the work of the steering group on the issue of minimum entry requirements, and when that steering group is likely to report on that issue?

We had a discussion yesterday, in fact, at the meeting that I referred to yesterday in relation to the progress that is being made by that group, and it's very much got teaching assistants at the heart of it and leading some aspects of it, which I think is a really important feature of it. It's been looking at a range of aspects. Deployment is one aspect, and terms and conditions more broadly, and how we can standardise an approach to recruitment, employment and deployment between the different local authorities in Wales. And, as the Member was asking in his question, a significant part of the work has been enhancing professional learning and training for teaching assistants. Teaching assistants now have the same entitlement as teachers to the national professional learning entitlement, and the funding that is made available to schools to support professional learning now takes account of the number of teaching assistants on the school roll, as well as the number of teachers. So, there is a marked shift, I think, in the support provided to teaching assistants from a professional learning perspective. The group is also looking at questions to do with qualifications, as the Member knows. We already have a training programme through the teaching assistants learning pathway, which provides career progression for teaching assistants. One of the considerations is around professional qualifications more broadly. I'm afraid I don't know the date for the report on that aspect off the top of my head, but I'm happy to provide the Member with that particular piece of information separately. He'll remember that I gave an update to the Senedd on the work of the workforce implementation group more broadly a few months ago, and I'll be looking to do that periodically over coming months as well.

Can I thank Hefin David for tabling this question? As a former agency teaching assistant myself, as the Minister knows, I'm particularly pleased that you tabled this today. If the Minister will indulge me on a short but brisk walk down memory lane, Minister, you'll have a seen a very happy time for me, but one instance in particular I just wanted to draw your attention to today. Obviously, as a teaching assistant employed by an agency, I was paid on a daily rate, and on one particular day it snowed and the headteacher had judged it to be unsafe and so had sent the children home at lunch time. What that meant was that I was only paid half a day's pay on that day, which really threw off, obviously, weekly budgets and other considerations, and I had had all the same expenses in travelling back and forth to the school on that day as well. Obviously, I understand that you haven't got powers over employment law, but you do have powers over guidance that you can issue to headteachers and school leaders when making decisions like that. So, can I ask what steps you've taken in this field to ensure that no other teaching assistants in the future have to go through what I went through, all those years ago?

The Member makes a very important point, and more powerfully so for having been based on his own experience of it, of course. He's right to say I don't have direct powers in relation to it, but the reason I launched this work programme over a year ago is because of stories like the Member has just given and experience of variable practice, both between schools and certainly between local education authorities as well. The point of the work is to result in guidance in relation to many of those questions, questions to do with terms and conditions, progression, but also that will provide a basis, I think, for us to be able to progress on the question of pay as well, which is absolutely paramount, both from the experience of each individual teaching assistant, but also to make sure that we have a teaching assistant workforce to do the fantastic work that they do in our schools.

The Welsh Government continues to grow the school holiday enrichment programme, SHEP, and £4.85 million has been allocated for the programme for this year. The Deputy Minister for Social Services and I work closely to ensure alignment between SHEP and the Playworks holiday programme, which is run by play and childcare providers.

I'm grateful for that answer, Minister, and for the support you offer schools. Ysgol Pen Coch in Flintshire have an ambition as a school to run a holiday club as well, but they do, as a school, face additional challenges. I wonder, with what you've said there, is there any additional support the Welsh Government could provide schools, like Ysgol Pen Coch, to deliver holiday club provision. And I wonder whether you could ask either your officials in the education department or the Deputy Minister's officials in the health and social services department to look into the specific case of Ysgol Pen Coch. And if they could report back to me on that as well, that would be great.

I'm happy to do that, Llywydd. Generally speaking, where a school is interested in running a holiday club, they will contact their local authority in the first instance, and then local authorities can put them in contact with other providers who might be interested in working together with them. In terms of the Food and Fun school holiday enrichment programme, I'll make sure that my officials work with the Welsh Local Government Association to make sure that the school has whatever information that it needs in order to be able to take that forward.

I've also been contacted by constituents regarding Ysgol Pen Coch, which is the only publicly funded primary school for disabled children in Flintshire, where lots of the pupils have autism and related conditions or complex needs, and at which a holiday club would make a huge difference to the well-being of pupils and their families. However, as we've heard, this school, unlike other schools in the county, doesn't have provision for a holiday club, where, I'm told by constituents, this would be much more costly than in a mainstream school, and they lack the funding and the expertise, leaving parents and governors to take it on, which is unrealistic. And, as they say, children in specialist schools are being treated differently to children in mainstream schools, when their behaviours and improvements need this provision more and needs to be addressed. So, what, if any, specific requirement, therefore, exists for such provision within primary schools in general and in specialist primary schools for pupils with additional learning needs in particular?

Well, I hope the answer that I just gave to Jack Sargeant provides some reassurance to the Member that I will ask my officials to work with the WLGA to support schools specifically, to understand what the particular barriers are and how best they can be addressed at a school level.

I've committed £6.6 million over the reminder of this Senedd term to expand immersion provision across Wales. Almost £1 million is being invested over a three-year period to establish new provisions in Rhondda Cynon Taf and in the Vale of Glamorgan, and to significantly expand provision in Cardiff.

Thank you very much. I know that we are entirely agreed on the value of immersion. We've all reflected previously on people from Ukraine who have taken advantage of that provision and become fluent in the Welsh language. But there's huge variation in provision at the moment. In my own region, in the Vale of Glamorgan, thanks to the investment of the Welsh Government, a child can be for 12 weeks at school, from Monday to Thursday, whereas the experience in RCT at the moment is perhaps an hour a day, which is a huge difference. So, what I would like to see is how we ensure that immersion, and genuine immersion, so that children and young people can have the opportunity to be able to speak Welsh—. How can we ensure that it isn't a postcode lottery, and that we can provide the same kind of offer, be that in the Vale of Glamorgan, in Cardiff or RCT, which make up the three areas in terms of local authorities in my region?

Well, the encouraging news is that every authority has bid for some of this funding, and a certain amount has been provided to every authority. But the truth is that every part of Wales is in a different place in terms of its journey in providing late immersion. Some authorities have been doing this for decades, and innovating, and others are following their example. So, I don't think it's realistic today to expect provision to be consistent across Wales, but what I would like to see as part of the provisions within the Bill—and we've been consulting on this as part of the White Paper along with Plaid Cymru, as the Member will know—is what we can do to ensure that late immersion is available in all local authorities and that local authorities proactively promote the benefits of that so that the availability is more prominent to people and that the provision is more consistent over time.

Minister, as if with perfect timing, the Chair has just come in from the culture, sport and Welsh language committee, as they've just issued a report on the ability of schools to, obviously, offer the Welsh education that allows the language to flourish in our school settings, and part of that report identifies the ability for teachers to take sabbaticals to build up their Welsh language skills. The figure that is estimated that would be required is in the region of 17,000 teachers across Wales signing up to that sabbatical programme. Is that a figure you recognise? And, if it is a figure the Government recognises, what efforts are you making to promote the ability for teachers to take those training opportunities and ultimately grow the ability for the Welsh language to be received either in English-medium schools, or obviously in Welsh language schools?

Well, the Member makes an important point at the end there that it's not solely about teachers in the Welsh-medium sector; it's also about teachers teaching Welsh in English-medium schools as well. I think we need to be clear that there's a range of need across the system. I don't accept that the only way of making sure we reach that target is through the sabbatical scheme, though I do accept that it's a significant contribution to the progress that we want to make, but it simply won't work in all circumstances, and it certainly isn't the only way of making that progress. Our commitment to the sabbatical scheme is absolutely clear; we've continued the funding for it, and I'll look to do that, obviously, in future years as well. When you go to see—. I've had the opportunity to go and talk to classes of teachers, in primary generally, who have experienced that opportunity not just to learn Welsh and to teach through Welsh, but that kind of approach to pedagogy through the medium of Welsh that they learn. It's absolutely fascinating to see it happening, and it's obviously a very successful way of being able to increase the numbers able to teach Welsh. But, as I say, it's only one of the ways of doing that.

Question 6 [OQ59606] has been withdrawn. Question 7, Tom Giffard.

We work closely with local authorities to support them in the implementation of their Welsh in education strategic plans to ensure that all learners in Wales have access to quality Welsh-medium education, and we have plans in place to ensure that that happens.

Thank you very much for your response, Minister. I know that you agree with me about the importance of good quality Welsh-medium education at every stage of life, and you'll be aware of the Estyn report from November on teaching adults in a community partnership in Swansea, which highlighted that the Welsh language isn't incorporated in the curriculum in Swansea, that very few learners practise, use or develop their skills through the medium of Welsh as part of the provision there, and that the partnership doesn't evaluate learner outcomes and targets at the end of the study period. I know that you're aware of the importance of reaching the target of a million Welsh speakers in Wales, but we're not going to reach that target unless we take it seriously nationwide, including in Swansea in this instance. So, what steps have you taken as a result of that Estyn report to ensure that adults, and indeed everyone, can speak Welsh in the way that they want to?

Well, it's important to ensure that schools are supported with resources and materials to deliver the curriculum, and, as the Member knows, every school that teaches the curriculum now teaches a proportion of their classes through the medium of Welsh, and that's very encouraging. What we want to see as part of our plans—and this is also included in the White Paper—is that there's more and more progress and more and more provision in all schools in terms of Welsh-medium education. It's challenging, of course, to deliver that, but it's important that we have that ambitious aim so that every part of the system has that shared goal. That includes those who have a function in supporting schools, including the consortia and the school improvement services and so on. We are about to reform some elements of how we fund provision in order to improve standards in the Welsh-medium sector, and I will be making a statement in due time on that.

We've invested £2.5 million in the education welfare service this year, to enable the service to provide earlier support, before issues escalate, and more intensive support to learners with high absence levels. In addition, draft attendance guidance to support schools and parents to improve learner attendance is out for consultation, as of the start of this week.

I've spoken to you about it numerous times, and we've heard it in the CYPE committee. Obviously, there's a multitude of reasons why there are such high levels of absenteeism, but one of the contributing factors is the lack of school transport and the cost of school transport. I'm just wondering if you could give a few comments on that, please.

Well, as the Member will know, the Learner Travel Measure (Wales) 2008 provides certain minimum standards for transport requirements, and there is a review of that under way at the moment. The Member will also know about the work the Deputy Minister is doing in relation to bus services, for example, more broadly, which have been, obviously, very challenging and have been very concerning in the context of school transport in particular, and I know that he'll have more to say about that very shortly.

Well, particularly in financially challenging times, it is vital that all communication channels are used and are active. I engage closely with local government on budget issues and I meet leaders, through the finance sub-group and other groups, as appropriate. I also visit schools to listen first-hand to the funding experiences of headteachers.

Thank you, Minister. I read with great interest recently about your visit to Ysgol Mynydd Bychan and the innovative work that they are doing there to develop an interest in Welsh politics as part of the new curriculum. Now, many of us have had an opportunity to welcome Ysgol Mynydd Bychan to the Senedd on a number of occasions. Of course, one of the main issues in terms of securing good practice is sufficient funding. Apparently, around 50 schools in Cardiff are now working at a deficit. What practical support can you provide to ensure that schools improve their financial situations? Thank you.

As the Member will know, the system we have in Wales is based on the fact that it's local authorities that fund schools directly. But, to provide the financial support to ensure that that is possible, of course, the Welsh Government, last year, had significantly increased the budget to local authorities, and that was true the previous year too. Of course, the pressure on school budgets and the budgets of councils and the budget of the Welsh Government is well known to everyone by now. What we have done as a Government is ensure that, when a Barnett consequential was received recently, as a result of decisions in Westminster—completely insufficient decisions, I have to say—we ensured that that additional funding went straight to local authorities to provide for schools.

What I have been able to do within my budget, which is also used partly to fund schools, is ensure that the elements that are within my budget, namely the PDG and the funding that goes to schools to deal with the impacts of COVID, which are still very real in our schools, either remained at the same level or has increased. I would like it very much if we as a Government had additional funding to spend on public services in general. The only way to do that is to ensure that we have a different Government in Westminster that is ready to invest across the United Kingdom, and then we will have funding to invest further in our schools. But, in the meantime, we are entirely committed to making the most progressive decisions that we can make as a Government, within that budget that we have, and spend every penny that we can on our schools.

As a birthday present for you, Vikki Howells, I've got to question 10. Question 10. [Laughter.]

Diolch, Llywydd. 

May I wish the Member a happy birthday as well? Since 2019, over £17 million has been allocated to the further education sector to fund initiatives and projects to support the mental health and well-being of both learners and staff. In 2023-24, a further investment of £4 million will be allocated directly to FE institutions to continue to provide the support they need.

Thank you for your answer, Minister. I know the Welsh Government is planning a communications campaign to raise awareness of the groundbreaking '111 press 2' telephone mental health support service. What discussions have you had with colleagues in Government about developing resources that specifically can target students and staff within the education system, so that they are aware of the immediate one-stop shop service that '111 press 2' provides?

That's a really important question. Thank you to Vikki Howells for raising it. I was recently in an FE college in north Wales actually when we made the announcement of the further investment, and it's clear to me that colleges are very creatively looking for new ways constantly to be able to highlight to their learners the availability of support that they themselves are providing, sometimes locally, sometimes on a national basis. The '111 press 2' service is, of course, an all-age service and is available to everyone for urgent mental health support and advice, and this includes students in further and higher education.

So, in answer to the Member's question, my officials will be working with the sector to raise awareness of the service, and importantly, I think, to make sure that there's an integrated approach, so that it's integrated with the full range of support available to students, which includes counselling services in colleges and also specialist projects like SilverCloud and Kooth Student. I think colleges have developed considerable expertise, actually, in tailoring well-being support to the specific needs of their students, and they've worked very collaboratively with each other to produce a very substantial, by this time, body of resources and professional learning for staff as well over the last few years. 

Just to say the further education and higher education mental health advisory group, which is chaired by the Deputy Minister for Mental Health and Well-being, is also considering how best to ensure a coherent approach to student well-being support, and that includes communicating the range of support to institutions and to students themselves. 

Finally, question 11, Sioned Williams.

Our school essentials grant has made a big difference to many lower income families across Wales, helping to reduce the worry surrounding the purchase of school uniform and equipment. Funding of £13.6 million has been made available for this grant in 2023-24.

Thank you, Minister. We've been hearing more about projects to reuse school uniforms recently. Four pupils from Maesteg School met the King after winning an award by the Prince's Trust for their project recycling and exchanging school uniforms for free. But the review commissioned by My Nametags found that 1.4 million of items of wearable school uniform are thrown away every year, and that 81 per cent of parents always buy new school uniforms every year, and half of those surveyed said that they don't want their children to wear a uniform that had previously been worn. 

A constituent of mine, Laura Santiago, who's vice-chair of governors at Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Trebannws, has been in touch about the second-hand school uniform shop that she and her school run, where you can buy items of school uniform and give a small donation of your choice, and all of the profit goes back to the school. Laura says that the initiative is a way to ensure not just that school uniforms of good quality are available to everyone for a small cost, but it has a positive impact, of course, on the environment. However, she feels that more support is needed for this way of buying school uniforms to reduce costs and waste. Bearing in mind the Government's ambition to reduce the cost of the school day, would you be willing to consider establishing a national campaign to promote and normalise school uniform shops like this, so that parents in all parts of Wales can ensure that they can afford a school uniform and reduce waste also?

Well, the Member makes an important point, and congratulations to Laura Santiago for the work that she's doing in Trebannws school. There is good practice in many schools in Wales—that's what we heard when we consulted on the school uniform guidance recently. There was a very strong response in terms of ensuring that schools do much more in terms of exchanges and second-hand clothing stores in terms of affordability, but also, as the Member said, sustainability too. It's also an excellent opportunity to reflect the ethos of the school. Very often the pupils are most enthusiastic to be part of this, and that's very encouraging indeed, I think.

In terms of ensuring that this is rolled out across Wales, that's exactly why we have changed the school uniform guidance, so it's now a requirement for schools to do that, and I would expect every governing body to look at that now and to ensure that they put arrangements in place. 

I thank the Minister. 

No topical questions have been accepted today.

But there are two 90-second statements, the first of which is from Vikki Howells.

Diolch, Llywydd. Tyrone O'Sullivan was a giant of the Labour, trade union and co-operative movements. His passion and optimism for our Valleys was palpable. A secretary of the local branch of the National Union of Mineworkers, Tyrone led the workers' buyout of Tower colliery, the last deep pit in Wales. It was the mine in which he had worked all his life, the mine that had claimed the life of his father. When the UK Government closed the pit in 1994, the 239 workers pooled their redundancy and bought Tower. It was the final battle in the history of struggles between south Wales miners and Westminster, a struggle in which Tyrone had played a full part, a battle in which he led the miners to victory—a victory that kept the pit open, employing local people, putting money into the local economy. Indeed, Tower was one of the largest employers in Cynon Valley when it closed 13 years later. Tyrone then fulfilled his dream of placing a zipwire tourist attraction on the site.

It is fair to say that Tyrone dreamed big and achieved big. Sadly, he passed away on 28 May. Like many, I am proud to have worked with Tyrone and to have called him a friend. My sincere condolences are with his wife, Elaine, his family, and thoughts with all the lives of those who he touched and inspired. Rest in peace, Tyrone; we will ensure that your legacy lives on. 

Lord John Morris of Aberavon was not only a huge figure in Welsh political life, but also a strong advocate for Wales and its language.

Llywydd, yesterday in your tribute to him you highlighted how his early development in Cardigan moulded both his political views and his strong relationships with the agricultural world in Wales. Following his studies to become a solicitor, he became influential in the establishment of the Farmers Union of Wales, and never forgot the important role that agriculture plays in Welsh life and the Welsh economy. He then moved on into the world of politics, and on 8 October 1959 was elected as MP for my home constituency of Aberavon, and remained our MP for nearly 42 years. As the First Minister stated in his tribute, during that time John served in the Government in the 1960s, 1970s and 1990s, under three different Labour Prime Ministers—Harold Wilson, James Callaghan and Tony Blair.

Neither should we lose sight of his progression in his legal profession to QC, earning great respect amongst his peers. But after leaving the Commons he was made Baron Morris of Aberavon, and continued an active role in the House of Lords until his death this week. Many here will remember his visit to the Senedd and his speech commemorating the first Secretary of State for Wales, Jim Griffiths.

Now, throughout his political career he always believed in the decentralisation of government, stating on more than one occasion that the people in Whitehall didn’t always know what was best for Wales. As Secretary of State for Wales he introduced the first referendum on devolution in the 1970s, but was not deterred when that failed to secure the votes, and continued to work for devolution. He was undoubtedly a founding figure in the establishment of our Welsh Parliament, and we all sit here today as a consequence of that commitment.

Llywydd, on this occasion 90 seconds does not allow me to do justice to the distinguished career and contributions of John Morris to Welsh life, but we’ve all benefited from his beliefs and his actions, and I’m sure all of our thoughts today are with his wife Margaret and his family.

Thank you, John, for everything that you have done for Wales. 

Thank you very much for both of those tributes. 

Item 5 is next, a debate on the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee report, 'The Welsh Government’s EV charging infrastructure strategy and action plan'. I call on Heledd Fychan to move the motion.

Thank you, Llywydd, and it's a pleasure for me to be able to open this debate today, particularly being an interim Chair of the committee, but I was fortunate to be part of an evidence session on this issue. I would like to thank all those stakeholders who contributed to the committee’s work, as well as the members of the committee and, of course, the officials who support our work.

Our report on the Welsh Government’s strategy for promoting electric vehicles has revealed a disappointing lack of progress, with examples of broken promises, and a worrying lack of ambition. We believe that urgent action is needed to address these issues and put Wales back on track.

Earlier today, the Deputy Minister announced that £15 million would be made available to help local authorities increase the number of charging facilities. Of course, we welcome this announcement. But there are problems in this policy area that go beyond funding. Our work focused on the Welsh Government’s electrical vehicle strategy and the accompanying action plan, which was published in 2021. As a committee, we were disappointed that, two years on from the publication of the 2021 action plan, the Welsh Government had failed even to start to make progress on several key actions.

I’m grateful to the Deputy Minister for his response to our report. As is customary, he has engaged with the committee's work constructively and positively. And while I am disappointed that he has rejected four of our 21 recommendations, the timing of today’s funding announcement a few hours ago should silence anyone who doubts the potential impact of Senedd committees and the importance of scrutiny of this kind.

I will start by talking about the EV strategy itself. The Deputy Minister points out that £26 million has been invested in charging infrastructure across Wales since the strategy was published, and this has led to an increase of nearly 1,500 in the number of public charging points available, which is an increase of 120 per cent.

This response gives the impression that this is a sign of good progress, but we know that this isn’t the case. Only this week, in its damning report, the UK Climate Change Committee specifically focused on EV charging infrastructure, saying that the development of infrastructure is not happening quickly enough to support the transition to electric vehicles. It's clear, therefore, that it’s not just our committee that is concerned by the lack of progress.

The strategy states that the number of fast chargers needed will need to increase between 30,000 and 50,000 by 2030. That is, we will need a tenfold increase in chargers in the next seven years. But the committee was not convinced that the strategy or action plan will deliver these kinds of numbers.

The vision set out in the strategy is that all users of electric cars and vans in Wales will be confident by 2025 that they can access EV charging infrastructure when and where they need it. Well, we are only two years away from that target date, and several stakeholders pointed out that we have a long way to go in that short time. And despite the investment made to date, EV users and drivers highlighted problems with a lack of charging points, charging points not working, and the lack of information about the chargers.

Our first recommendation was that the Welsh Government should revisit the EV charging strategy in light of the changing patterns of EV usage and the growth of commercial EVs. The Minister has rejected this because he is satisfied that the strategy is sufficiently flexible to reflect changes in usage of EVs. But Deputy Minister, we will see whether you were right in being as confident as this when we reach that deadline in 2025.

I will move now to the action plan. I think that it’s fair to say that we were surprised at the lack of progress here. The action plan contains nine actions; two years on, there has been no discernible progress on five of them, and targets and deadlines have been missed already.

We were surprised that there was no explanation for why the actions were not delivered. In several cases, the Welsh Government said that it was considering whether to progress specific actions and how to do so, months after the deadline for them to be delivered had passed. For the committee, the lack of progress undermines the credibility of the action plan and has called into question the Welsh Government’s commitment to it.

And given the lamentable lack of progress on the action plan, one of the most surprising announcements from the Deputy Minister was about the creation of another plan—the delivery plan this time, rather than an action plan.

The Deputy Minister has provided a version of this detailed delivery plan with his response, and it is a big step forward in terms of the granularity of the plan and the clear steps that need to be taken to stand a chance of realising the vision in the EV strategy. It is certainly a step in the right direction. But after a couple of years of dawdling, is it possible that the Deputy Minister has finally found second gear?

Turning finally to specific recommendations, the Deputy Minister has rejected recommendation 12, that the Welsh Government should explain why it did not establish the connections group, even though this was promised under action 2 of the action plan. By not explaining, the Government succeeds in only one thing, namely undermining the credibility of the action plan. I suspect pressures on resources and priorities is the reason behind this, but if so, the Deputy Minister should come out and say so, as it is not unreasonable for the committee to seek an answer on this issue.

Recommendation 17 was also rejected. It asked the Welsh Government to explain why a charge point operator working group was not set up in 2021, as promised under action 6 of the action plan. The Deputy Minister says in his response that the Welsh Government and Transport for Wales agreed that the group shouldn’t be established until the delivery plan was in place. Well, there's no excuse for this, is there, Deputy Minister, because it's the Welsh Government that has decided on the actions and the deadlines for delivery. What's the point, therefore, of having actions and deadlines in an action plan if you have no intention of adhering to them? Could you at least explain to the Senedd why this has happened?

I'll conclude my opening remarks in this debate with those few comments. I look forward very much to hearing the other contributions and the response of the Deputy Minister. Thank you for the opportunity to do so today.

By January 2023, the number of charge points per 100,000 residents installed in Wales was 47, Scotland 69, and London 1,311. Those figures speak for themselves—[Interruption.] Sorry, Minister, but you are failing on this aspect. I'm here to scrutinise and challenge you, so let me finish, please, out of courtesy. You are failing to deliver and inspire a rapid roll-out of EV charging points in Wales. Unsurprisingly, and it was well put across by Heledd Fychan, the committee is concerned that the strategy may fail to achieve its vision that, by 2025, all users of electric cars and vans in Wales will be confident they can access EV charging infrastructure when and where they need it. A plan for one or two 50 kW rapid chargers on the strategic road network every 20 miles is now inadequate.

Olly Craughan, of DPD Group, discussed this strategy's lack of consideration for commercial vehicles. DPD group is decarbonising its fleet quickly, and they have nearly 3,000 EVs across the UK. The need for this strategy to cover commercial use is clear, yet you have rejected recommendation 1 and you just simply indicate that a plan for freight is being developed. Logistics UK have expressed their disappointment, especially as they find that 62 per cent of van operators plan to have decarbonised their van fleets by 2030. So, it would be beneficial to us and businesses operating in Wales if you could provide a date here today for the publication of the plan for freight and indicate what changes you're going to deliver.

Logistics UK have also highlighted that adopting electrical commercial vehicles means expanding depot charging, yet a third of companies interviewed have cited power supply infrastructure as one of their biggest challenges for delivering depot charging. Some operators reported estimated costs from their energy network operator of over £1 million for upgrading their energy supply to enable this charging. So, can you explain, Deputy Minister, how you are going to deliver a fair and equitable approach for funding electricity connections to enable the expansion of depot charging?

The WLGA have highlighted that, whilst equality issues are mentioned in the strategy, they're not really explored in depth. Dr Neil Lewis stated that 40 per cent people do not have off-road parking, which makes it difficult for them to even access charging for their EVs at an affordable rate. In 2020, I urged the Welsh Government to investigate how it could support the conversion of publicly available lamp posts into electric car charging points. It’s used all over the UK; they are using electric car charging points. Three years on, and it is a disgrace that there is only one lamp-post charging unit in the whole of Wales. When considering that London already has at least 7,000, the Labour Government has absolutely no excuse for such a lack of provision here. Clarity on what action you are taking now to address the crisis would be welcome, because as it stands, I am certainly not convinced that you are adhering to your own commitment in response to recommendation 3 that equality and social justice is being taken into account. 

I would also like to highlight a very important statement in this report. Five of the nine actions were not delivered according to the timescales in the action plan, yet no explanation is given for why the actions were not delivered on time. The whole lack of progress undermines the credibility of your action plan, and actually calls into question the Welsh Government’s commitment to it at all. 

In response to recommendation 6, you actually wrongly dispute the point. Connections group to report in the 2021 financial year: not delivered. Network of charging forecourts across Wales at approximately 20 miles across the SRN by 2025: not delivered. Review of policy and regulations by 2022 and updates made where appropriate to support EV uptake: not delivered. Establishment of a charge-point operator working group in 2021: not delivered.

You’ve rejected recommendation 7 that the Welsh Government should deliver on its commitment to review the KPIs annually, but clarify why.

I will conclude on a positive. I welcome the notes that draft amendments to building regs should be forthcoming and that these will mandate the provision of EV charge points for each new dwelling with an associated car parking space. But, Minister, you have a long, long way to go to actually put words into actions, and I think that we as a Senedd are asking that here today. Diolch. 

You won’t be surprised to know that I'll take a slightly different tone in this debate, because I absolutely agree with the Welsh Government that the majority of electric vehicle charging infrastructure should be delivered by the private sector. The Welsh Government doesn’t run petrol stations, so why should they run electric charging points? I think this is very much something that is fundamental. The private sector needs to step up to the plate, and there are lots of ways in which—. 

I’m grateful to you for taking the intervention. I appreciate the point that you make about the private sector needing to step up to the plate. Indeed, it seems that they have in many respects, in order to fill some of the void that the Welsh Government has left. But wouldn’t you agree with me that if the Welsh Government has been given tens of millions of pounds to expand the roll-out of electric vehicle charging points, the paltry number of electric vehicle charging points provided by the Welsh Government is completely and totally unacceptable?

No, I don’t. I agree that the private sector has installed electric charging points, and they’ve done it for perfectly valid commercial reasons, which is that they want people to visit their site, and therefore they are making it attractive to people who own electric vehicles. Supermarkets, for example, have started putting in electric vehicle charging points. I’m surprised that many of the hotels along some of the electric vehicle charging point deserts—for example, going up the A470—haven’t taken advantage of this opportunity to encourage more drivers to want to stop and eat at their hostelry while they’re charging their vehicle. That seems inexplicable to me, whether you’re a hotel, a pub, or a restaurant, that you haven’t jumped at this opportunity to increase your commercial opportunities. I think that the money that may have come from the UK Government needs to be used on different things, and I support the way the Welsh Government is approaching this.

So, we know from the evidence we took that the strategy to have the aspiration met by 2025, that all electric car and van users can be confident of access to electrical vehicle charging in time, is challenging and it's ambitious but pragmatic. So, I'm hoping that the Welsh Government will be able to elucidate in your response, Deputy Minister, that you think that that ambition is still doable. Because I think it's really important that we endeavour to encourage those who can afford to move to electric vehicles to do so when they're changing their vehicle in the normal manner. Because obviously, all that supports the climate emergency.

I want to focus in my remaining remarks on the more challenging issues around on-street parking in built-up areas, which I know has been identified as one of the two priorities of the electric vehicle charging infrastructure programme. So, at least half my constituents' homes don't have off-street parking. They either have a small garden at the front, or their house goes straight on to the street, with possibly not even enough for a rubbish bin, never mind a car to be parked there. And clearly, we need to avoid the perverse consequence of everybody who's got a front garden then converting it into a hard-standing garden, with all the sustainable drainage consequences that we rehearsed earlier in the climate change questions. So, much of the housing in Cardiff Central is terraced housing, similar to many Valleys properties, where, literally, they have no space big enough. And what I don't want to see is the proliferation of new pillars on pavements, which will be a hazard to people with pushchairs, to people with sight problems.

We need to have an alternative way of looking at this, in the context of the fact that all of us need to be thinking about considering whether or not we really actually need to have a private vehicle, rather than simply hiring a vehicle from a car club, as and when we need to use one. And obviously, in the context of an urban environment like Cardiff, that is a significant and important consideration. So, I want to know what discussions the Welsh Government has had with local authorities like Cardiff on how we can structure our electric vehicle charging points to be much more friendly to people to be able to play in the street, rather than having all these vehicles cluttering it up, and having centralised electric vehicle charging points overnight—maybe in commercial businesses' parking places, where they don't need to use them overnight because they're closed; they could extend it to a club of local community people, to enable them to do that there. It's about using urban spaces effectively, without causing other, perverse consequences. And it seems to me that that is quite a major challenge in the urban environment, and one that is worthy of a good deal more debate.

I'd like to thank the committee team, our Chair, and our interim Chair for their work.

And as we've already heard, with the need to move towards sustainable transport becoming ever more pertinent as a subject worldwide, the adoption of electric vehicles is a vital opportunity to reduce carbon emissions and ensure a greener future. Now, we in Wales should be in a good position to lead the way in developing a comprehensive infrastructure for electric vehicles, but, as we've already heard, the reality is disappointing. The committee report notes the serious deficiencies in terms of the infrastructure, as has been mentioned. At present, Wales has the lowest number of public charging points and fast or superfast chargers of the population in Great Britain—I won't rehearse those figures. But it is clear that, two years since the action plan on this issue was published in 2021, to date, I would say, certainly, that satisfactory progress hadn't been made by the Welsh Government on several key actions, and there are still a number of issues that need to be resolved. Today's news about a further investment of £15 million is very positive; that is certainly something to be welcomed. We need a clear plan to enable this to lead to clear outcomes, to avoid the repetition of mistakes that have taken place over the past two years. I'm sure that everyone in the Siambr today would agree that the seriousness of the climate crisis facing us now means that we have no time to waste. To begin that journey, it is crucial that there is effective collaboration and co-ordination between key stakeholders. The Welsh Government, local authorities, as we've already heard, and transport agencies must work hand in hand, with the private sector too, to create a comprehensive infrastructure, while there is a need for close collaboration with energy providers to assess relevant grid capacity. 

Now, as we've heard, private partners are going to be exceptionally important in this, through, for example—. And perhaps we should be thinking about encouraging public/private partnerships as a result of this, for example, through offering financial incentives such as grants and tax credits, thus benefiting from the funding and resources expertise of both sectors. 

We also need a thorough assessment of the needs of the charging infrastructure. We must analyse the landscape and identify appropriate locations for electric vehicle charging stations, based on a number of factors, such as population density, as Jenny's just talked about, transport corridors, urban centres, residential areas, workplaces, retail centres, and popular tourist destinations—there are so many factors that need to be considered here. In addition to this, it is vital that fast charging infrastructure is just as prominent in rural areas as it is in urban settings. On top of that, these charging stations should be positioned in areas that have been well lit, thereby prioritising convenience and safety. That is crucial.

We must be clear about the kinds of charging stations that we need, bearing in mind the predicted growth in the number of EVs in Wales. This should include a blend of methods of charging, such as fast charging stations, destination chargers, and appropriate charging methods in residential areas.

Now, the Government should take a proactive role, of course, in encouraging the use of electric vehicles. At present, only 0.17 per cent of all vehicles in Wales are electric. And that shows how vital it is that we see a significant increase. And introducing financial incentives, again, such as tax credit grants for individuals and for businesses—. There are so many things that must be done, and that must be aligned, and we need to give this aim a boost. 

Now, I'm aware of time, so I'll say in conclusion how vital it is that we take steps to remedy the situation. A few weeks ago, the most recent report of the World Meteorological Organisation underlined that the planet is dangerously close to a temperature rise above the target of 1.5 degrees Celsius within the current decade. The climate crisis is not something that is beyond the horizon now; it is here now, and it is impacting our lives with every day that passes. So, we do need to have a system that doesn't just think about the public transport sector—that is going to be vital—but in terms of the way we live our lives, this has to be a crucial step that we take. And with those words, I'll conclude. Thank you. 

It's a pleasure to take part in this debate, and can I just begin by thanking colleagues on the committee for their work, jointly with all of us, in taking evidence, and also, to those who gave evidence, and to our Chair as well, and to our clerking team and the researchers? And it is a hard-hitting report, but it's been interesting the different approaches to that. Some have used the hard-hitting report to give the Government a good kick and walloping, as you'd probably expect—Janet. [Laughter.] Others have taken it to say 'Well, hold on, let's just look at where the balance of responsibilities lie as well, and who pulls their weight on this'. 

Can I just begin my contribution by saying something I don't think has been said today? EV, domestically, is not going to be—. We're focusing on EV points today, but EV cars, EV vehicles, are not going to be the solution for everybody. There are real social justice implications here with the roll-out of EV points, the affordability of EV technology, the sustainability of EV vehicles themselves and the carbon impacts and all of that. But let's put that to one side just for a moment and focus on the EV.

I think the point was well made in the Government's response to the 21 recommendations that we have, of which all but four have been fully accepted. It's a hard-hitting report. I would say that the Government has actually responded well, by and large. I can focus entirely on the four, which I will turn to in a moment, but actually accepting the majority of the recommendations shows, I think, contrary to what we've heard so far by some contributions, that the Government has taken this report very seriously, Llyr, and the impact of this report and the call to Government. But the report also makes clear—. The Government's response to the report makes clear that this has got to be primarily for the private sector to step up to the mark. It's for Government to help build a framework and to help it address market failures. So, in that respect, before I turn to the detail of the recommendations in the report, I do welcome not only the Government's response to the report, but also the announcement, as Delyth was saying, of the £15 million extra into Welsh electric vehicle charging points, and I've looked at the detail of some of this as well.

It's really interesting, because I don't have an EV car, but if I were to get one, most of my travelling, or my wife's, would be back and forth to work on a daily basis, within a 50-mile radius, if that, if we were doing that. But actually, we do take trips all the way to north and south Wales and so on and so forth. It's great to see, within the detail of the announcements that have been made, that there's a substantial investment in central Wales, in west Wales, in north Wales, in those parts that we do need to do this connectivity. What we now need is those private operators and the public authorities and others to make use of this and actually deliver those electric charging points so that nobody has to worry about it anymore.

And there is no direct contrast, by the way, with London and the south east, where these lovely people down there, by and large, are in an ultra-urban environment. Some of them have masses of disposable income and are buying up and are driving the electric vehicles. Well, good luck to them all there. It's not the same, I have to say, as well; we've got to find something that works for Wales, but the investment here within this £15 million is spread right across Wales. I do have a couple of questions on it. I just want to flag my own area for a moment. It's good to see money going into places like Rhondda Cynon Taf and so on. It also talks about money beyond Cardiff in terms of the Cardiff regional zone. I'd be interested to know whether that includes all the local authority areas within that wider Cardiff zone so that it does link up with the Neaths, the Swansea, and then into further parts of Wales and so on.

You also mentioned in your statement, by the way, the private sector taskforce. I welcome that. I would be grateful to hear any further detail on that, because I think that question of the private sector stepping up to the mark, it does need Government intervention to help drive that, but I think pulling them together to say, 'Right, how are we going to do this together?'—a bit like broadband in a sense. 'Where can we help as Government, but where are you going to step up and do this, because you will ultimately benefit?' In so doing, can I just suggest to him that one member of the taskforce you might want to look at is the representative of an indigenous Welsh business that is growing like Topsy, called Clenergy EV, based in my constituency? I think they are third now in terms of growth and leadership globally in terms of software applications so people can join up fleets. The public sector and individuals can join up where they can charge—in hospitals, in private charging facilities, in somebody's home, as well as these independent ones that are setting up.

I'm going to run out of time. There are four recommendations within here that you've rejected, Minister. Two of them, I notice, are timescale ones specifically. It would be helpful to know why the timescale has slipped on those two particular ones. On the first recommendation, recommendation 1, which you've rejected there, it would be good to know, because we have had representations from the commercial sector about what is going to happen with the network for them. So, some response to their concerns that the report didn't go far enough in addressing their concerns, but neither did the Government response; well, how are we going to respond to the commercial, the fleet sector, in driving forward these EV points? Diolch yn fawr iawn, Dirprwy Lywydd.

It's already been noted that Wales has fewer rapid chargers compared to the rest of the UK, and the lowest number of public charging devices per population in Great Britain. It's probably, therefore, a good job that Rowan Atkinson doesn't live here in Wales, or he might feel even more duped by the electric vehicle revolution.

Deputy Minister, the Federation of Small Business believe the Welsh Government should revisit the EV strategy. They believe that the aim needs to be clearer; there needs to be clear timelines and support for businesses. Like other Members, I'd be interested to see how Welsh Government is co-operating with the private sector in this matter.

I'm pleased that the Welsh Government accepted the recommendation that Ministers should provide an update on the development of the transport decarbonisation programme, which will support the decarbonisation of buses and taxis and private-hire vehicles. Can you indicate what discussions you've had with Cardiff Bus to move to a net-zero fleet?

I also welcome the announcement today of £900,000 over the next two years for Cardiff Council to roll out EV charging and rapid charging infrastructure at Lamby Way for 12 electric refuse collection vehicles. But what about other councils in my region—the Vale of Glamorgan and Rhondda Cynon Taf? What action are they taking?

Across the region, how certain is the Minister that money from Welsh Government will ensure that the right electric charging infrastructure is at strategic sites, such as park-and-ride facilities? And I liked Jenny Rathbone's idea of using large areas that are empty for larger periods of time.

I know that some developers and builders in my region are looking to include heat-source pumps, solar panels and electric charging points in every new-build housing. I welcome that, and I welcome the consultation you've also mentioned this summer about amending the building regulations to mandate EV charge points. Could you provide a timescale for the completion of that consultation, and would you consider legislation to make EV charge points mandatory on new houses?

As Jenny Rathbone mentioned, many houses in my region, including my own, were built well over 100 years ago and do not have a front garden. I've raised this issue with you in the past on behalf of constituents. People living in terraced houses, with difficult lane access, feel the difficulties charging an EV would be far too prohibitive. I saw recently that Octopus Energy currently offer an overnight economy charge of 10p per kWh, plus a standing charge of 52p a day per household. But, in Rhondda Cynon Taf, the proposals for a charge was 35p per kWh when the public charging stations are up and running. It's fair to say that, as Huw Irranca-Davies mentioned, there's a real issue here about discriminating against residents of terraced housing and discouraging the use of EVs by members of the community. We must ensure that there isn't an electric vehicle charging divide because of where people live. Perhaps, Deputy Minister, you could update me on the work that is being done to provide charging points in terraced housing, as has been piloted in Oxfordshire. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I just start by thanking the members of the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee for producing this interesting and informative report? Let's hope that this report serves as a wake-up call for the Welsh Government and we finally actually do see some meaningful action, instead of the usual warm words. Time and time again, we hear Ministers in this place claim they're part of the green Government, yet this report does beg to differ. The Welsh Government has got a truly shocking record when it comes to delivering electric vehicle charging points, which many of my colleagues, indeed, from all various platforms here, have indeed been saying so far.

Now, we are going to be seeing more electric vehicles on our roads, like it or lump it, going forward, especially in the light of the UK Government's ban on the sale of petrol and diesel cars. So, it's absolutely imperative that drivers do have access to charging points. In 2021, the Welsh Government published an action plan to increase the uptake of electric vehicles in Wales. How well is that working out? Because I note the committee actually picked up on this fact, that the Government has failed to even start making progress on a number of key actions. One of the Welsh Government's aims is, and I quote, that:

'By 2025, all users of electric cars and vans in Wales are confident that they can access electric vehicle charging infrastructure when and where they need it.'

End quote. I saw the Welsh Government's announcement, as many of you, perhaps, have today, that they're going to be investing £15 million in EV charging, which may sound like a lot of money, which is great and very welcome. However, having done a bit of Googling myself while we were sitting here earlier on, the average charging point costs between £1,000 to £1,500, plus VAT. Now, if you don’t take into account the installation or any of the other charges that could go into connecting it or et cetera, we still hit below 10,000 charging points, and that’s quite laughable in my opinion. It appears that Labour Ministers really are living in cloud-cuckoo-land if they are nowhere near close to hitting that milestone.

I took one from one of your colleagues.

Go for it, Jenny—go on.

I think we have to think differently about this, because vehicles aren't going to be used all of the time, every day of the week. And therefore there's got to be a change of attitude, in sharing electric vehicle charging points so that—. Most people would only ever need to charge once a week, and then you don't need to clutter the environment with too many electric vehicle charging points. And so communities could share the cost of installing electric vehicle charging points at £1,500 between them—that wouldn't be a big deal. If they have a car, they can afford that.

Of course, I understand your point, Jenny, but bearing in mind I have dealt with a lot of people who drive cars for commuting purposes, for hospital appointments, those people who have disabilities, who have a need to be able to drive their cars, even then—. I completely agree with you, we do need to have more charging points, regardless of how that's done. I know my colleague, Darren Millar, raised the question earlier, which wasn't answered as well and was kind of rebuffed, whereby he asked—. Money has been given by the UK Government to the Welsh Government—where has it gone? Where is it going? Why hasn't that been spent on EV charging points? [Interruption.] I just want to finish my point. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. According to the Welsh Government's own stats, Wales will need an extra 30,000 to 50,000 fast chargers by 2030. Now, by my calculations that I just mentioned, £15 million won't even hit that figure or even close to it. So, is the Welsh Government confident that it's going to actually even hit that target that it has made? I'd be interested to know what the Welsh Government is going to be doing to urgently improve the provision of EV charging points in Wales, especially in light of this report, because, to me, it looks like Ministers have spent the last few years just sitting on their hands.

I support what the Plaid Member from south-east Wales said earlier, that Ministers must think more innovatively and incentivise a faster roll-out of EV charging points, with a greater focus on expanding provision in rural communities in Wales. Personally, I have no doubt more people would use electric vehicles, but, at the moment, they simply can't because it's not practicable. This needs to change, Deputy Presiding Officer, and it needs to change fast.

And I call on the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, Lee Waters.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. And I'd like to thank Members for their contributions and the committee for their work in producing the report. I welcome the challenge and the scrutiny by the committee, both in our oral evidence sessions and in today’s report. And I would welcome them having an ongoing role to hold our feet to the fire. I think it’s a very important function that they provide. And we have accepted the overwhelming majority of the recommendations made by the committee and we are delivering on these.

Myself, I’m a fan of not putting 'accept in principle' when we don’t agree with something, to avoid fudging. I’d much rather say, ‘We don’t agree’ and set out the reasons why. And that’s why, on four of the recommendations, I’ve set out that we do not accept, and I’ll just address those in turn now.

Recommendation 1 asks the Welsh Government to revisit our EV charging strategy. Now, we are confident the strategy, which was developed to take into account a rapid change in technology and usage, remains valid. The principles and the framework remain valid and don’t need revisiting.

Recommendation 7 asks the Welsh Government to commit to review and publish the key performance indicators annually. Instead, we’re planning to review and publish the KPIs at strategic points in time—not to an arbitrary rhythm, but when we are reflecting key stages of the delivery programme and the availability of resources. And comment was made about the impact of resources, and, of course, it is a fact that, when our budgets are being cut and when the number of civil servants we have is held down because of austerity, inevitably there is a limit to what we can do at any one time. And that affects all of our actions. And I would have thought, from the comments from the Plaid Cymru Members, that, having Members in their group who are working closely with the Welsh Government as designated Members, they would know the reality of the operation of the Government and the tight resourcing that is available and the judgments that have to be made. And there’s no point denying the fact that that has had some impact on our ability to deliver this.

But, more than that, I think we have decided to step and pause in our analysis—rather than just spraying money willy-nilly, to look at where the market is planning to serve, to analyse that and to map that, and to look where Government intervention would be best. So, I think, by surveying the landscape first and then ramping up the spending second, that's a much better approach than the approach the committee seems to be chiding us for. 

Minister, will you give way on that point?

I'll happily give way to Huw.

I just wonder whether, with that approach that the Minister is suggesting that he takes, when we come to the work of the taskforce and sitting down with them, is that a point at which he'll be able to explain to the Senedd what those resources allow in strategic points of review of hitting the KPIs would be? I get what you're saying about, 'Pause. Work with the sector'—we've got to demand the private sector step up to the mark on this—but there's got to be a point at which you come back to the Senedd and say, 'We now have got a clearer understanding of when we're going to go for this.'

Well, let me come to that. Let me just first address recommendations 12 and 17, which ask the Welsh Government to establish the connections group and the charge point operator working group within weeks. Now, we are in the process of setting up the two groups. However, we believe it's essential that we take time to develop a robust delivery programme before our formal engagement with distribution network operators and charge point operators. So, we're not going to be doing that within weeks, but we will be doing it soon, and that's why I've not accepted those recommendations. 

We have learnt a lot from our approach to broadband, and, if you think back to the debates we've had on broadband, we've decided an outside-in approach in broadband. So, rather than looking at where the market will effectively meet demand in its own right, in dense urban conurbations, rather than over-serving those markets by also putting Government funding in, in broadband, we decided to target those areas the market would serve slowest, and that situation has worked well, and I think we should follow that same approach with electric charging points, because, as Huw Irranca and Jenny Rathbone have echoed, this is primarily a role for the private sector, with the Welsh Government intervening where there's market failure or the market is slow to respond. I think that is the best use of public money and it reflects the fact that we don't have the full lever of powers in this area.

Now, the statement the committee made, which has been augmented, I think, in a fairly daft way by some comments in the press and by Members, is that

'Welsh Government had completely failed to deliver many of the Actions in the Action Plan and by the lack of progress towards achieving others.'

Now, I think that is an unfair evaluation of the work and the results that we have completed to date. Now, for this reason, I welcome the opportunity to update Members on the progress that we have made, and we shouldn't lose sight of how complex and expensive this area of work is. Our financial analysis suggests a total capital cost of over £350 million will need to be invested to install sufficient en-route and destination charging by 2040. Now, given the scale of the challenge, as I say, we expect most of this to be delivered by the private sector, and our role is to step in to help that, to remove barriers and to look where we can make targeted help available. So, I've decided to again learn from the experience of the broadband delivery, where the National Infrastructure Commission a few years ago recommended we create a barrier-busting taskforce for broadband to work with the private operators to identify where Government action would be helpful.

So, we're going to do the same with electric charging points; we're going to set a private sector taskforce that will help us engage with the market, bring down any barriers to investment and accelerate the roll-out of charging infrastructure. Now, that may involve financial intervention, but it's just as likely to involve issues around planning or stubbornness of different institutions to respond in a timely manner. So, I think that will be welcomed by the sector as a practical thing we can do to unlock private sector investment, because, as Huw and Jenny mentioned, there is market appetite here on commercial grounds to invest in this, and our job is to lever that into Wales rather than to try to duplicate it.

Now, since the publication of the strategy, we've focused our resources on two key priorities. First, delivering a baseline charging infrastructure across Wales that gives users the confidence that they can travel across our country without fear of running out of charge. Now, Darren Millar asked how we'd spent the money that we've been able to draw down. Between 2020 and 2022, we have delivered £26 million of ULEV, as it's called, funding, to local authorities, to install charging infrastructure across Wales, and this year we've approved a total of £15 million of funding for the roll-out of EV charging infrastructure, and that includes £8.9 million for local authorities. We did an initial trial asking TfW to help us to roll out the infrastructure and concluded that, actually, local authorities were far better placed to play that role, and we have now decided, in a fulsome way, to reflect that in our funding decisions.

So, we have spent the money well and there's infrastructure to show for it. It has proven very complex in some cases and very slow and frustrating. So, in the Rhyl case, in Darren Millar's area, there is a very nice charging plaza, which I have visited, but that was much delayed because of the need to create an extra substation, about access to the grid, soaring construction costs and so on. So, this is not straightforward, but I think we are making some good progress.

And our second focus has been on developing tools and plans that'll help local authorities to accelerate the roll-out of their network. We will complete the installation of 19 rapid charging points at least every 25 miles across Wales and the strategic road network this year—that's two years ahead of the action plan target. It's a major step forward to delivering our vision, and it stands in contrast to what Janet Finch-Saunders said, that the figures speak for themselves. And Natasha Asghar tried to portray this as a truly shocking record. I'm afraid the facts don't confirm those biases.

Jenny Rathbone asked about some reassurance that we wouldn't be cluttering the pavement environment by having charging infrastructure on pavements. I absolutely agree, and that's why the national standards that we're just about to publish make clear that that is not acceptable. And, to make sure that we've got those standards right, I did share it with the secretariat of the cross-party group on active travel, got them to review the document, they've made a number of amendments, which we have accepted, so I hope that addresses—

Deputy Minister, you need to conclude now.

—that concern.

I fear I haven't been able to address all of the points. Let me just simply say to conclude: there is much that has been done. At the moment, we have more than our per-head share of charge points for the number of people in Wales who own electric vehicles, and as that ramps up, as we want it to, so our coverage will ramp up. But it'll ramp up in a strategic way, because we've taken the trouble to do the preparatory work, to do the baseline, to establish private sector relationships and do this in a measured and prudent way. And I really hope the committee keeps an eye on our progress and keeps challenging us and, together, we'll get to the right place. Diolch.

I call on Heledd Fychan to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to the Deputy Minister for the response and to everyone who has contributed to this debate.

Certainly, the ongoing role is something the committee will certainly welcome, and the committee will be relooking at this during the Senedd term. And, obviously, as I mentioned at the beginning, the fact that we saw that announcement today is proof of the importance of scrutiny.

I was concerned in terms of the Deputy Minister's response in terms of KPIs and so on, and the lack of commitment to a firm date, because, for scrutiny purposes, it is useful for us to know when those are expected, so that we are able to monitor progress, so I would not personally accept that point.

I think Huw Irranca made the very, very important point in terms of social justice, because, obviously, for a number of our constituents, they don't even own cars, let alone electric vehicles. That's not going to be affordable, hence why there's been such an emphasis, in previous debates, on public transport and so on. So, I do take your point there, and it is very well made.

And in terms of the infrastructure, which was mentioned by many, many Members—Jenny, Delyth and Rhys ab Owen—in terms of the challenges with terraced housing, for instance. There are huge, huge challenges, and, Jenny, you were right to mention in terms of those trip hazards for those—. Already, pavement parking can be a huge challenge; if you put more trip hazards, then for more elderly, vulnerable people, those who have a visual impairment, it is a huge challenge, and we see those in many, many communities currently, where people are trying to make that switch.

But the reality at the moment is that many people who are making that switch are finding it difficult with the infrastructure that's in place, of not having the security that they will be able to get from north to south Wales, et cetera, on those journeys. We heard of many people not certain that they would make it to Eisteddfod yr Urdd in Llanymddyfri last week with electric vehicles. So, there is a challenge there about making sure that the infrastructure, even when it's in place, is working, which is something we also heard as evidence through this work.

Delyth, you mentioned the importance of safety—

—that safety is so vitally important too, because many of these public sites aren't well lit. And certainly, we must be ensuring that this is safe for everyone if we're going down this route.  

Both Natasha and Janet mentioned some of the barriers at present and some of the challenges, and I thank you for your contributions as well.

But certainly, I would want to acknowledge that the private sector does have a key role in terms of providing charging points, and that's clear in the report. But the Welsh Government must not neglect its important leadership role here either. We need to improve performance in this area, and many key stakeholders do feel that they're being left in the dark, and they're waiting eagerly for any sign of definite progress. And as I mentioned in opening this debate, the UK Climate Change Committee in its progress report has stated that we need a significant and definite increase in speed if the Welsh Government is to reach its targets by 2025. Those are the Government's own targets.

I was disappointed to hear the Deputy Minister talking about the co-operation agreement because this is a committee report, and we are contributing as cross-party members of a committee. And this is a report that scrutinises the Government's own targets. I do appreciate that you have outlined the important work that the committee will have in continuing to collaborate and to scrutinise in this area. It is of great interest to our constituents and it's important in terms of our response to the climate emergency.

I would like to conclude by thanking Llyr Gruffydd for his role as Chair of the committee whilst this report was being developed. I'm sure Llyr would have a great deal to say had he contributed to the debate today, but thank you to everyone who has contributed, and we will accept your challenge, Minister, to continue to scrutinise and continue to push the Government on this issue.  

The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No, therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36. 

Item 6 is the first Welsh Conservatives debate this afternoon on accounting practices at Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, and I call on Gareth Davies to move the motion. 

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Deputy Llywydd, and I'm pleased to open this debate this afternoon and move the motion tabled in the name of my colleague Darren Millar. But we're here again, aren't we? Here again in this Senedd Chamber, highlighting another failure and another scandal surrounding Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. Only recently, we stood in this Chamber discussing the return to special measures, the damning report into vascular services, and quite often speak about the Welsh Government's failure to reduce waiting times at Glan Clwyd Hospital's A&E department, safe discharges, and the failure to build north Denbighshire community hospital in Rhyl, and, of course, reducing waiting times for patients across north Wales. 

But, in addition to this, we seem to have entered into a whole new ball game of learning of the alleged widescale fraud on behalf of the most senior personnel the board employs. But how did we learn this? Were we addressed with a statement from the Welsh Government on this very Senedd floor to where you were elected? No, of course we weren't. We had to learn of the news through the leaking of the Ernst & Young report to the press, and we're yet to see the full publication of the report and the detailing of the accounting failures that have been alleged to have occurred. 

Now, let's put a bit of perspective to this. The people who are alleged to have committed fraudulent behaviour are some of the highest paid people in the land, with the chief executive role being £250,000 per year and the finance director earning a cool £150,000 per year. All right if you're lucky enough, isn't it? But these individuals earn more than the First Minister and even the Prime Minister, and their primary role and function is to be the custodians and guardians of the public purse, and to make shrewd and calculated decisions in the best interests of taxpayers. Well, 'What happened there?', I ask.

What myself and the Welsh Conservatives want to get to the bottom of is how long has the Welsh Government known about this, why wasn't action taken at the time, why was there a failure to bring a statement to this Senedd Chamber from the health Minister informing Members of the news, as most of us only found out from an article by Guy Adams of the Daily Mail. It's hardly a fantastic advert for the Welsh Government's view of democracy on behalf of the people of north Wales, as you don't seem to enjoy discussing the issues that most people of north Wales are anxious about. Because the people from that area are anxious about the overall performance of the health board, and its chronic failures over the past decade or so. 

This is people's lives at the end of the day, and what the people of north Wales need are competent individuals who take their needs seriously. And, I'm afraid, the latest scandal is just further evidence that the health board and the Labour Government have failed the people of north Wales. What would Aneurin Bevan or even Betsi Cadwaladr herself be thinking if they could see all of this happening?

I've kept my remarks quite short with the time of the debate, but I conclude my comments to urge the Welsh Government and Betsi Cadwaladr to publish the entirety of the Ernst & Young report to the people of north Wales, so that we can see the extent of what has happened here, so that we can start to repair the damage and bring back the integrity and public assurance of the health board, if there, indeed, is a shred of that left. I urge Members to support our motion unamended tonight. Thank you. 

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

Formally. 

It's déjà vu, isn't it? And it saddens me immensely that here we are again, talking about an issue of utmost seriousness in relation to Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. It's eight years—eight years—since it went into special measures first. Eight years in which we have witnessed a catalogue of scandals. Each one undermining trust, each one undermining staff morale. And this Ernst & Young report that we are discussing today, in so many ways, sums up the story of Betsi. I see it very much as a microcosm of the health board's failures.

It's a report that highlights deep mismanagement. It's a report that highlights financial impropriety. It's a report that highlights a lack of transparency. It's a report that highlights an inadequate response by Welsh Government, and its failure to provide the transparency by giving us officially a copy of that report is a part of that. It's another example of the finger of blame being pointed at the wrong people. Remember, this is a report that was commissioned by the independent members of the board, who wanted to put things right and wanted to shine a light on what was going on in Betsi Cadwaladr. Yet, it was they who were effectively sacked and forced out before this report made the light of day. This report is based on financial matters. The inadequacies that shine through it are very similar, aren't they, to the problems that we have seen in mental health provision, in vascular services, in countless reports that have highlighted serious failings in the leadership of the health board. 

We've certainly lost faith in Welsh Government's ability to manage Betsi Cadwaladr, and remember this is a Government that directly runs, effectively, through special measures, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. And it's the taking of responsibility that is so, so crucially important. As I said earlier, I note in the Conservatives motion today they're calling for the report to be released in its entirety. Absolutely, we need to see that happen. When Adam highlighted the contents here, it was something that shook even further the faith that people had in what was going on in trying to remedy issues at Betsi Cadwaladr. 

I will keep on harping on about the need to restructure Betsi, not because I want restructuring—goodness me, we'd like to avoid that—but it's not working, is it, currently? And, again, I'm calling on Welsh Government to put a plan in place. Put a plan B in place. But here we have a report that we have to see out in the open. I want to see a full police investigation into it, and we need to be on a path towards better health services in the north, because we're not there yet.

I really am very grateful for the opportunity to speak, albeit briefly in this debate. I know that there are many Members who wish to contribute. Firstly, we should recognise that NHS staff in north Wales, as across the whole of the United Kingdom, do amazing work each and every day. As others have already said, the health board in north Wales is in special measures, but so too are more than 20 health boards in England, I believe, and that can be in no small part due to pressures resulting from years of austerity. But the designation of special measures status should not undermine our support or commitment to the NHS. Surely, it's those American health insurance companies and private healthcare providers that are most excited and gleeful about so many English health boards, along with Betsi Cadwaladr, being in special measures. I believe that nobody in this Chamber wants them to realise their ambitions and take apart our precious NHS. 

The Ernst & Young report has caused enormous interest in north Wales, and information emerging from it has undoubtedly further damaged public trust in the organisation. It was a report, as has been said, that came as a result of the inquiry that was initiated by the former independent members, and I'd like to say this: the report is owned by the board, and the board must rebuild public trust in the organisation. To build trust you must provide the truth and be transparent, and so the board should not be asking for legal advice over whether to publish the report, but instead seeking legal advice over when and in what form it should be published, in a form and at a point that will not prejudice any disciplinary action that may have been initiated or may yet be initiated. And finally, I’d also urge the board to publish the legal advice it receives, so the public can enjoy maximum transparency.

I'm disappointed. I know, Minister, we all do feel that ultimately it is your responsibility. This is a health board that is now in special measures because of all the failings over many years, actually. But I actually am disappointed in the Minister for north Wales, Lesley Griffiths, who herself has, by deleting the motion, sent a very clear message. She does not want the residents in north Wales and her constituents and mine to see a report into the health board that the Welsh Government are funding and that these people rely on for good healthcare.

The Minister for Health and Social Services—to be honest, there’s huge disappointment there, too. You recently wrote to me stating that the Ernst & Young report was commissioned by Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board and that, in view of the ownership of the report and the ongoing disciplinary process at the board, it is for them to decide on any publication of the report. I find that a complete abrogation of responsibility on your part, and so many of my constituents and patients feel the same. At the end of the day, it’s you that allocates taxpayers’ money to the health board. It is you, the Welsh Government, that have the board in special measures, and it is you as a Welsh Government that have the levers at your disposal to ensure that this report is published.

Leadership has been a major factor throughout all the problems and the failings that we’ve seen in this health board. Leadership was also a major factor when placing the health board in special measures in 2016, so there have been at least seven years of leadership failure, and there is a real chance the findings in the Ernst & Young report could be seen in financial years prior to those reviewed. In fact, a snippet from the leaked report states that there have

'been systematic cultural failings in the finance team and leadership'

at Betsi board. This is all we’re asking for—no organisation, or indeed a government, is any use with poor and weak leadership. Minister, a number of my constituents are actually suffering as a result of all the failures of this health board. Please take the responsibility for it yourself. You could do that today by supporting our motion. Diolch.

Before I call on Mark Isherwood I want to clarify that the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales submitted the amendment in her role as Trefnydd, not in her role as Minister for north Wales. Mark Isherwood.

The Minister refers to the number of organisations in England in special measures but fails to mention that these organisations are not in escalation for long, because NHS England brings in an external expert team to resolve the difficulties. Speaking publicly in March, the health board's former chair stated:

'A range of longstanding shortcomings and concerns were escalated formally at the start of September 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'.

Speaking here in March, I quoted from a statement I'd received on behalf of the former independent members of the health board, in which they stated that

'Welsh Government and the executive team run the health board, with the board an afterthought at times.... Those who battled to see the organisation learn from past failings have been replaced.'

At its meeting on 3 May, the Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee, or PAPAC, received evidence from former independent non-executive members of the health board forced to resign by the Minister. This included:

'it was actually the independent members then that brought in Ernst & Young to come and do an independent further in-depth review, and that currently is a report that clearly has not yet been released into the public domain...we were absolutely flabbergasted at that statement of 'no further action' from NHS counter-fraud when items within the Ernst & Young report quite clearly show a range of financial irregularities of a significant amount, not just within Betsi, but potentially reaching into other departments across the NHS in Wales, other health boards, and, in fact, straight into the Welsh Government itself.'

and, 'The financial performance wasn't our only area of concern. The Ernst & Young report should be released, given what we knew.' 

As PAPAC Chair, I have been in discussions with the health board for some weeks, to obtain a copy of this report for formal committee scrutiny. We have offered to discuss various options regarding how this report can be shared with us to ensure that any ongoing investigations are not impeded. I am committed to working with the health board to secure a copy of this report through official channels as soon as possible.

We are all aware of the public interest in these matters, and it is frustrating that, while the contents of the report have been detailed in the public domain, PAPAC has not been afforded the opportunity to conduct appropriate scrutiny. It is imperative that our request is dealt with expediently to allow prompt and thorough action and scrutiny by PAPAC.

In the event that the report is not made available to the committee, we will explore our powers to call, under section 37 of the Government of Wales Act 2006. However, I hope that we will not need to exercise this legal power and expect the health board to recognise the respect that is due to a national legislature on a significant matter such as this. 

I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services—Eluned Morgan.

Diprwy Lywydd, many thanks for allowing me to reply to this opposition debate on the Ernst & Young report into accounting management within Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. The audit committee of the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, on advice from the Welsh Government, commissioned Ernst & Young to undertake a forensic review of accounting management after Audit Wales qualified the health board’s accounts for 2021-22 and identified internal control failures.

As has been said on numerous occasions in this Chamber, this was not our report, so I can’t ask for it to be published. This report was commissioned by the health board, so any decision to publish any or all of the report is a matter for the health board. In fact, the health board’s chair has informed me that the health board is seeking legal advice on whether it is able to publish the report. Should that advice be to publish the report in full or in part, that is what they will do. I think that they are very anxious to do that if they get the legal okay to do that.

As I said previously, the report makes very sobering reading, and sets out some really serious failings in financial control at the health board. It did not find any evidence that anyone has personally benefited from these actions, but it did amount to extremely poor accounting practices. I have received assurances from the interim chair and interim chief executive that the health board has developed, and is implementing, a financial control action plan that responds to the issues raised in the EY report and Audit Wales findings.

My officials and the financial planning and delivery directorate of the NHS executive are working closely with the health board on the development and implementation of a financial governance and management action plan, as part of the special measures framework. This will include ensuring that the financial control action plan developed by the health board in response to the EY report and Audit Wales findings is robust and is implemented.

The health board is also progressing the management of the issues raised in the report, in line with their existing procedures and policies. Where there is any indication of incorrect actions taken by individuals, appropriate disciplinary processes are being followed, but they must be allowed to be concluded before jumping to any conclusions. There's been a great deal of interest in relation to the publication of this report; this has included Members in this Chamber quoting from leaked copies of the report, which I hope Members will appreciate could significantly compromise the extremely important processes the health board is following to get to the bottom of the issues highlighted in this report while also respecting individuals' employment rights.

As the First Minister and I have previously stated, the Welsh Government does not comment on leaked documents, particularly when—as in this case—internal procedures are still going on. I told the Chamber recently that my understanding is that the key individuals named in this report have been suspended. Whilst the health board follows its processes and procedures around key individuals named in this report, it would not be appropriate for me to say any more on that until the necessary procedures have been completed. 

I'm very grateful to you for taking an intervention. You have made that statement before, that key individuals have been suspended, and I've very pleased to hear that. Can you tell me whether key individuals at the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership have also been suspended, and not just at the Betsi Cadwaladr health board?

What I can tell you is that we have looked into shared services as well, but nobody has been suspended in that area. It is not for this Chamber to act as judge and jury on matters that will directly impact on people's personal and professional lives, as well as their well-being. The NHS counter-fraud service investigated concerns raised in the EY report, having had an opportunity to review the full report, including the appendices, and in April, decided that there was no evidence that anyone acted in a way that was motivated by personal gain, and announced that it would not be taking any criminal action at that time. North Wales Police has yet to confirm whether it considers there are grounds to launch an investigation into claims made in the report. I know the police have had early discussions with the NHS counter-fraud service and the health board and that the health board is co-operating at this early stage. I would expect them to act in a transparent and honest manner should the police decide to investigate.

Will the Minister give way?

Yes.

I'm grateful. There is a suggestion in the report, which has been reported in the media, that a company, Lightfoot Solutions, effectively changed the date on a proposal in order to allow the financial misreporting to happen. I think you met with the company in October last year. Is that company still an approved supplier to the Welsh NHS?

Lightfoot Solutions is providing services to some NHS organisations in Wales. Until we get to the bottom of what exactly happened and what needs to be done—. I can give you an assurance that we have looked at that. We are looking at whether there was any impropriety and exactly what happened. So, that process has been undertaken.

There are serious issues contained within the report and the health board is currently addressing these. This includes consideration of whether officials of the health board were part of the financial issues covered in the report. This work is being done in accordance with disciplinary procedures of the health board. I can give an assurance that I am taking these issues seriously, and as you know, the issues raised by Audit Wales, as well as grave concerns elsewhere on the efficiency of the board, did lead to putting the board into special measures.

Audit Wales highlighted this issue, and it carries out a crucial role in terms of auditing health bodies and providing assurances on the use of public funds in all health boards in Wales. Audit Wales will now audit the accounts for 2022-23 in terms of health service bodies. The boards of all health boards and trusts within the NHS are responsible for working with auditors, and they're also responsible for assuring themselves that financial practices and management within their organisations comply not only with their internal procedures, but also with their legal and statutory duties. I have asked my officials to note the key issues in the report that could be pertinent to other organisations in the NHS, and to share those themes and key findings with them. So, that's my response. I have asked them to consider any other steps that need to be taken in order to ensure that lessons are learnt and that the practices addressed don't happen or can't happen within other NHS organisations here in Wales.

We must bear in mind the power of our words in this Chamber and beyond. What we say has an impact on how previous and current members of staff, and prospective members of staff, feel about working within the health board, and how patients and their families feel about the health board. We mustn't forget that health board staff—

Minister, you need to conclude now.

—are working hard for the people in north Wales under very difficult circumstances. So, I hope that I will have an opportunity during the next few weeks to provide a further update on what has changed within Betsi recently. Thank you.

I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I have to say, I'm a little disappointed at the Minister's response to the debate today. We know that, under the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006, you do have powers to direct the health board in any way that you see fit, given that your position is that that health board is in special measures, and that means you could direct them to publish this report, which we all know is in the public interest for them to be able to see. We need some transparency. We need to be able to see this information out there. I've read the report. A copy was shared with me, as it was with other Members, on an anonymous basis, and it is scandalous: false accounting, fraud, what appears to amount to misconduct in public office being committed. All of these, of course, could be criminal matters and that is why it's absolutely appropriate that the police are carefully considering whether to take a prosecution forward.

But what else is in this report? We know that there's the deliberate alteration of documents in collusion with a supplier, Lightfoot Solutions, as has already been mentioned—a supplier that you've already confirmed is still working in the NHS in Wales. It was awarded a £1.8 million contract without going through the proper procedure. In fact, they deliberately circumvented those procedures, and people are now making money at the expense of the taxpayer as a result of those circumventions—deliberate circumventions—of the financial controls in the health board. There's no problem with the financial controls; the problem is with people deliberately circumventing those financial controls, and that's what this report exposes. It's a forensic report, which is very detailed, which goes into lots of detail, not just about Lightfoot Solutions, not just about many individuals in the health board—there are some 75 individuals listed in the front of the report—but it also, of course, goes to the heart of NHS Wales, because it goes to the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership.

Now, frankly, people across Wales will be astonished today to learn that Simon Whitehead, the head of procurement at NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership, who deliberately set up a purchase order that was designed deliberately not to go through the system properly or go to Lightfoot Solutions, is not suspended for his actions. This is a person who is a senior employee in that procurement team at NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership. Frankly, I think that that amounts to gross misconduct and that that individual should no longer be able to work in the NHS, but you've told us that this person is in work, that there's been no suspension, and it doesn't appear as though anything is happening to that particular individual. There are many other individuals, of course, named in the report, who still appear to be at their desks in the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, doing the day job, on significant salaries, who knew what they were doing in covering up information, deliberately bending the rules or breaking the rules deliberately, in order that they could have their way.

Now, you've had this report, and so has the health board, for four and a half months. I don't know how long it takes to organise a dismissal of people and to hold them to account, but it shouldn't be taking four and a half months, frankly, given the information in this report, which seems to be pretty black and white as to what was going on. There are appendices to the report, which I haven't seen, which are copies of e-mails and other details, which I also believe need to be in the public domain. And if they are, I think, frankly, Minister, people in north Wales will be cheering you on for being a champion for them in exposing the rot at the top of this organisation, so that we can weed it out, have a good clear up, and get decent people in charge who have the right culture, who are honest, and want to deliver the change that we so desperately need to see in our health service in north Wales.

So, four and half months on, we still haven't seen a single person sacked. We've seen people move from the health board who were involved, and get other jobs elsewhere, including senior roles, again, within all-Wales NHS organisations, including Sue Green, the former executive director of human resources at the health board in north Wales, who now has an even wider role across the whole of Wales. And this is an individual who failed to sort out and procure and deliver a new chief executive within a specified time frame—

Darren, you need to conclude.

—something that was criticised heavily by Audit Wales. So, I urge everybody in this Chamber, and I remind you that we're not calling on the Minister to publish this report; we are calling upon the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board to publish this report, because it's in the public interest. And I very much hope, therefore, that Labour Members, particularly those in north Wales, will not be whipped and that they'll be able to use their own judgment in being able to call upon the health board to publish this report, and get it into the public domain as soon as possible.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections. I will therefore defer voting under this item until voting time. 

Item 7 this afternoon is the second Welsh Conservatives debate on blue carbon habitats, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move the motion.

I take great pleasure, actually, in speaking on this debate today because, too often, when we've talked about our carbon-zero objectives, we ignore, at our peril, the massive contribution that blue carbon habitats can make to those ambitions. Wales’s woodlands and peat bogs are regarded as being critical to our carbon strategy. We must treat marine and coastal ecosystems, not just in the same way, but with greater priority. One hundred and thirteen million tonnes of carbon is stored in the top 10 cm of marine sediments in Wales. According to NRW, that represents almost 170 per cent of the carbon held by Welsh forests. Marine ecosystems can capture more carbon per acre than forests. For example, a square metre of seagrass captures triple the amount of the equivalent from a rainforest, and 10 times the amount from grassland. So, clearly, we need to build on the success of project seagrass. It is considered that salt marshes in estuaries with high suspended sediment loads in the water column, such as the Severn estuary, would actually sequester more than our forests—at least 1.5 times as much. Now, I know the Minister has heard these arguments before, and I know, to a degree, you do agree with us on this. Now, we need a plan to support and expand salt marshes in our estuaries around Wales. This is in line with the findings by NRW in 2020, and I quote,

'In particular, the protection and restoration of habitats such as saltmarsh and seagrass which store and sequester carbon could contribute to significant increases in blue carbon. Greater protection of areas of seabed supporting (or with the potential to support) bivalve beds could also increase carbon sequestration.'

Now, we've had this evidence for years, but I'm not alone in thinking that little progress has been made. Studies have proposed that the cessation of bottom trawling would promote improved carbon storage in sub-tidal sedimentary habitats. Yet, bottom trawling is still allowed. Restoring inter-tidal and shallow sub-tidal habitats would yield the greatest per-unit area benefit in terms of increased carbon sequestration. Now, there are various techniques that have been used to achieve this, with managed realignment being the most commonly applied and proven method for creating inter-tidal habitats. This has, for example, been undertaken in Morfa Friog in Gwynedd. With the coastal flood risk ever increasing, it would be worth while assessing if there are sections of the Welsh coast where management realignment could take place without threatening anybody's homes. For some shallow, sub-tidal, biogenic habitats, such as seagrasses and oyster beds, we should be looking to Celtic partners. Many authors have argued that carbon stored in shells represents a long-term store.

Now, I've been liaising with Ulster Wildlife and the Wild Oysters project. They are doing such amazing work in Northern Ireland and in Conwy. There are oysters under Conwy marina, the pontoons, and this is helping to restore a historically important species. Just think, the significant Mumbles or Oystermouth fishery was the largest in Wales, supporting 400 fishermen across 188 boats. Locally to Conwy, there have also been productive native oyster beds during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries near Caernarfon and Bangor, off Puffin Island, and around Anglesey, but sadly, now, only a few small native oyster populations remain in Wales. Our friends across the Irish sea have proposed the idea of Celtic oysters, where Wales could work with Northern Ireland and other stakeholders to restore our shellfish. What an amazing international mission that could be. So, Minister, we want to see you take the huge potential strides in combating the climate and nature crises by looking out to our sea, and it's in our amendments.

For years, I've been explaining the need for a Welsh national marine development plan and spatial plan as well that clearly shows where every type of project could take place, including blue carbon, but yet, we're still having to call on yourselves to deliver this spatial approach to marine planning. Similarly, you are even calling on yourselves to deliver national blue carbon recovery. However, over a year on since our climate change committee supported calls for a national blue carbon recovery plan, we are yet to see one. Both the Wales Environment Link and the Marine Conservation Society are spot on when they highlight the carbon storing capabilities of the ocean as critical in meeting the target of becoming net zero by 2050.

This week, the climate change committee has disclosed that Wales is falling behind on actions needed to fight climate change. Now is the time to unleash the blue carbon potential for Wales. At the end of the day, marine ecosystems can capture more carbon per acre than forests; they can help combat the climate and nature crises. So, please back our proposals today. 

Now, to put it bluntly, devolving the Crown Estate would be an unnecessary distraction that would cause even more delays. We will never support that. Our environment deserves better. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

I have selected the amendment to the motion. I call on the Minister for Climate Change to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths.

Formally.

Blue carbon habitats are hugely significant when it comes to the struggle against climate change. These coastal ecosystems have the ability, as we've heard, to sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and to store it in sedimentary layers. They can capture and store carbon at a greater rate—as we've already heard from Janet Finch-Saunders—at that greater rate than any forests on our land, so it is vital, therefore, that we focus on safeguarding and protecting these habitats effectively. 

And the idea of restoring blue carbon habitats offers opportunities to Wales to go beyond carbon sequestration. It offers an opportunity to contribute to our international targets, such as the Paris agreement. These ecosystems have global potential.

And in restoring these habitats, there is a biodiversity aspect and element too, because these habitats are home to a range of plants, of species, including a number that are under threat. Restoring these habitats, in a way, is a means of providing a sanctuary to these species. This is important in terms of our national resilience, the beauty of our coastline, and the sustainability of our fisheries.

These habitats protect our coastline; they act as natural buffers that shield our shores from rising sea levels, from erosion, from storms. It isn't just the nature emergency that we need to keep in mind here, vitally important though that is, but the climate emergency too. It makes economic sense—sense for our coastal communities—that we invest in initiatives that protect these fragile systems. And that's why we do need a clear marine development plan that identifies suitable locations for renewal energy development in our marine area. It should be based on a comprehensive understanding of existing habitats, coastal geomorphology and water quality. It should be drawn up in concert with scientific experts, policy makers and stakeholders. Their expertise should guide us. And it must include monitoring the health of those ecosystems and tracking biodiversity indicators.

Now, I know that we don't have long for this debate, so I'll just say in closing that we have to involve local communities, environmental groups and industries that operate in coastal areas, because their buy-in is essential with this and so are their perspectives. We need to make sure that all these people feel a sense of ownership of this policy. It is their future, of course, that we’re providing for here as well.

So, I do thank the Conservatives for bringing this debate to our Senedd. Janet, I can't agree with you on what you said about the Crown Estate. I don't think it's a distraction; I think that it is essential in the context of what we're talking about here, but I do welcome the fact that you've brought this debate to the Senedd. Diolch yn fawr.

I thank the Welsh Conservative group for tabling this motion. Three years ago, I led a short debate on the need to add blue to the green recovery, and I called it 'the teal new deal', and I think that it speaks to this room today. 

As I said then, and, as we've heard today, blue carbon ecosystems are some of the world's most efficient absorbers of carbon dioxide, and long-term carbon sinks. As NRW reported in 2020, the carbon stored in our marine sediments represents 170 per cent of the carbon held in Welsh forests. And seagrass meadows capture carbon at a greater rate than tropical forests, and that has already been said here today. So, therefore, protecting and enhancing blue carbon is a key piece of the net-zero picture. 

Policies like the Welsh Government's national forest have captured people's imagination, here and internationally. But because blue carbon habitats are often less visible they can attract less interest and therefore political energy, which is why projects like the pioneering Welsh seagrass nursery in Pendine are vital. Project Seagrass's restoration project at Porthdinllaen on the Llŷn peninsula is already a big success story. Developing a large nursery is the next step to achieving the team's aim of restoring 2,500 hectares of seagrass in the UK by 2050. I hope the Welsh Government is able to support that going forward.

A word of caution, though—environmental management never works in silos. And this is especially true when it comes to our watercourses. We cannot restore blue carbon habitats without getting a grip on pollution and nutrient management upstream. So, I urge the Conservative Members, and all other Members who have expressed support for blue carbon habitats today, to back the Welsh Government in delivering the 170 kg per hectare nitrogen whole-farm limit this autumn.

It's a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon. There are over 100 million tonnes of carbon stored in just the top 10 cm of marine sediments in Wales. That's nearly double the amount held in Welsh forests. So, we can say that when it comes to net carbon emissions, seagrass works twice as hard as our Welsh trees, as important as our oaks and sycamores are. In fact, some studies indicate that it can hold three times as much carbon per hectare.

The carbon-capture potential of these aquatic plants plays an integral role in managing the acidity of our water. Dissolved carbon dioxide needs to be absorbed, or this risks the further acidification of our oceans and waterways, which damages marine life and is harmful to human health too.

We know that there were 83,000 sewage spills into our waterways last year; 600,000 hours of sewage discharge. It is a particular issue here in Wales, with overflow outlets spilling 65 per cent more often than in England, and six of the 20 most polluted UK rivers being in Wales.

These spills can cause eutrophication, a harrowing process, where the growth of algal blooms is promoted due to nutrient-rich sewage spills. The algae act as big green blankets, which shade the aquatic plant life from sunlight, killing them and subsequently all of the fish in the body of water affected, creating 'dead zones'. Without seagrass and a national blue carbon recovery plan for Wales, we could see a dramatic reduction in aquatic biodiversity, because we know that marine ecosystems rely on the thousands of hectares of seagrass habitat along our beautiful Welsh coast—4,582 hectares, to be precise, which has the potential to support over 350 million fish and over 450 billion saltwater invertebrates. But, sadly, as scientists are telling us, these vital habitats are under threat and are in a perilous state. But you don't need to be a scientist to understand this; we learnt it in school: when the producers of an ecosystem like green plants reduce in number, that has a knock-on effect down the food chain. If we lose our seagrass habitats, we could see a collapse in fish numbers. This would be damaging for our fishing industry, a sector that has already seen overall farmed finfish and shellfish fall 82 per cent in value between 2019 and 2021, with a near total collapse in the tonnage produced, from 3,100 tonnes to a mere 214 tonnes, a 93 per cent decline.

Losing our seagrass habitats would be the final nail in the coffin for fishing, which will, in turn, have a domino effect for tourism, another industry under siege at present. Fewer lobsters, crabs, scallops, cod and salmon will devastate communities across Wales, from Rhyl to Tenby. When blue carbon ecosystems are degraded, they emit the carbon they previously stored. A 2019 study estimated—

Gareth, you need to conclude now.

Okay. I'll leave it there, because I've run out of time. So, just to sum up, though, briefly: let's develop that national blue carbon recovery plan and work to expand Project Seagrass, bringing the benefits to all parts of Wales and especially the Vale of Clwyd. Thank you.

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

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I very much welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate today, though I am sorry it's such a short debate and I will not be able to address all of the issues raised, given the amount of time I will have. I will just take a moment to mention, though, the Wrexham primary school who came and sang me the most brilliant rap song about the importance of seagrass and gave me a beautiful book, which I'm just arranging with the Commission to have displayed in the Oriel, so that as many people as possible can see it. They were very passionate, as they rightly should be, about seagrass.

So, Net Zero Wales, our emissions reduction plan, published two years ago, acknowledges the role that saltmarsh and seagrass could take in our carbon budgeting, through the greenhouse gas inventory, but it also goes further in exploring the role those and other blue carbon habitats can play in adaptation to and mitigation of the effects of climate change. Many of the habitats are already part of our marine protected area network and we are taking steps to protect and restore them. As well as funding the management of the network and research to guide our priorities, we're also delivering significant new conservation action, one example being the allocation of over £1 million to the work at Rumney Great Wharf, which will re-establish saltmarsh habitat there. And Joyce mentioned one of the others, in Llŷn, which I'm particularly keen on. We will be augmenting this approach through delivering our programme for government commitment to fund targeted action to restore seagrass, saltmarsh and other nature- and carbon-rich coastal habitats.

We are currently engaging with partners to consider the most effective means of delivering the scheme and building the capacity necessary to deliver at scale and pace. We therefore support the first three points of the opposition motion, which sets out some of the challenges and opportunities around marine habitats and carbon sequestration. Our amendment seeks to significantly strengthen the calls for action. The motion on the Government amendment illustrates the difference between the approach to net zero favoured by the Conservative Party and the approach currently being pursued by the Welsh Government. Blue carbon is currently not accounted for in our net-zero pathway, and, therefore, as our understanding of the science improves, it will present new opportunities for contributing to global efforts to limit the impact of global warming.

This is not an either/or—it's not seagrass or forests. I'm regularly questioned by Members of the opposition—. If there are new opportunities for offshore wind deployment, do they think that this means we should deploy less onshore wind? It is not an either/or; we need all of the opportunities to get us to net zero, not some of them, or to highlight one over the other. If there are new opportunities to accelerate decarbonisation in Wales to contribute to global efforts, then these should be opportunities to go further, not an excuse for reduced ambition in other areas. So, I would call on all Members in the Senedd who agree that the new opportunities around blue carbon mean we must do more rather than less to vote in favour of the Government amendment today. 

The opposition motion also calls for plans. I do agree that these are an important part of delivering on policy aims, but in themselves the health of the oceans will not be restored with words alone. That's why the Government amendment reflects our commitment to fund blue carbon recovery, with a focus on important habitats along the coastline. As well as helping wildlife, these globally significant habitats are part of Wales's natural heritage, and, as projects already active in Wales have shown, it's possible to achieve dramatic improvements where public bodies, conservationists, science and communities all work together, as Delyth very helpfully highlighted. 

And just to say at this point that I'm the native oyster champion, Janet; I'm very well aware of the Oystermouth oyster heritage. I'm very pleased to see that we've been reseeding native oysters in Swansea bay, which has, as I said earlier in answer to Mike Hedges, been reaffirmed in its good conservation status for another year. 

The opposition motion also calls for a spatial approach to marine planning, and as a Government we have committed to taking this approach in the way that our Welsh national marine plan is implemented. A spatial approach, however, cannot be just for one sector. It needs to ensure sustainable use of the sea in ways that will enable the development of a greener economy in Wales, whether that's in energy, shipping, fishing or other uses. 

The original motion made a major omission by failing to deal with the most important question of responsibilities over the Crown Estate. They are the owners and decision makers on the management of the sea bed and significant areas of Wales's coastline, and therefore have an absolutely critical role to play in relation to blue carbon. We call on the UK Government to devolve responsibility for the Crown Estate to Wales, as is the case in Scotland. It's clearly not the case that the Conservative Party agrees with us, but it actually can't explain why. I'm absolutely baffled by your saying that it's a distraction. How can control over the sea bed that you want us to improve be a distraction when it's the very thing that would allow us to do it?  

Deputy Llywydd, I've been brief in my remarks, given the time allocated to the debate, but I hope it's a subject we'll return to, as it deserves a much lengthier debate and exploration of the issues involved. Diolch. 

I call on Samuel Kurtz to reply to the debate. 

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I'm grateful for the two minutes that you've given me in closing this debate, and the Minister made reference to the shortness of this debate, and I look forward to the Government bringing forward a debate in their own time on this topic. 

But, in opening the debate, Janet Finch-Saunders spoke eloquently, set the scene for the need for blue carbon seagrass and why this is really important to this. In my own constituency, I've got Atlantic Edge Oysters, and I went out to visit, and, when the tide was out right on Angle peninsula, you're able to see the seagrass there, as it's laying limp waiting for the sea to roll back in and bring it back up to life. it's an incredible things to see, this tiny little piece of seagrass in these sea meadows, and how much carbon they can actually sequester. 

I think what's really important—and, really, the way that I visualise things—is the fact that seagrass can capture carbon up to 35 times the rate of tropical rainforests. Surely we should be jumping up and down about the importance of seagrass in our fight to sequester more carbon. So, I think this debate is a fantastic starting point in trying to get this discussion up and running. 

Delyth Jewell spoke eloquently as well with regards to the wider habitat element of seagrass and blue carbon, and what that brings in terms of our biodiversity and the demands we have and we make of ourselves and policy makers in restoring these habitats, so that biodiversity has an opportunity to flourish and thrive once again, and I think that's incredibly important.

And that's a point that Joyce Watson continued in her observations and contributions, and she made reference to the Welsh Government's water regulations and the 170 kg per hectare nitrate limit. I agree we need to look at pollution within our waterways holistically, across all sectors. I would only point and highlight to Joyce Watson the evidence from the Irish environmental agency, which has introduced nitrate vulnerable zone regulations in Ireland, where they've seen spikes of nitrates because of these regulations actually making the problems worse, because, as soon as those problems exist, the eutrophication—Gareth gave us a very eloquent science lesson on eutrophication and the scientific process around that—. Those limits actually can cause detrimental effects to our waterways.

I can see that the clock has gone red, so, to not test the Deputy Presiding Officer's patience any further, I will just suggest that all Members support our motion. Thank you.  

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

Item 8 this afternoon is the Plaid Cymru debate, full devolution of water resources, and I call on Delyth Jewell to move the motion.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Our debate this evening has many courses flowing into it. Their torrents direct us towards our future as a nation even as they are propelled by our past. There's the tide of territorial integrity; the constitutional right that, I believe, Wales should have powers over our resources; and our motion makes clear that Wales should have the ability to regulate the transfer of water beyond our borders. 

Then there are other tributaries that feed into the urgency of this debate—the climate and nature emergencies, those founding, grounding forces, the swell of which could yet overwhelm us if we don't change our own course and convert our society's obsession with carbon fuels into greener ways of sustaining our lives.

And there is, beneath all this, an undercurrent that governs how we see this debate, and that current stems from our past, our awareness, so close to the surface, of how Wales's modern politics, and certainly the national question, sprung to prominence because of water and the drowning of Capel Celyn in the 1960s. It is perhaps impossible to discuss water in a Welsh context without an awareness of what went on before. So many streams of thought, Dirprwy Lywydd, flow into this one debate. But let's begin at the source. 

Because water casts a spell over the psyche or spirit of our nation, and any debate on water in this Senedd—a Senedd, some might argue, that came into being because of the row over Tryweryn—is impossible without mentioning that bitter history.

There are some place names in Wales’s history that have a greater resonance, that speak of anger and the betrayal of entire communities; place names that have become symbols, because the places represented have since disappeared. And more than geography was harmed by their loss. As Harri Webb tells us in his poem, 'Colli Iaith':

'Losing land and losing homesteads, / Losing Elan and Tryweryn; / Losing Claerwen and Llanwyddyn / And the whole country beneath a lake's water.'

Elan. Tryweryn. Names, words that we are called upon to remember. Names that bring to mind cultural destruction, that feeling of incapacitation. Words that express loss. Water in Wales is not just a supply or utility.

Water has played a part in our industry. Our waters washed the coal clutched from the earth by our grandfathers' hands, but industry stained the waterways too—those mountain streams dyed black with soot, the legacy of mining that still desecrates our dales and valleys. And though the mines have closed, mostly, the grubbiness persists. Our society's obsession with deregulation and monetising our natural world, those profligate, wasteful tendencies of late-day capitalism, have left us with rivers that are dying, sewage that seeps into our streams, whole habitats and ecosystems poisoned by human filth. Hence our motion calling for Welsh Ministers to be given powers to address the scourge of sewage being discharged into our rivers and seas, those waters that are dying.

Yes, the Dŵr Cymru model produces better results. Forty-four per cent of our rivers are in a good ecological state, compared with only 14 per cent in England. Most of Wales is not governed by the whims of what will please shareholders. But not all. It is not enough. And Dŵr Cymru still has to operate in this messy broader system that puts privatised, commercial companies alongside their model, a system that does not respect national borders. The privatisation of water is a failed model. It has led to soaring bills and a terrible deterioration in the quality of our water supply. We must let another current take its course instead.

Because the consequences of what we decide to do about water, they don't just have an impact on the Wales of today. They will have an impact on future generations. That need for water will only become more urgent in the years ahead, but as we gaze towards our planet's uncertain future, bogged down by those twin emergencies plaguing our climate and our natural world, that future is dependent on water. With investment, millions will be able to live without access to oil, but none will survive without water.

So, what is standing in our way? Why have these powers over water not been devolved to Wales? Well, the turn of this tide is curious. As things stand, Wales's powers to pass laws over water don't align with our boundaries on a map. That means that we can't legislate to stop or control a situation where a private company based largely in England seeks to transfer water out of a reservoir in Wales because it's cheaper to do that than to fix pipes that are leaking.

Now, the Silk commission recommended ending that anomaly, matching those powers over water to our borders, as is already the case in Scotland and Northern Ireland. But section 48 of the Wales Act 2017, which would allow this to happen, has not been enacted, and it would appear that this is because Welsh Ministers have yet to trigger the mechanism. That is important, because the power to commence the provisions is conferred on the Secretary of State, meaning that we have to make a formal request.

Now, under a freedom of information request, we have obtained a copy of a letter dated 3 December 2018, from the then environment Minister to the then DEFRA Parliamentary Undersecretary and Secretary of State for Wales, which, as Adam will set out, I'm sure, requested a postponement and to reschedule the date for when these powers would be transferred. Though the delay in question was meant to push back the implementation of the alignment to spring of last year, that obviously didn't take place. As far as we can tell, there has been no further discussion between the Governments. There has certainly not been a clarification from either Government as to when it will happen, if at all.

Now, I hope that the Minister, in responding to the debate, can throw some light on why this happened and why this transfer of powers seems to be on indefinite hold. This is not simply a matter for constitutional anoraks. The consequences of this indecision can be quantified. Wales's water infrastructure is extensive. We have no less than 1,592 registered large reservoirs, and 243 billion litres of water can be extracted from Welsh sources every year for use in England. We seem to have deliberately absented ourselves from having any say over it.

Let's keep in mind that this debate has a national significance. It pertains to where we have come from as a nation, and to where we are headed. I'm put in mind of what Eliot says in his 'Four Quartets':

'We cannot think of a time that is oceanless / Or of an ocean not littered with wastage / Or of a future that is not liable / Like the past, to have no destination.'

Wales's destination, the current that we will follow, is bound up in this question. The question of water for Wales is about more than pipes or systems. In its glassy surface, we see reflected ourselves, our priorities, how much we really care about the world that we inhabit—those oceans littered with wastage. Water reflects. It shows so much about how we govern and apportion and poison our living world. And, yes, it reflects the losses our nation has suffered. Yes, it tells the story of corruption, of filth, of dereliction from our past. But it is also the source of life, and it is an element that will be vital for our future. Water, water everywhere, nor any drop that is wasted.

I look forward to hearing the views of others in our debate.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Janet Finch-Saunders. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Now, I know that both Plaid Cymru and Welsh Labour here are stating that the privatisation of water is a failed model. With anything like this, it's an interesting idea. But of course, Dŵr Cymru customers face the second highest water bills across England and Wales. While the average bill across England and Wales for the year 2023-24 is £448, the average bill in Wales is £499. There were over 83,000 sewage spills in Wales in 2022, accounting for 569 hours of spillage in Wales. And, the water company has been fined hundreds of thousands of pounds due to sewage spillage. However, we believe that there could be better enforcement. One such instance, however, was in 2021, when the company was fined £180,000 due to sewage discharge resulting in the largest fish-kill incident in north Wales for several years.

However, I don't believe that privatisation is the problem, and I made it clear to the Senedd yesterday that there needs to be more and stronger enforcement by Natural Resources Wales. This leadership role for Natural Resources Wales should be coming from this Welsh Government. Also, the model is delivering positive change. Welsh Water's business operating model has allowed them to bring forward over £100 million of additional investment that will directly benefit our rivers, but this will be by 2025. No other organisation is investing at that level and pace to try and improve river water quality in Wales.

Since around 2010, Dŵr Cymru's bills have been on a downward trajectory. Glas Cymru is a single-purpose company, formed to own, finance and manage Welsh Water. It is a company limited by guarantee, and, because it has no shareholders, any financial surpluses are retained—I've spoken too much today—retained for the benefit of Welsh Water's customers. Results of Cardiff University's economic impact assessment of the Glas model shows a significant increase in jobs, value added to the Welsh economy and expenditure retained here in Wales. It is supporting over 9,000 jobs, and, for every £1 million-worth of direct GVA, a further £1.27 million of GVA is supported elsewhere in our economy. Sixty-two per cent of supply chain expenditure is retained here in Wales, compared to 41 per cent in 2013.

The evidence couldn't be clearer: privatisation is not failing; it is actually delivering for some positive results. So, what we need to see is this Welsh Government co-operate with Welsh Water to help fast-track some of the schemes they have under way. Examples do include Welsh Water needing to invest significantly to improve storm overflows, with £140 million being invested by 2025 and a further £420 million planned from 2025 to 2030; and, investing an additional £60 million specifically to reduce phosphorus in the five failing special areas of conservation rivers in their own operating area. And there are RainScape sustainable urban drainage schemes in Llanelli, Cardiff and Llandudno, where nature-based solutions are used to remove or slow the amount of surface water entering our sewers and reducing how often they overflow. Greater co-operation is what is required; more devolution is not.

You could introduce legislation, Minister, within the current Senedd term. We believe the Welsh Government has failed to legislate to tackle water pollution. In contrast, the UK Government, under the Environment Act 2021, introduced England-only provisions to reduce discharge from storm overflows. The UK Government has also set stringent targets for water companies to meet. So, by 2035, water companies will have to improve all storm overflows discharging in or near designated bathing water and improve 75 per cent of overflows discharging to high-priority nature sites. By 2050, the above will extend to all remaining storm overflows, regardless of location. We need that same aspiration from you. Indeed, we're still waiting for the report on storm overflows that should have been published in March 2023.

Finally, I will address the point about section 48(1) of the Wales Act 2017. Under this provision, the Senedd's legislative competence will cover any water and sewerage in Wales even if the undertaker's areas are mainly located within England. It was the Welsh Government that requested to postpone the enactment of those water provisions. In a letter addressed to the UK Government in 2018, the Welsh Government said the process of aligning the Welsh Parliament's legislative competence to geographical boundaries was complex. Reasons such as amending legislation, statutory plans and resolving complex licensing and regulatory issues were cited by this Welsh Government. In response to a recent question on the matter, the Secretary of State for Wales said the UK Government will work with their Welsh counterparts to agree a timetable that works best for both Governments and the water industry.

The way I see it, it's quite clear: what Plaid Cymru and Labour are calling for is extremely complex and could have a detrimental impact on Wales. Scrapping privatisation and introducing more powers to this Welsh Government will only cause the response to our water crisis to be less effective. Plaid Cymru and Labour often cite further devolution and nationalisation—

I've been very, very generous.

Oh, you have.

Yes, I know, unexpected as it is for you, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you. The reality in this case is that it is wrong. Thank you. Diolch.

Adam Price. Oh, no; first of all, sorry, if I may ask the Minister for Climate Change to move formally amendment 2.

Formally. Diolch yn fawr.

Adam Price.

Diolch, Llywydd. Water, that most precious resource, is one that we in Wales have in great abundance, but it's one that we get precious little for, and we're not alone in that. The Global Commission on the Economics of Water has just produced its report earlier this year that concluded that the world as a whole is currently underpricing water. Fresh water is mostly treated as free, or almost free, rather than the precious resource that it is, and its price to the customer is based on the cost of getting the water to the customer, not the value of the actual water itself, and this is leading to environmental degradation worldwide. It also means that money is transferred from the poorer communities that are generally the sources of fresh water to the large companies in the richer regions that benefit from exploiting this undervalued resource.

That's been the history of water in Wales for over a century—since the nineteenth century, certainly. It’s unsustainable: it’s unsustainable environmentally, it’s unsustainable economically, and it’s unsustainable politically as well. It’s likely to change anyway because of climate change, pollution, the destruction of ecosystems; fresh water in this century is already becoming a scarce resource, and that will continue. We're seeing already the emergence of local, regional and global water markets; water is beginning to be traded across borders, not just the Wales-England border, and the price is rising as a result of that.

That's the future, but what's happening now in Wales? Currently, up to 320 million litres per day are exported from the Elan valley by Dŵr Cymru to Severn Trent for use primarily in the English midlands. United Utilities can extract up to 252 million litres per day from Lake Vyrnwy to supply customers in Chester and the north-west of England. It’s that resource that Thames Water are potentially looking to divert to the south-east of England. United Utilities also use Llyn Celyn to extract, at various points along the River Dee, up to 660 million litres by regulating the level of the water, and 50 million of that is directly extracted on the Welsh side of the border. So, depending on the level of demand on any given day, around 600 million litres of water are typically exported from Wales.

To put that in some perspective, the total demand for water within Wales is around 800 million litres per day. Wales gets a negligible amount in return for this level of water exported. For the over 100 million cu m of water exported annually just from the Elan valley, Welsh Water gets just over £7 million—that's equal to 7p per cubic metre—when Severn Trent, the recipient of that water, charges its own customers 20 times that. Allowing Welsh Water to charge Severn Trent what it charges its own customers would bring in many hundreds of millions of pounds, potentially, and as the global price of water rises, then that may become not just feasible, but necessary. But even adding just a fairly conservative 50p water export levy to the total amount of water exported from Wales would bring in an extra £100 million a year. That would mean that the cost would still be below that of comparable alternatives like desalination. That money could be used for a variety of pressing purposes in Wales, whether it's combating water pollution or water poverty. And that's the great irony: this par excellence wet country has rising water poverty because we are currently prevented in law, because of the lack of powers, from actually having a fair price for the water we export, while the companies that receive the water make excessive profits for their shareholders based on that essentially cost-price-only export of water.

Some of the details are actually bizarre. Privatisation is part of this, of course, because before Welsh Water was privatised, the Conservative Government ensured that essentially the hands of Welsh Water would be tied, so there's an interlocking set of agreements that mean that Welsh Water can't actually make any profit off the water that they export. There's even, bizarrely, an escrow account in Jersey of all places accruing money for the aqueduct that Severn Trent are meant to have sold to Welsh Water, but they haven't yet signed, and they don't have to sign it—I've got the details here—until 21 years after the last grandchild of George V dies. And that's Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, if you didn't know—positively feudal. There's over £100 million in that escrow account that could be used for the benefit of the people of Wales. That's the legacy that we have from the Conservative Government. That's why we need the powers here to Wales, so we can have a fair price for the export of that water, and reinvest that for the benefit of the people and the environment of Wales.

Three hundred and eighty-five billion litres of water are taken from the county I live in, Powys, a year: as we've heard, 133 billion litres from the Elan valley, and 252 million litres from Lake Vyrnwy. And I'm pleased to say that the Liberal Democrat-controlled Powys council are looking into this. They want to do something about this. They have written to the Welsh Government and to the UK Government, asking for permission for a small levy that means that they can charge for the water taken out of Powys into England, which will then be reinvested in Powys into our energy supplies, but also to tackle the climate emergency. That's practically what could happen. I welcome the debate on this really vital issue, and just to add to Janet Finch-Saunders's list of parties that support the devolution of Welsh water, please put the Welsh Liberal Democrats on that list as well.

We must ensure that our communities and our natural environment benefit from the infrastructure decisions in Wales, especially where it leads to the transfer of natural resources outside of Wales. It is surely only right that we have authority and oversight of our natural resources. We shouldn't tolerate the ongoing extraction of our natural resources and natural wealth for others to financially benefit from. If a provider doesn't operate mainly or wholly in Wales, the Senedd actually has no tools to take action. We have fewer powers to ensure that all providers are working towards the same shared goals in terms of the quality of our rivers and our seas.

Welsh water bills are amongst the highest in the UK, and yet we are seeing billions of litres of water transferred out of Wales per year just for pennies. Lake Vyrnwy, in Powys again, was drowned. Llanwddyn, the village that was there, is a community that is lost right now, and that was for the benefit of people outside of Wales. Welsh ratepayers are also paying to clean up decades of underinvestment in our sewage treatment works, as we know from debates earlier in the Senedd.

Just commenting on the amendments, I welcome the collaborative approach outlined in the Government amendment, but in the Conservative amendment I would have liked more support on the actions around storm overflows and sewage discharges. Pollution is a devolved matter, but the amendment sidesteps the critical issue of Wales having full control over our own natural resources.

This debate is well overdue, and I thank Plaid Cymru for bringing it forward. This is a discussion we've been having for the best part of a decade and, as more of us become more aware of the rapidly deteriorating state of our rivers, I think the Senedd, now, should have the full authority over our water resources. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

In my contribution, I'd like to focus on the point in our motion that refers to the way that the privatisation of water has led to increased bills, and the impact that this has on many households in Wales that are already facing economic difficulties. And as Adam Price mentioned, it is a sad paradox, ironic indeed, that although Wales is a net exporter of water, customers in Wales face some of the highest water bills, and a concerning and increasing number of households in Wales are in water poverty. 

The average water bill for Dŵr Cymru customers is £499, an increase of almost 3 per cent since last year, whilst customers of Severn Trent have seen an increase of 12.4 per cent to a bill of £372 on average. Dŵr Cymru customers are paying the second highest price for their bills across Wales and England. And these significant bills could be even higher, as payments depend on many factors.

In its guidance for the price review process in 2024, Ofwat defined water poverty as households spending more than 5 per cent of their income, after housing costs, on their combined water and sewerage bills. According to this metric, around 114,000 households in Wales are in water poverty—over 8 per cent of all households in Wales. This compares to 6.3 per cent of all households in England. In the meantime, 354,000 households in Wales—27.2 per cent of all households in our nation—spend more than 3 per cent of their income on water bills. This too is a far higher proportion than in England, at 17.4 per cent. There is no more damning signifier of an entirely unfair economic system than the fact that so many people in Wales find it difficult to afford to pay for one of the most basic essentials of life, and there is surely nothing much more essential than water.

In my own region of South Wales West, Citizens Advice has seen an increase of 11 per cent in the people who approach them for advice on water and sewerage debt. Amongst those, the average debt was £1,278. We should also consider these figures in the wider context of the cost-of-living crisis. Food prices have contributed to an increase of 69 per cent in food insecurity in Wales over the past year, which has in turn contributed to 30 per cent of the people of Wales reporting that their financial situation is having a negative effect on their physical health. And it probably goes without saying, although we do need to say it: this is having a detrimental and disastrous impact on people’s mental health.

According to research on the cost of living published by Ofwat, a third of water customers in Wales and England expect their financial situation to get worse in the coming year, and they all said that this is causing a great deal of distress about their situation. So, bills are too high.

Social tariffs are available, but the eligibility criteria and support levels differ across companies in Wales. Dŵr Cymru’s HelpU tariff, for example, helps low-income households by capping the amount that they pay for their water, but a number of eligibility criteria must be met, including being eligible for means-tested benefits.

Joint research undertaken by the Consumer Council for Water and Ofwat found that although more than a third of customers are finding it difficult to pay their bills on a regular basis, only 4 per cent said that they received financial support from their water company in the previous year. We must acknowledge that a significant level of support is being offered to customers by Dŵr Cymru, which has helped almost 146,000 individuals in the past year. This was the highest proportion among all water companies in Wales and England, and again it underlines the benefits of the not-for-profit model, which allows dividends to be reinvested for the benefit of customers rather than shareholders.

The Consumer Council for Water has been campaigning for many years for one water affordability scheme for Wales and England, a single scheme, to be established by the UK Government, fairly funded and able to support households in Wales that find it difficult to pay their water bills. Such a single water affordability scheme of this kind could lift approximately 114,000 households out of water poverty in Wales. DEFRA is still planning a consultation on the future of affordability measures, but it no longer intends to move forward with plans for a single water affordability scheme. 

In the meantime, the Consumer Council for Water has been working on interim measures to help tackle water affordability issues. They're awaiting further direction from the Ministers for social justice and climate change on this work, so I would welcome an update from the Minister on this this afternoon. 

But, Llywydd, why must we wait? Why must we urge the Westminster Government and wait for months, if not years, for answers that never reach us? Why must we be in the position of having to mitigate water poverty in the first place? It's shameful that so many of our fellow citizens find it difficult to pay for one of the most fundamental essentials for life. For the sake of the people of Wales, therefore, particularly those on lower incomes, we must place full control over water in public ownership under the care of this Government so that we can create a fair system for everyone.

I'd like to begin my contribution this afternoon by emphasising the importance of water and the symbolism of reservoirs to the region that I represent in mid and west Wales. Politics, culture, and indeed the national psyche continue to be haunted by the ghost of lost communities such as the Elan Valley, Llanwddyn, and, of course, Capel Celyn, to name but a few. 

In the enduring words of singer Huw Jones,

'This is the water that weighs heavier than any tombstone',

and these lost villages and the water that has drowned them have become commemorations of the kinds of exploitations and injustices that our communities have suffered in relation to water over decades. And, Minister, this isn't scaremongering or pulling at emotional heartstrings, but the visual expression of those old wounds that have yet to heal.

I’d now like to turn to an issue that underlines the case for far greater legislative control of our water resources, namely the deteriorating quality of our rivers and other waterways due to the negligence of water companies.   

Fewer than 45 per cent of our rivers are currently classified as being in a 'good' ecological state. At the root of this issue is the outdated nature of our combined sewerage network, which has virtually remained unchanged since the time of Victoria. Recent research headed by Professor Peter Hammond of the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology estimates that 11 billion litres of raw sewage were discharged across Wales and England by only 30 water company treatment works in 2020 alone. Welsh Water’s contribution in this respect was the equivalent of 55 Olympic swimming pools’ worth of sewage.

Based on event duration monitoring data, which record the length of combined storm overflow spills, five Welsh constituencies were in the top 10 of UK constituencies by the number of hours of spills in 2022. Five of those are in the region I represent—Carmarthen East and Dinefwr being the worst, but the list also includes Preseli Pembrokeshire, Dwyfor Meirionydd, Ceredigion and Brecon and Radnorshire.

So, there is a glaring need therefore for water companies to be made fully accountable for their transgressions with sewage spills, but unfortunately this is once again an area where the current devolved framework in Wales falls well short of where it needs to be.

The lack of robust devolved powers in this area means that we are at considerable risk of effectively letting polluting water companies off the hook. 

Looking at the broader picture, Llywydd, the shameful condition of our rivers reflects the disastrous folly of water privatisation—a failed model that, since it was established under the Thatcher Government, has failed customers and the environment alike.

It's no surprise in this regard that England is the only nation in the world that has a fully privatised water system. Of course, here in Wales, the situation is a little different, given the not-for-profit nature of Welsh Water. And, at this point, I'm sure the Tories, who are wedded to the model of privatisation, would argue that, 'Perhaps our system isn't that great, but it's no worse than your system.' Well, I would respond with three key points. First of all, although the situation in our rivers is not perfect, by any stretch of the imagination, the failure to invest by privatised companies in England means that only 14 per cent of rivers there are registered as being in good ecological status, compared to 45 per cent in Wales. Secondly, it's worth bearing in mind that the Welsh Water catchment doesn't capture the whole of Wales. And finally, and most importantly, the devolved framework that we currently have for Wales means that Welsh Water is operating, in reality, alongside a commercial ecosystem that is fully privatised.

Plaid Cymru therefore strongly believes that water treatment and supply in Wales should be ultimately managed by one public body devolved to Wales that corresponds with the geographical boundaries of our nation. And to conclude, yes, water is an emotional issue, but there are practical arguments, such as improving water quality and management and reducing bills, that highlight why the devolution of water is a matter of the greatest importance for us as a nation.

I hadn't intended to speak in this debate, so I definitely haven't got any statistics to hand, but I think it's a really interesting and important debate, and I fully appreciate that the politics of water is absolutely hardwired into Welsh politics, largely due to Bessie Braddock and her arrogance over the way she dealt with the people of Tryweryn.

And so, we absolutely need to get it right on water, and there's no doubt that we haven't got it right at the moment, because there isn't any incentive at the moment for us to build more reservoirs, because there are a lot of other parts of Britain who are going to suffer serious, serious droughts as a result of the climate change, and I can't see Wales being happy to agree to the huge construction of new reservoirs, unless we were actually going to get some benefit from it. It's a similar problem with wind energy that we're in danger of suffering if we don't get that right.

And I think the important points raised by Sioned Williams about the cost-of-living and how the social tariff is really important to ensure that people do have the price of water capped off, but for many other people, the price of water is just too cheap, because people are chucking it away; they are wasting water. We spend far more per head on water in this country than they do in other European countries, and there has to be some re-evaluation of that because water is the new gold. Because none of us can live without water, and if we haven't got it, well, it is the end. I am really disturbed that, in the last week, I have seen people watering the grass, I have seen people watering their dreaded leylandii hedges with water. I mean, this is completely insane and an absolute abuse of the use of water. So, we have to really think about that to ensure that people appreciate just how important water is to the whole ecosystem and to our very survival.

Of course water should not be privatised because nobody actually produced it; it comes from the sky. Clearly, there need to be charges for the mechanics of getting water from where it's stored to where it needs to be used, but the example that was given of what Severn Trent is charging for our water, compared with what Welsh Water is allowed to charge for it is scandalous; there's no doubt about it. So, I think it's really important that we've had this debate, and I very much look forward to what the Minister is going to say as to how we're going to have a fairer deal for Wales, because the UK Government needs to wake up on this one. If they really want to solve some of the water problems that they are going to have in England, never mind the problems going on in southern Europe on the continent, we are going to need a fairer deal for Wales if we are going to make a contribution to end that crisis. 

The Minister for Climate Change now to contribute to the debate—Julie James. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I very much welcome the opportunity to respond to this extremely important debate today. There has been a real genuine groundswell of public opinion in favour of better water quality, better water management, and particularly in favour of cleaning up our rivers. And this is a moment in time that we really should embrace. Ministers in the Welsh Government have, for many years, engaged with anglers, and other river users have been ferocious campaigners for better water quality, better water management and better river health. But the breadth of interest now in this topic is like never before, it's pretty much what people want to talk about wherever you go, which is a moment to be grasped. We need to get that momentum to take forward all of the actions that are needed to accelerate progress in improving water quality in Wales. 

I don't think those campaigning for better water quality are particularly interested in political debate for the sake of it. They expect us to forge a consensus behind taking firm action, and in that spirit, whilst we would not have phrased the motion today in quite the terms Plaid Cymru have, we will support the opposition motion completely whilst adding to it a set of actions we think can help deliver the intent behind the motion. So, I absolutely agree that Wales should have full control over its water resources. 

It is important to say that this is already largely the case as a result of the ongoing process of devolution, including through the various relationships between the Government, water companies in Wales, NRW and Ofwat, as very many people have highlighted. Just to give an example, our strategic priority statement for Ofwat last summer outlined our expectations for tackling the climate and nature emergencies, protecting the environment, building resilience and sustaining asset health, and collaborating with customers and communities. And that is how they must deliver on Wales's priorities in how they carry out their role, and as various people mentioned—Adam in particular—the 2018 inter-governmental water protocol for England and Wales, and its impact on resources. 

But I do completely agree that the pricing mechanisms are out of kilter and need to be reviewed, and I will certainly be very happy to take away the idea that we should look again at whether we need the statutory protections put in place on top of the inter-governmental protocols. I'm very happy to do that. 

The original motion also highlights the need to introduce legislation within the current Senedd term to place the drainage on waste water management plans for water companies on a statutory footing. This is a commitment we've already made and we hope this Senedd will endorse us in taking that step, too. 

I also agree that the privatised model of water regulation just has not delivered. It has not led to the promised levels of investment whilst delivering profits, salaries and bonuses that the public quite rightly find very difficult to accept as reasonable. It requires far too many of the costs of the system to be added to customer bills, causing real issues of social and environmental justice that several Members, Sioned in particular, have highlighted. We also know that water bills are often a canary issue for wider cost-of-living issues too, and it's the first one that people stop paying because they think that they can't be cut off, and so on. We've done a lot of work with Dŵr Cymru on their social tariff, and I'm pleased to see the acknowledgement of that.

But I have to say that I was bitterly disappointed that the Conservative Government pulled the plug on a UK-wide social tariff at the last moment. There's absolutely no excuse for that. It really does cause real issues of social and environmental justice.

It is important to say that water quality in Wales has been improving, and our task is to accelerate that progress. Many people have mentioned 40 per cent of water bodies achieving good or better overall status under water framework directives; classifications rising to 44 per cent if you look just at Wales's rivers. Just to put that in historical context, that is 8 per cent higher than the first classifications in 2009, but it's not good enough, quite clearly. Cefin Campbell, in particular, highlighted that and Delyth, you did too. We absolutely have to do better. But I do think it's important not to have a council of despair. It is going in the right direction. What we need to do is try and accelerate the direction of travel. 

There are also acute and chronic water quality problems that require action, but we have shown already that, by working together—public bodies, communities, businesses—real progress can be made. There is a case to say the current model has contributed to situations where there’s been a deterioration in water quality, but, overall, the actions taken by all of the people who are signatories to the phosphates summit in particular—water companies, farmers, conservationists, planners, house builders and many others—have helped deliver progress in improving water quality.

But the privatised model is clearly flawed. The reason it’s really flawed, to be honest, Janet, isn’t because we happen to have a not-for-profit model here—it’s still a privatised company, regardless of what the leader of the opposition inexplicably tweets all the time. But it is operating in a commercial system that does not work and that insists that the cost of the environmental improvements that you call for all the time are paid for by bill payers, instead of treated as infrastructure developments of general significance that should be paid for out of general taxation. This model does not work. It’s why we haven’t had the improvements we want to see, and it’s why they won’t happen while that model still exists.

So, our Government amendment does not take anything away from the original motion, but adds to it actions we think the Senedd should support us in taking, using the powers that we have. We’re not in a position where the interests of Wales can be set aside, because of those powers at our disposal to ensure this is not the case. I understand the emotional call about Welsh water, of course I do. We all understand the emotional and cultural significance of the appalling treatment of communities across Wales. But I also think that we have to acknowledge that the chief pressures on water resources in Wales are not from those transfers, better regulated though they could be, and better paid for though they could be. The chief pressures are from activity taking place here in Wales that we need to act on. [Interruption.] Of course.

Specifically on the issue of powers, could you clarify what is the current position? Because the Deputy Minister did write to the Secretary of State for the environment asking for a delay in the transfer of those powers under section 48. Has there been subsequent correspondence? Are you now asking for the immediate transfer of those powers fully, for the whole of all companies based within Wales's borders?

We haven't. Nothing has happened since we asked for the delay, but what I'm saying, as a result of this debate, is I will go away and have a better look at why we've settled on the protocol and not taken that further. I honestly don't know the answer to that, Adam, but I'm absolutely determined I will find out for you and come back. So, it has been very useful to have the debate today to raise that point. 

The point I was making, though, was, in addressing water quality itself, that's not about the transfers, although all the points you've made are good points. It is about developing further measures to address agricultural pollution, shifting spending on new roads to target maintenance, which includes surface water management and funding the removal of grey infrastructure from rivers, and our world-leading work on addressing pollution from metal mines. 

Also, in 2019, Wales became the first country to introduce a mandatory requirement for sustainable drainage systems on new housing developments. Not only do SuDS support our net-zero, biodiversity and well-being objectives, they are an important means of relieving pressure on the sewage network, and in turn have a positive impact on issues like combined sewer overflows. Last year, I commissioned a review by the Welsh Local Government Association to review the SuDS implementation and will be making an oral statement this month about the findings. 

We've already seen that these activities deliver water quality improvements in Wales, and our view is that continuing to make a real difference working with others is where the primary focus should be. I am especially interested in capitalising on public interest in promoting the use of citizen science data in informing policy decisions and targeting regulatory actions. I've been working with our biodiversity deep-dive group and others on developing catchment-wide approaches that facilitate actions that can deal with all of the pressures across a whole catchment, bringing together all of the relevant interests in doing so. Taking that kind of collaborative approach must be the way forward, as I said in earlier debates this morning, not pitting one sector against another for narrow political gain.

So, speaking of unhelpful approaches, I must now turn to the amendment tabled by the Conservatives. I think the Welsh public may be surprised to hear the Conservatives believe there’s no role for them or their party in tackling this issue. They tell us it is all someone else’s fault and someone else’s problem to solve, and, rather than come forward lending their support to tough actions to improve water quality, they see an opportunity to distract from the staggering levels of economic and environmental incompetence displayed currently at Westminster. It is quite extraordinary to hear the Conservative Party lamenting the state of the River Wye. The Conservative representatives for Brecon and Radnorshire have been unwavering opponents of action to address water pollution because—and I’m going to quote them here—it would be disproportionate to strengthen regulation in areas like the River Wye, where they say there is not a problem. Those are their words, not mine. I'm sure that they might be very interested in having a look at the scientific evidence—it would be very interesting for them—but unfortunately it might require them to adjust that position.

If the Conservative Party today would like to throw its weight behind tighter regulation of pollution affecting water resources in Wales from all sources, that would be a development the public would warmly welcome. However, the Conservative motion specifies not a single action that would make any direct difference, and it tells you, I think, all we need to know about the state of Tory environmentalism today: gestures rather than action, grappling with inconvenient truths that the majority of the Welsh public accepted well over a decade ago.

So, Llywydd, I believe today is an opportunity for the Senedd to speak with one voice on this issue and show our shared resolve to take decisive action on water quality. Clearly, we approach this issue differently, from our different political perspectives, but, having accepted all points in the original motion, we've added a set of actions we believe any party represented here could and should support. Diolch. 

I call on Delyth Jewell now to reply to the debate. 

Thank you, Llywydd. Thank you to everyone who's taken part in our debate this evening. We heard from Janet about the important work that Dŵr Cymru has been doing, particularly in assisting vulnerable customers. It is important to have that.  

I don't think what we're calling for is complex, to take what you'd said. I think, in its essence, it's actually incredibly straightforward, but I do thank you for your contribution to the debate.

Adam set out how the world undervalues water and how this has led to the exploitation of communities across the globe. He made the economic case for Wales getting a fairer price for our water persuasively. Jane contextualised the problems facing communities in Powys, in this sense of the same historic injustice: the high water bills, set against the pennies we get. 

Thank you for that. We heard from Sioned about water poverty. That ironic paradox of the high bills again, when we have such a rich supply beyond our reach, and the impact on mental health as a result of the debts. That was also important to encompass. Cefin talked about the symbolism of lost communities:

'This is the water that weighs heavier than any tombstone'.

Thank you for quoting Huw Jones. Our call this evening is for the benefit of our future, but it's also for the benefit of those lost communities too. 

The past is never far from the surface in this debate. 

Jenny propelled us towards the future, again underlining the need for protecting vulnerable customers, set against the fact that, for those who can afford it—. As Adam had been relating with some of these figures, this should be a re-evaluation of how we actually value water. You said that water is the new gold. I wonder, in years to come, if water will become, in a sense, thicker than oil, thicker than blood. So, thank you for your contribution as well. 

I thank the Minister for her contribution. This is a moment in time to be grasped. I welcome your support. I would still welcome clarity, when you can find out, Minister, about what had led to that delay, for the sake of openness. I do agree that overwhelmingly we must look towards the future, and it feels like this could be a historic moment. I hope we'll get a timetable very soon setting out when that mechanism can be triggered to devolve these powers set out in the 2017 Act, because that's what the motion will call to happen once—. I am hoping very much now that it will pass.

It's been an emotive debate, which is as it should be, and we've traversed many parts of Wales in our time this evening through our rivers and our reservoirs. But for all the references made to our haunting past—

the names that we must not forget—

I'm glad to say that a fair focus has been on that future of us as a nation, not gaining powers for the sake of gaining powers, but the need to make better the lives of people who live here, the need to clean up the waste in our waterways, the need for clarity about how decisions on water will be made in the future. And I feel like this could be the start of something important. 

As Harri Webb would have said, this is Wales starting on its journey. 

Because we have to face that future, learning the lessons of what has gone before, or else our fate will be that of Fitzgerald's Nick Carraway, beating on, 

'boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.'

The tide is flowing our way. We must take it at its flood. Our fortunes, as a nation, will depend on it. Diolch.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there are objections. And we will therefore defer voting until voting time.

That brings us to voting time, and we'll move to the vote unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung. As there is no indication that Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will move to the first vote.

The first series of votes is on item 6, the Welsh Conservatives debate on accounting practices at Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. The vote is tied and therefore I will use my casting vote against the motion. Therefore, the result of the vote is that there were 24 in favour, no abstentions, and 25 against.

Therefore, we will move to a vote on amendment 1, which was tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote on amendment 1. Once again the vote is tied, and therefore I will exercise my casting vote against the amendment. The result of the vote on amendment 1 is 24 in favour, no abstentions, 25 against. Therefore, the amendment falls.

The motion and amendment have fallen, therefore, and nothing is agreed under this item.

Item 7 is next, the Welsh Conservatives debate on blue carbon habitats. I call for a vote on the motion without amendment, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. The vote is again tied, therefore I will exercise my casting vote against the motion. The result of the vote is that there were 24 in favour, no abstentions and 25 against. The motion is therefore not agreed.

We will move now to a vote on amendment 1. Open the vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. The vote is tied: in favour 24, no abstentions, and 24 against. Therefore, I exercise my casting vote against the amendment. The result of the vote is that there were 24 in favour, no abstentions, and 25 against. Amendment 1 is not agreed.

Nothing is agreed under that item.

We will therefore move on to votes on item 8, the Plaid Cymru debate on the full devolution of water resources. 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 11, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We will move to a vote on amendment 1, therefore, and, if amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 35 against. And therefore amendment 1 is not agreed.

We will now move to amendment 2. Open the vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 35, no abstentions, 13 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is agreed.

The final vote is therefore on the motion as amended. 

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 35, no abstentions, 13 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

And that concludes voting.

We will move now to the short debate.

I'll let Members leave the Chamber before I ask Buffy Williams to introduce her short debate. If Members are leaving—. Yes, I think Members who are leaving have left, and others are here to listen. Buffy Williams.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to give a minute of my time to Sioned Williams and also Joyce Watson, if I could, please.

The founder of our national health service was Welsh. We have over 105,000 NHS staff, with over 70 per cent of them women. We have free prescriptions, unlike over the border, but what we don't have is a level playing field. We've heard time and time again in this Chamber, read in very many charity reports, and some of us have experienced first-hand, the impact of women's health inequalities in Wales. NHS Wales states that although women and girls make up over half of the Welsh population, women’s health and well-being is often undervalued and under-resourced, and there is a need to reduce health inequalities, improve equality of service and improve health outcomes for women in Wales.

We know from the quality statement of women's and girls' health that there are 29 health conditions where there is gender inequality, from asthma to dementia, heart disease and stroke, to gynaecological disorders and osteoporosis, to mental well-being, anxiety and depression. But there's also an inequality deep rooted in our culture, passed from generation to generation, that some conditions experienced by women are viewed as normal, or that it must just be in your head. Women in Wales have heard this for years, sometimes from other women, who’ve been told it enough that they start to believe it themselves, leading to a multitude of problems later in life.

The last time I stood here opening my short debate, I spoke about postpartum PTSD, an anxiety disorder that affects women, is very difficult to diagnose, and though we have the state-of-the-art mother and baby unit in Swansea bay, and the amazing charities who provide support, like Mothers Matter in Rhondda, there is really very little clinical long-term support available.

When I received notification from the Table Office that I had the opportunity to table another short debate, I felt it was only right to highlight another women's health condition. Premenstrual dysphoric disorder—PMDD—is another condition that affects women, is very difficult to diagnose, and though awareness and support has grown, more so than ever in recent years, it's still nowhere near the level that's needed to reach women who are suffering, clinicians to be able to diagnose those women and, therefore, help improve quality of life.

You'd be hard pressed to find a woman or girl in Wales who hasn't experienced cramps, mood swings, anxiety, irritability, bloating, breast tenderness, changes in appetite or headaches over the days leading to their period—all symptoms of premenstrual syndrome that affect women and girls Wales wide that are well-known and well-documented condition, with a number of treatments available. But there are women and girls who suffer a separate condition: PMDD.

Due to unexplained heightened sensitivity to a spike in hormones, women and girls with PMDD can suffer for weeks, not just days, before their period. They experience symptoms of PMS, but far more severe, as well as additional symptoms of depression or hopelessness, anger or suicidal feelings. Physical symptoms can be debilitating, leading to being bed-bound, and women and girls end up missing work or school, missing important life events for family and friends. Mentally, symptoms will lead to major breakdowns over casual events, scenarios or comments that would be seen as ordinary on any other day. These symptoms can be felt for easily over 26 weeks of the year. They will play out on a continuous loop every month, like a tidal wave of torment that simply cannot be stopped.

The consequences on work and school life, or relationships and social life, are catastrophic. When the symptoms stop, the problems caused as a result—fights with friends or family, problems at school or work—don’t, only adding to the mental health worries. Through no fault of their own, women and girls are often suffering in silence with PMDD. It’s a fact that some women just put up with what they’re going through without seeking medical intervention, because they 'should be having a period' and 'periods should be difficult'.

I ran a survey for women in Rhondda prior to this debate, and I’d like to thank them all for taking part. Ninety-nine per cent of them reported that their period, and the time leading to their period, impacts negatively on their mental health and some have sought medical treatment. I was alarmed to read the sheer number of responses that went into great detail about the difficulties accessing healthcare. There’s a clear picture emerging that women don’t feel listened to, some saying they feel as though they’ve been fobbed off, others that they felt their healthcare professional wasn’t bothered, and a handful who said they felt they were wasting their healthcare professional’s time. More alarmingly than this, almost a third of women stated they were put off from seeking medical support as a result of hearing other women’s and girls’ experiences.

There’s a chronic lack of understanding among healthcare professionals in Wales, leading to misdiagnosis and wrong treatments for women suffering PMDD. The NHS website states very little about PMDD, including the condition as an addition to PMS. Some treatments for PMS do not make a jot of difference to women who suffer PMDD. Young women are told the only alternative is to have hysterectomies. We need to ensure there’s a very clear difference. If we don’t, women with PMDD will continue to feel lonely, isolated, angry and suicidal. Imagine how awful it must be trying to explain to family and friends how you feel without a diagnosis, trying to explain to work colleagues or managers about your symptoms without a diagnosis. This must change.

After suffering years of physical symptoms, including bloating, headaches, mastitis, fatigue and joint pain, trying every remedy that the GP recommended, including the pill, the Depo injection, and even the coil, being told that it is 'what women go through', being told I had PMS, and had I tried running, I gave up asking for help. I gave up trying to find answers. I would spend one week of every month living and the other three just existing—getting on with it as most women do. It wasn’t until I had my youngest daughter and spent a long period of time being cared for by health professionals who specialise in women’s health that I learned of PMDD. For months after having my daughter, I knew something was very wrong. My symptoms worsened. I was suffering so badly I didn’t want to leave the house. I had mood swings, I was irritable, I felt lost. My periods were no less than horrific. I was suffering after a traumatic birth and I had all the symptoms of PMDD. I was desperate. Speaking with my consultant, I explained the years of not really understanding what was happening to me. My life was on hold. As a last resort, I was left with no alternative than to undergo a hysterectomy at the age of 34. This was one of the most difficult decisions I have ever had to make. All the pros and cons were explained to me in detail, but, for me, there was only one choice. The way I explain my hysterectomy to others is that, before my surgery, I had horrific months of pain; after my surgery, my life completely changed, though I understand that this is not an option for all women and girls.

Due to the very little research, it's very difficult for women and girls to find information regarding PMDD. It was only less than five years ago that the World Health Organization added PMDD to the ICD-11, helping validate the condition as a legitimate health diagnosis. If it wasn't for the charity the International Association for Premenstrual Disorders, we would still be in the dark when it comes to PMDD. Thanks to IAPMD, there is a whole host of information available to women and girls who think they may be suffering with PMDD, from symptoms, practical steps towards diagnosis, right through to potential treatments and support groups.

On behalf of women and girls who suffer PMDD, I'd like the Minister to formally acknowledge that PMDD is a health condition in its own right and ensure that, in Wales, it's treated that way. We can take the first step very quickly by creating an individual webpage on the NHS website for the condition, not just a couple of sentences tagged on at the end of the PMS webpage. I'd like the Minister to help women and girls who may be suffering PMDD recognise the symptoms and help validate the condition. We need to end the additional anxiety and upset that comes with facing day-to-day events. A positive long-term action to take would be to run an awareness campaign, encompassing the public, private and third sectors to reach women across schools, workplaces and community groups Wales wide. This could incorporate a review of whether PMDD is included in enough detail when discussing the reproductive system in schools; inform women and girls how and what to prepare prior to an appointment for a diagnosis; inform sufferers, families and friends on how to help them cope; and promote the recently announced standard on menstrual health and menopause in the workplace.

Off the back of coverage in a popular soap opera recently, I can't think of a better time to kick-start this campaign. Given the strides made in very recent years, I'd like the Minister to hold meaningful discussions with the charity IAPMD, in partnership with primary and secondary care providers, to ensure that our caregivers are fully equipped with the very latest knowledge of PMDD, ensuring that if and when women and girls present to them, the best possible care and treatment is provided. Last but not least, I'd like the Minister to review what research is currently taking place in Wales into PMDD, with a view in the very near future to work with research partners and fund research of PMDD in Wales. There is currently no blood test to diagnose PMDD. Let's ensure we're at the forefront of this research in Wales. We have an amazing opportunity in front of us to be a nation that leads on women's and girls' health. PMDD must be part of this in its own right to save lives.

Thanks, Buffy, for bringing this debate and speaking so honestly about your own experience. PMDD is sometimes misdiagnosed, as you said, as depression, anxiety or bipolar disorder, and this is due to that lack of understanding of the condition, and I was glad to sponsor the recent event—I know you came along—in the Senedd to raise awareness about PMDD, supported by the International Association for Premenstrual Disorders, the National Centre for Mental Health and researchers from Cardiff University. That event was organised by Becci Smart, who is one of my constituents from Bridgend, who has lived with PMDD since she was 14, and she had to wait 18 years for diagnosis and treatment. I'm glad to say that Becci is now working on submitting a petition to the Senedd on some practical changes, like some of the ones you mentioned, so we can make some changes to education, to healthcare training and to treatment so that this can be overcome. So, we will keep hearing about this in the Senedd, hopefully, until more action is taken, because we do have to see PMDD in a wider frame, as you said, of women's health conditions, and make sure that it's given the attention it deserves. We simply don't know enough about conditions like this, and we don't speak enough about them. And hopefully, now, that is changing. So, let's keep speaking about them. Let's keep ensuring we raise awareness, so we increase our knowledge through investing in research, and listen to the women, like you, like Becci, who tell us about the struggles and heartbreak that cyclical hormone-based mood disorders can cause.

I want to thank Buffy for bringing this debate today, and for sharing so honestly her own situation as was. And we've all heard it growing up, 'Oh, it's that time of the month' or 'She's a bit moody, take no notice.' And those things, you still hear them, sadly. And people still believe those things. And it's just a lack of education. I know that we're giving education in schools now, so that girls should understand what a good period is, and that can only be to the advantage of those young girls growing up, and to their families, because they in turn can take it if they know their mother suffers, or their auntie or their sister.

But I think what is being asked for today is a particular focus that goes further, and I support that. And also, to help those people who are giving that education, but those people who are giving some diagnoses and treatment as well. So, I applaud you for your honesty in bringing this forward, and isn't it wonderful how often now we talk about specific issues of women's health that have not ever been spoken about in this Chamber before?

And I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services, Eluned Morgan, to reply to the debate. 

Well, diolch yn fawr. I'm really grateful to Buffy for bringing this debate to us today. And this is part of a series of issues on women's health, and I'm just incredibly grateful to you in particular for sharing your own experience and that of your constituents, because, actually, it's the colour that makes people sit up and realise that it's not something abstract; it's something that happens to people that we all know. And I think it is important for us to recognise that there are over, probably—it's estimated—53,000 women in Wales who live with premenstrual dysphoric disorder. And I think it is a condition that needs to be considered in its own right.

It's a hormone-based mood disorder. It's caused by an abnormal brain reaction to normal changes in hormones across the menstrual cycle, and symptoms usually occur one or two weeks before the menstrual period starts, and are only present during that time. Common symptoms include anger, irritability, depression, anxiety, and all of these things, of course, can interfere with their daily activities. But those people who've got the disorder are at an increased risk of suicide, and we've got to take that seriously. This is a very, very serious condition, and I think it's very important that people start to recognise that.

So, I'm going to look into your suggestion about what more we can do on websites. Obviously, it would be better to get them on the health boards' websites, but that's certainly something that I could encourage them to do, and we can certainly look at what we can do maybe on the 111 website.

So, for women and girls with this disorder, it can have a massive impact on their lives every single month. And the condition can be diagnosed through tracking daily symptoms for at least two menstrual cycles, and there's a range of clinical treatments and options available, often requiring the support of primary and secondary care, and sometimes, mental health services, to ensure that both the physical and the emotional support can be effectively managed. And in the current 'Together for Mental Health' plan, there has been an increase in funding to improve access to a range of psychological therapies.

I think there's been insufficient recognition of premenstrual dysphoric disorder and the devastating impact that it can have. I think women have been unaware of the symptoms. So many women just put up with it. And it's not something that you need to put up with, and it is something that you can seek support and help for. But, actually, people need to be told it's not normal to have to put up with this. There is an educative role here, and the new curriculum will allow that to happen. So, I think we have to make sure that there's better training and awareness about the condition, including amongst practitioners that, perhaps, hinder early diagnosis and treatment. We need them to know that early access can help and change their lives.

Work has been done to ensure that we reach this aim. In July of last year, I published the quality statement for women and girls' health. And that statement notes the Welsh Government's expectations of the NHS in terms of ensuring that we do provide a health service of high quality to women here in Wales. And, in December, the NHS published its findings report. This report has—. About 3,800 women have interacted with that consultation in some way, so it has influenced the consultation. The next step now is to establish a women's health clinical network. So, the NHS owns this, and it's important that they take the opportunity to take this forward.

I do want to assure you that what I'll do after this debate is I will ask the NHS network that is looking at women's health whether they can look at this specifically, whether they, perhaps, can get in touch with the charity that you mentioned—was it the IAPMD? So, I'm going to make that commitment, and I'll see if they're prepared to do that.

And just on the research, I have asked my officials to see what we can do to shift resources into women's health, because that needs to happen. Enough is enough. We need something to happen when it comes to research. So, I've asked for that to happen, and I'm waiting for a response on that.

In February of this year, the Welsh Government published the action plan 'Period Proud Wales', and the ambition is to eradicate period poverty. Also, it challenges the practice of normalising symptoms that women experience when they aren't normal symptoms. So, that's really important. That includes symptoms related to premenstrual dysphoric disorder.

There you are, that's what it is in Welsh, PMDD.

So, I'm really pleased that you brought this to our attention today. I've made some commitments here, and I will follow those through, and I want you to hold me to them and make sure that I follow them through. I just want to reassure you that I'm not letting go of the issue of women’s health on my watch. Diolch yn fawr.

I thank the Minister. And that brings today's proceedings to a close.