National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon and welcome to this afternoon's Plenary meeting. Before we begin, I would like to inform the Senedd, in accordance with Standing Order 26.75, that the Infrastructure (Wales) Act 2024 was given Royal Assent on Monday 3 June. 

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from John Griffiths. 

Thank you for the question. We work with local authorities across the Cardiff capital region to increase economic prosperity. Our regional economic framework for south-east Wales has identified the development of key growth clusters as a priority, alongside our investment in infrastructure supporting the economic mission.

We're in the midst of a crucial general election for the future of Wales and the UK as a whole. An incoming UK Labour Government would have Gordon Brown's report available to it, recognising the regional inequalities of the UK, and providing major investment for Wales in infrastructure, renewables and clusters in south-east Wales, such as cyber security and the semiconductor industry, as well as easing the transition to green steel. What a contrast to the Tories short-changing Wales by several million pounds in not fulfilling their pledge to replace EU economic aid to Wales pound for pound, and now committing to introduce an outdated national service for our young people, which the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates would leave Wales £275 million worse off, in taking money from the £1.5 billion so-called shared prosperity scheme, which, of course, was originally earmarked to replace EU economic aid. Do you agree, First Minister, what a stark contrast this is between that regressive policy of the UK Tories and the Welsh Government's young person's guarantee for 16 to 24-year-olds, providing support for a place in education, training, work or self-employment?

Okay, this is now a minute and a half into this party political broadcast. I'm sure you won't be the only one that tries this over the next few weeks, and it will come from all directions, I'm sure. But if we can allow the First Minister to find the question in there and to answer. 

Thank you for the question. I agree that the national service model proposed as a shock by Rishi Sunak was not just a shock to young people, but a shock to many Conservative MPs and indeed, Ministers—a desperate gimmick at the start of a crucial general election for Wales and Britain. And the Member's right to draw a contrast between that and what we have chosen to do with the young person's guarantee—long-term investment in the future of young people and the skills they need to survive and thrive in the world that we are seeking to create. It's a direct contrast to the Tories taking away money and powers from Wales—£275 million as a minimum every year is lost to Wales because of the shared prosperity fund that now the Tories propose to put into a national service model that no-one thinks is going to work or actually provide a future for young people. That is the Tory record. I believe people will make a definitive choice on 4 July. Look at what they have done to Wales. Look at what we offer. Who on earth would want to stand with the Tories when it comes to 4 or 5 July? I look forward to the verdict of the people of Wales.

First Minister, let's bring it back to Wales now. We're in the Welsh Parliament; let the UK Government focus on their own things. Now, First Minister, businesses in Wales are finding it increasingly difficult to stay afloat following the Welsh Government's decision to cut business rate relief. Labour Ministers' move to slash the relief from 75 per cent to 40 per cent now means that businesses with a rateable value of £15,000 will be left with a rates bill of nearly £8,500. This isn't just a couple of pennies or pounds, First Minister; we're talking about businesses being expected to find thousands of pounds. UK Labour's shadow Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, recently described your party as the natural party of British businesses and said that you are pro worker and pro business. That's simply not true, is it, First Minister, under Labour, because here in Wales we have the highest business rates in Great Britain, extremely low business survival rates, the second lowest gross value added growth since 1999 out of the UK nations, and the highest economic inactivity levels out of the four nations. So, do you think the Welsh Government should finally stop punishing hardworking businesses and start helping them thrive? And do you not think a good place to start would be reintroducing the 75 per cent rate relief support? Thank you.

I agree we're not talking about mere pennies or pounds; we're talking about over £1 billion lost to Wales because the Tories broke their manifesto pledge to replace EU funds in full. I remember Andrew R.T. Davies saying repeatedly that Wales would not lose a single penny. We've actually lost more than £1 billion, and, on top of that, our budget is worth £700 million less in real terms than just three years ago. That is the Tory record. That is what the Tories have done to Wales. I'm proud that we are pro worker and pro business. [Interruption.] I look forward to carrying our message into communities and doorsteps across the country. [Interruption.] I want a new start for Wales—

I can't hear the First Minister. Can we have some silence, please?

—to turn the page on 14 desperate Tory years.

Thank you for the question. Our Business Wales service should be the first port of call for any business in the Caerphilly area in need of support. Since 2016, it has supported the creation of over 1,400 jobs, 283 new-start businesses, and provided support to over 1,800 individuals and businesses within Caerphilly.

I was reading just the other day about the futureproofing fund the Welsh Government is introducing. Can he give us more detail about how that's going to benefit businesses in such areas as the retail and leisure sectors in Caerphilly, Ystrad Mynach and Bargoed in my constituency?

Thank you for the question. The futureproofing fund was launched by the economy Secretary on 20 May. It's a £20 million fund to provide discretionary financial assistance to microbusinesses and small and medium-sized enterprises in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors. It's designed to help invest in measures to help them reduce their running costs, and to futureproof their businesses. I'm looking forward to seeing the applications that will come in for the different businesses we want to be able to support. It's part of what we look to do in investing in the future of our economy, in the jobs that our local communities and workers need. I want to see more tools in our armoury to do that, not desperately fighting against a deliberate attempt to take money and powers away from this Government and this Senedd. I expect there'll be more that we can do together, with local authorities, with businesses, if we do see a new start on 4 July. But we will carry on doing what we should do, with the powers we have, with the money that we have, to make those positive choices to support businesses in Caerphilly and beyond.

As my colleague has already said, we now see Welsh businesses facing the highest business rates in Britain. You are certainly not the party for small businesses. These businesses, especially in our region, have been crying out for help, and what constituents have been telling us all for months is that this business rate rise will cause businesses to either shut or even move to England. This is obviously damaging to the economy and is an example of this Welsh Government not supporting young people, as you've just said, or any people at all. As we know on these benches, you cannot tax an economy into prosperity. It's all about choices, First Minister. And what worries me even more is that Keir Starmer now states that Wales is his plan for the rest of the UK. So, First Minister, can you tell us how this Government, and when this Government, actually plans to help businesses in my region and beyond, and bring them in line with the rest of the UK, instead of taxing them out of business?

Well, it's an extraordinary thing for a Conservative representative to stand up and talk about taxes. We have the highest tax burden in peacetime, under this UK Conservative Government—the highest tax burden in peacetime. We have the second lowest growth in any G7 country over the last year—all on the Tory watch. And they now say they're the party of business and the party of the economy. Well, people will make a judgment on that on 4 July, and I look forward to that judgment. We are dealing with a deliberate reduction in our budget—£700 million in real terms—and the deliberate taking away of money and powers of more than £1 billion of money that this Parliament and this Government should have determined, to invest in the long-term future of our economy. All of those choices were made by a UK Conservative Government, with cheerleaders in this place. Not a single Welsh Conservative raised their voice in opposition to the taking away of money and powers from Wales. I am confident that we will make a positive case to people in Wales in this election, for our future. And I say again, who on earth would want to stand with the Tories in what is to come after what you have done to Wales?

Questions now from the party leaders. The leader of the Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, yesterday, the BBC broadcast a programme called A Big Stink. You had to feel sympathy and empathy for the poor people of Withyhedge who are suffering the smells and odours that are coming from that tip. You took £200,000 as a leadership donation from that company. We learned from the programme yesterday that that company was under criminal investigation. Can you confirm when you knew that that company was under a criminal investigation?

Well, of course I feel sympathy for anyone directly affected by the issues raised in the programme around the operating of the site. The Member will know, and I draw attention again to my register of interests, but, actually, this is an area where it would be wholly improper or inappropriate for me to know about the investigation that the BBC reported on. That's when I was first aware of it—when it was reported on. Either in my role as the constituency Member for Cardiff South and Penarth or, indeed, in my role as a Minister within the Government, it would simply not be appropriate for me to be informed of any type of investigation going on into the operation of the site in Pembrokeshire. How could I know about the investigation taking place? And I should not know. That's the point. Whoever is undertaking the investigation needs to be able to undertake the investigation without fear or favour and come to whatever the right outcome is to see the improvement that could and should be made.

So, I take it from your answer that you did not know until the point was put to you by the BBC last week. I think I infer that from your answer. So, that leads on to the point where you've said that due diligence was undertaken on all donors to your campaign. What due diligence was actually undertaken, given that you were in receipt of the largest political donation in Welsh political history? Leave alone the other donations, but, on this specific £200,000 donation—given that you said you didn't know the criminal investigation was being undertaken until, I'm assuming, last week, because that's when the BBC put it to you—what due diligence were you and your team undertaking, as any reasonable person would expect to have been undertaken on a donation of that size?

Well, of course we undertook all the due diligence we were required to. That's exactly what happened. Again, even the BBC programme could not find an instance where any of the rules had been broken. So, we undertook due diligence. Again, I come back to the point that is being made: it would be improper and inappropriate for me to know about an investigation, whether it's undertaken by a regulator or any other authority with the ability to bring criminal proceedings. There would be no basis for me to be informed, and I should not be informed of that. That is the point. I just don't think there is much reasonable ground for a reasonable person to go over. I've answered these questions repeatedly, and I'll carry on repeatedly responding honestly and truthfully. I should also just correct the Member, as the largest political donation in Welsh political history was actually made to Plaid Cymru.

Not on an individual basis, First Minister. The largest individual donation was to your leadership campaign as an individual. You have received £200,000. Now, it's not unreasonable to assume that due diligence was undertaken given such a major donation was undertaken by this businessman. You knew that this businessman had two criminal convictions against him—the owner of this company—yet you were not prepared to ask the searching questions; you were just prepared to bank the money and run. That's the long and the short of it. There's a vote of confidence in you tomorrow here, First Minister. Are you going to win?

Again, I go back to reminding the Member that, on all occasions, I've answered truthfully and honestly about what happened, about the due diligence that was necessary and, indeed, the fact that no rules have been broken, the ministerial code has not been broken. And we come back to—. And I understand why the Conservatives have put forward a motion tomorrow—a non-binding vote, but a vote, nevertheless, in this Parliament. There is a formal method available. I understand why the Member puts the vote forward. I understand, at this time, when people are making choices, why he does not want to talk about his party's record. I understand the points being made about judgment. I understand what that means and looks like. Look at the judgments that I have made and compare them. Look at the judgments I have made on test and trace. Look at the judgements that I have made on PPE during the pandemic, with no corrupt VIP lane in Wales on my watch. Look at the judgments he has made: defending Boris Johnson to the hilt, backing Liz Truss to the hilt. When she made her speech to the Conservative conference, his response was, 'That's a cracking speech'. Ask mortgage holders what they think of her, ask people with business investment what they think of her. If you want to go into what's going to take place with people's judgment, I am very comfortable having any comparison between the two of us.

I am confident about tomorrow. I look forward to the debate, which I will attend. I could and should, in my view, have been elsewhere, but I will be in this Parliament to respond to the debate. And I say again, with the Conservative record of what you have done to Wales, who on earth would be prepared to stand with you? I do not believe the people of Wales will stand with you when it comes to 4 July.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Rhun ap Iorwerth. 

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. The First Minister has perhaps signalled his attitude towards the vote of no confidence in saying that it is non-binding, but I think we should take it seriously. It's a rare thing for the Senedd to hold votes of no confidence, especially in the First Minister, and so it should be. Whilst we in opposition may not agree with Ministers on policy, we do respect the outcome of democratic elections. But, in this instance, the office of the First Minister has been undermined to such an extent that I have no doubt that the people of Wales have lost confidence in him. There is genuine anger. His acceptance of a £200,000 donation from a convicted polluter has eroded trust in politics, and we see it on the Labour benches themselves, even. Such is the level of concern that it was reported yesterday that a senior figure within the Labour Party offered to loan the First Minister £200,000 so he could pay the donation back. Given that some contrition might have actually shown he understood public anger, why on earth did the First Minister reject that offer? 

As I have made clear before, I don't have £200,000 to pay anybody back. I'm not sure if the Member has access to that ready cash; I certainly don't. Having followed the rules for donations and having followed the ministerial code as well—. And I understand the Member wants to make an alternative case that, regardless of not breaking rules, I should nevertheless suffer the ultimate price in political terms. And I say to the Member, the idea that votes of no confidence are not commonplace is just not borne out by any cursory examination of the record. There have been three votes of no confidence within this Senedd term. Every health Minister has faced a vote of no confidence at some point in time. So, this is part and parcel of what happens. I look forward to responding to the debate tomorrow and setting out what this Government has done, what we continue to do: the ceaseless, never-ending commitment to improve our country, the reason why the vote on 4 July matters to this place and the people that we serve. I look forward to carrying on doing my duty as the First Minister of Wales. I look forward to leading a Government that wants to, and will, transform lives of communities in every part of our country. That is what we are here for. 

Perhaps the First Minister can clarify whether that means he plans to continue regardless of the result of the vote of no confidence in the Senedd tomorrow. But, once again, no contrition, no remorse, not the slightest acknowledgement by the First Minister that his actions were severely ill-judged. This is even more staggering given that we learnt yesterday that a firm that donated to the First Minister's campaign was subject to a criminal investigation at the time a donation was made. We come back, don't we, to this issue of due diligence and why on earth the First Minister could have put himself in such a compromised position. Let me ask this: if he were given the opportunity again, would he take a different attitude towards due diligence, or would he again prioritise the size of his leadership war chest over what was right and proper?  

Again, the Member has asked me a hypothetical question about the past. I'll go back to what I've said before. It would be improper and inappropriate for me to have known that there was any investigation at the time that investigation started. Can you imagine if I was informed of those investigations, whether it's by the regulator, by the police or any other authority who could undertake an investigation that could lead to a criminal sanction? I can't respond to questions about an investigation I'm not aware of. You can't undertake due diligence on matters that you're not aware of. What I am focused on is being able to turn a new page for Wales on 4 July and the partnership I believe should happen. If you look at our communities and the challenges we face, on the doorstep the cost-of-living crisis is the No. 1 issue, and, more than that, all of the issues it drives: the reality of our budget, the fact that we've lost £700 million in real terms, what that does to being able to properly fund the NHS and public services, to support the economy. Those are the things that drive me in public life. Those are the things that underpin our campaign over the next few weeks and, more than that, how the Government I lead wants to change Wales for the better.

Of course, the First Minister did know about the convictions that had already been passed on the person that had given the £200,000. It's nearly a fortnight now since Rishi Sunak looked to the heavens in Downing Street and wished he had an umbrella, but here in Wales, look up and what we see is the parachutes of Labour candidates imposed by Labour's headquarters in London. With the number of MPs slashed in Wales from 40 to 32 in this election, we can't afford, the Senedd can't afford, the Welsh Government can't afford to have our voice further diluted by having candidates or MPs who've shown no past interest whatsoever in pursuing what's right for Wales—issues of fair funding, for example. Landing parachutes in places like Cardiff West and Swansea West is damaging to Welsh democracy, it shows complete disregard for Wales, and for the views and voices, frankly, of local Labour Members, who are, understandably, livid with the UK party leadership. Perhaps the First Minister can tell us if he endorsed the choice of those candidates over local alternatives. And given that Keir Starmer clearly isn't willing to apologise to local Labour members, or to the people of Wales as a whole, will the First Minister do so on his behalf?

I see yet again the leader of Plaid Cymru is obsessed with the internal democracy of the Labour Party. In terms of candidates who are approved to stand, in the two recent instances, there was a joint panel of local members and the elected members of the Welsh executive. Those candidates now need to go out and work alongside local members and, more than that, on your point about Welsh democracy, need to persuade Welsh voters that they are the right person to stand up for their local communities within the UK Parliament. It's a UK Parliament that will have a huge amount of work ahead of it after 14 years of Tory chaos, 14 years where I do not believe families are better off, and the last four and a half chaotic years, with what that has meant to and for Wales. I believe we do need a new start, and that is the case that we will make. If you look not just at the cost-of-living crisis, not just the way that money and powers have been stolen from us in this Parliament, the fear and the division of culture wars, the failure on the economy, the fact that deliberate choices made in the UK Parliament now mean that more children grow up poor in Wales than when this party across the UK first entered Government, those are the things that I believe will drive people to the ballot box to make their choices on every Labour candidate that we put forward. I'm proud to stand on the side of Welsh Labour and the Labour offer in a UK election. I believe that none of us who believe in progressive politics should stand with the Tories. I make that division very clear about what I'm not in favour of and what I believe should happen with and for the people of the country I am proud to lead.

Question 3 [OQ61184] by Jack Sargeant has been withdrawn, for the best possible reason for withdrawing a question. I'm sure we all welcome little Noa Sargeant to this world. Croeso, Noa. 

I hope the economy of north Wales will be boosted by the arrival of Noa Sargeant, but our plan for boosting the Welsh economy is set out in our economic mission, namely to ensure a just transition to a green economy, a platform for young people, fair work, skills and success, with stronger partnerships for stronger regions, the everyday economy we enjoy, and investing for growth.

Thank you for your answer, First Minister. You will know that north Wales has had significant attention, investment and support in recent years from the UK Conservative Government, who are transforming the economic prospects of the region I represent, with a new free port in Anglesey creating high-quality, long-term jobs, attracting around £1.4 billion-worth of investment; the enablement of a nuclear power plant at Wylfa that is a key part of our nuclear revolution and will create thousands of jobs on the island; a new investment zone in Wrexham and Flintshire, which will be an engine for further economic growth and improving skills and training; and £1 billion committed to upgrading and modernising the north Wales main line, which will improve links across north Wales and into the north-west. All of this is made possible by a UK Conservative Government. Why doesn't Cardiff Labour show the same commitment and faith to north Wales?

I admire the Member for saying all that with a straight face. On all of the areas that he's set out, there's joint investment and joint decision making with the Welsh Government, of course. I'm proud to have taken a pragmatic approach to working with a range of very different Ministers in succession on the free port, on growth deals, and indeed on the future of investment zones. And look at what we have done: the investment in Llanberis with Siemens, making sure there are high-quality jobs in rural Wales. Think about what we've done on Ynys Môn, investing in Halen Môn and others—a partnership over a long period of time, working alongside them. Look at what we're doing in north-east Wales with Enfinium and the work we are doing there, with more jobs coming as part of the green revolution that is on our doorstep, and the work we're doing to take advantage of offshore energy.

We could do so much more with a stable and decent Government across the UK, a Government that can make decisions. The reason why we have not seen investment delivered in a new generation of nuclear, whether that is for radioisotopes desperately needed in our national health service or whether it's new small modular reactors or larger technology, is because the Conservatives have never managed to field a Minister who could make a decision. It is because of the chaos in the Conservative Government that that investment has not been delivered. And who on earth knew, when they bought the site of Wylfa from Horizon, when they made an announcement on the day before the general election, that would be a gimmick for the election? I want a Government that is serious about being a partner with the Welsh Government and north Wales to deliver good, high-quality jobs in the green revolution that is coming.

We've not even seen any development funding for those projects mentioned in north Wales yet. In the last 14 years we've seen the UK Tory Government make vicious real-terms cuts to the building blocks of economic growth: health, social care, housing, wages and local authority budgets. We've seen them starve Wales of the funding it needs, whether through successive austerity budgets or through the deliberate holding back of billions of HS2 funding. We've seen them conspiring to take money out of people's pockets through Liz Truss's mortgage and inflation bombshell. And we've seen them give more levelling-up funding to Canary Wharf in London than the whole of Wales combined this year. Is it not therefore the case, First Minister, that the best thing we can do to boost the economy of north Wales is to vote out the UK Conservative Government on 4 July?

I think within the question the Member makes a particular point that says everything you need to know about the Conservatives' attitude to Wales and to whether levelling-up is genuine: the fact that Canary Wharf in London has received more than the whole of Wales combined. That is not a Government committed to investing in the future of the economy, not a Government committed to genuine levelling-up for the communities that need a Government on their side. And no-one should be surprised that this Conservative group are such fans of Liz Truss and the disaster that she unleashed, because, of course, just on their own watch they had a series of unfunded tax cuts they pledged to the people of Wales in 2021. This group of Tories cannot be trusted, nor can the shower down the road who are in the current UK Government. I look forward to seeing them run out of town at the ballot box and a new start for Wales and Britain.

Thank you for the question. 

Several research reports into attracting graduates into teaching, including the use of incentives, have been published since 2019. Preliminary work to further evaluate the priority subject incentive scheme specifically is currently under way.

Thank you. We know that there are great problems in terms of recruitment and retaining teachers across the whole of Wales. Indeed, the electoral messages of your own party do recognise that this crisis has happened under your leadership, and this is also reflected in one of your six electoral commitments. And there has been no shortage of announcements in recent years by the Welsh Government encouraging young people to think about a career as a teacher or classroom assistant, but we do know whether these campaigns have been successful?

Can you tell me, First Minister, whether the initial teacher education incentive scheme for priority subjects is working, and how do you know this, because I was quite shocked recently to learn from the Cabinet Secretary for Education that the Welsh Government has no data to determine if the recipients of the incentive before 2022-23 are still teaching in Wales, are teaching somewhere else, or not teaching at all? Now, this is a scheme that's been running, in one way or another, for over a decade, with millions of pounds spent on it, and we don't know if any of its previous recipients are still in teaching positions. Now, that I find quite astounding. So, can you confirm, First Minister, that this astonishing oversight will be corrected, and explain to me how?

I think there are a couple of different things, to try to address the Member's questions and points directly. There's the point about how you link data for when people go into the workforce and how you can track where they are, and how you do that successfully, and understand where they've undertaken an incentive. Indeed, incentives for teacher training have been agreed on a cross-party basis during most of the life of devolution, a recognition that you need to have incentives to bring people into the teacher workforce, and then specifically across a range of subjects. So, that's why we're undertaking an evaluation to understand more deliberately, after a period of time of incentives, how successful it has been. We also need to understand without those incentives, where would we have been with the workforce that we need to know what all of us want to see for children and young people.

So, that's why the research is important, but I would say that in the subjects that we have—a range of sciences, design and technology, ICT, maths, modern foreign languages, physics, Welsh and any of those subjects through the medium of Welsh—we know that we need more workforce. It's a challenge for both English-medium education and, indeed, Welsh-medium education for the ambitions that we share. Now, to get there, you've got to understand how you get teachers and then keep them. It's partly about the initial stage about incentives, I think. It's also partly about the environment within the classroom. It's also partly about how they're then supported and the reforms that we are undertaking on changing our curriculum. Lots of teachers positively want to come to Wales because of the journey we're on, and it needs to work to make sure that young people get the best start in life through the first 1,000 days, and into education.

So, yes, we will look at the research and the evidence that is there. The crucial part is: how do we get the workforce we need to understand how we make clear that being a teacher is a fantastic career to make a big difference for the community you live in and you serve, and the country, and it can be a hugely rewarding profession for individuals as well? Sadly, lots of parts of the teaching profession have been attacked on a regular basis by different actors, and that has turned some people—[Inaudible.]—wanting to be teachers through and immediately after the pandemic. That's levelling off a bit, so we need to understand what more we can do to get the high-quality teachers that we need, and each and every one of our constituents and their families want to see in Welsh education. 

The First Minister has been talking a lot about the last 14 years. Well, in the last 14 years in England, we've seen massive growth in the education sector in England, thanks to Conservative-led reforms that have delivered the best Programme for International Student Assessment results anywhere in the UK consistently. Meanwhile, the Welsh Labour Government refuses to follow suit, presiding over the worst education scores anywhere in the UK and getting worse.

Now, the initial teacher education priority subject incentive scheme, as the First Minister outlined, includes physics as a profession that can be taught via it. The Welsh Government targeted the recruitment of 61 students to complete the ITE programme for 2023-24. Do you want to know how many did qualify in 2023-24? Three. Is it not, First Minister, one lesson that we can learn from Wales and the Welsh Labour Government that you just can't trust Labour when it comes to education? 

Actually, what the Member points out is that the incentives are part of the answer, but not the whole answer, and if you want a serious debate about how we get the workforce we need, that contribution doesn't get you to where you need to be. You need to understand what we need to do to make teaching an attractive profession for people to want to study it, and then to stay in it and want to carry on delivering. Now, I went to university with a range of people who are now teachers; I met some of them at the Urdd Eisteddfod, actually—the Aber mafia is everywhere, as the Presiding Officer knows—but to understand why they stayed in Welsh education and what makes a difference, that's part of the work we need to do, as well as a commitment to want to raise standards with and for children and young people.

Part of it is it the environment in which they work in as well, and, of course, we have now seen, on a sustained basis, the largest school and college building programme for new facilities since the 1960s. I'm very proud of what Welsh Labour has done to invest in facilities; we'll carry on working together with the profession, and others, to make clear that teaching is an attractive profession. You can undertake a hugely rewarding and valuable career and make a big difference to communities that you live in. And that is the journey we are on, and I make no apologies for wanting to be positive about the workforce needs we have and how we want to go about meeting them for the future of the country.

Thank you. In March this year we concluded our 12-week consultation on the regulation of animal welfare establishments, activities and exhibits. This refers to companion animals. The consultation proposed licensing owners, keepers and trainers of racing dogs, including greyhounds, with a view to improving their lifelong welfare, from birth to retirement, when bred or raised specifically for sport. 

Thank you for that response, First Minister. While seeking election to the post of First Minister, you stated on your social media channel that

'Protecting Greyhounds goes beyond just ending the sport—we need to ensure good care throughout a greyhound's life.'

I could not agree more. But does the First Minister agree with me that ending greyhound racing sooner rather than later is key to protecting the welfare of these wonderful animals? Therefore, will you commit to a meeting with the Cut the Chase coalition, which has been campaigning on the issue, to discuss their concerns about the well-being of the dogs that are still being used for commercial racing in Wales? Thank you.

I thank the Member for his question and the genuineness. I know he is a supporter of the campaign to end greyhound racing and the reasons behind that. I want to thank everyone who took the time to get involved in the consultation; we had over 1,100 consultation responses. So, we're having to go through those, undertake a proper analysis of them, then come out with the response from the Government. It's why I can't give a commitment that I know the Member and others may want to hear, for a specific outcome, because we do need to understand what that response is, in all of its terms, and then to set out what the Government's response will be.

One of the points in the consultation is about whether to support a phased ban, but as I have said, and will go on saying, you need to think about not just greyhounds for today but, actually, the welfare for those greyhounds, if the sport continues or, indeed, if greyhound racing ends. That's what we'll look at. I don't want to prejudge or pre-empt the consultation, but I do take seriously the point the Member makes, and I know that there is genuine cross-party support on this issue.

Good afternoon, Prif Weinidog. It's not a surprise to many that I wanted to just say a few words on this issue, and I'm grateful to my colleague Altaf Hussain. I do understand totally that you're not able to prejudge any outcome in relation to the consultation period, but just to say a little bit about my dog, Wanda, she is—[Interruption.] No, I won't go into that. She and the previous dog that I owned, the previous racing greyhound, were both very traumatised by racing. Wanda, in fact, ran her last race in October of last year—it was her forty-eighth race in four years. I very much hope that the consultation period will mean that we have a phased ban on greyhound racing.

My question to you is this—hopefully we'll have that outcome—what will you do to secure the safety and protection of greyhounds that are on the racing track in Caerphilly, to ensure that they are protected during that period? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you for the question. I should say I am a dog owner myself; sometimes we feel that we're owned by the dog. But she's not a greyhound, but I understand they make fantastic family pets. But there is a point here about the broader welfare and what happens with those greyhounds that are bred for racing, whether they make it at racing greyhounds or not, and I know the concerns that are there. The Valley track is now part of the Greyhound Board of Great Britain, so it has to meet external standards. We will continue to maintain an interest in what takes place there, regardless of the outcome of the consultation and the Government response.

The local authority don't have statutory responsibilities to inspect the track and understand animal welfare, but we do want to make sure that the GB-wide standards they only signed up to last year, when they joined the GB overarching body, are met. And I do take seriously the point the Member makes about the welfare whilst the sport continues for greyhounds in Wales and beyond and also what might happen if there's a different future, because I take very seriously the welfare of these wonderful animals. I will stop there, because otherwise I'll start talking about family history with greyhounds, which probably is beyond First Minister's questions.

First Minister, 2 June marks National Greyhound Day. It is a timely reminder that Wales is one of only 10 countries across the entire globe—this includes all UK nations—where commercial greyhound racing still takes place in 2024. Published results from races and trials at the Valley Greyhounds stadium, which sits within the Senedd seat of Islwyn, show that from 3 March to 29 May this year nine dogs were recorded as 'fell' and 15 were recorded as 'knocked over'. The welfare of these precious greyhounds that are fallen in races remains unknown. The Cut the Chase coalition, which consists of the highly respected RSPCA, Dogs Trust, Blue Cross, Hope Rescue and Greyhound Rescue Wales, have well documented the truly shocking lack of welfare shown in the greyhound racing industry for the welfare of the animals. First Minister, what timescales and what more details, then, can you give about the outcome of the 12-week consultation considering the future of greyhound racing, and when will that report to the Senedd? I also would like to pick up on the point of what is going to happen in the interim to those dogs and their welfare.

Thank you for the question. Again, I understand the response the Member would like me to give, but I can't give it because we're going through the response to the consultation, but it is striking, the point the Member makes, that Wales is one of only 10 countries around the globe that still has commercial greyhound racing. We need to understand more about the welfare of the dogs, the standards that the Greyhound Board of Great Britain has for greyhounds to be able to make sure that they are met and that they undertake the welfare engagement they're supposed to, and we have to deal with the response to the consultation. Now, I can't give you an absolute time frame for when that will be published, but the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs is leading the work on this; we will publish a summary of the responses, and we will publish a response from the Government about how we propose to take those matters forward. So, I'd ask Members on all sides to bear with us, to understand we're treating this seriously, with the significant volume of responses that shows a real interest in the issue, and we'll set out the Government's response as soon as we're able to. And again, I recognise the significant and very genuine and well-meant and kind-heartedly-felt concern on all sides of the Chamber.

The Welsh Government continues to work closely with the health board to drive sustainable improvement that enables patients to access safe and timely health and care services. We have set out clear expectations for improvement that will be followed through by myself and the Cabinet Secretary.

First Minister, under Labour, the NHS in north Wales is on its knees: the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board has been in and out of special measures since 2015; there's been a failure to deliver improvements, which has resulted in patients coming to harm; patients are waiting longer than in other parts of the UK for operations and treatments; and we all know that the Glan Clwyd Hospital, which serves the people of Conwy and Denbighshire, has the worst emergency department performance in the country, with one in four people waiting 12 hours or more in A&E. It's totally unacceptable.

Now, in a bid to address some of these issues, 11 years ago, the Welsh Government promised to build a brand-new hospital in Rhyl to serve the coastal strip, improve access to NHS services and alleviate the pressure on Glan Clwyd. It should have been open in 2016, but we're yet to see a spade in the ground, First Minister, and yet, since then, since 2013, you've opened a brand-new hospital in south Wales. Why is north Wales always playing second fiddle to south Wales under your Government? And when will people in Conwy and Denbighshire get this vital facility that patients need?

Well, I recognise that long waits are something that I would not try to defend, whether it's emergency care or usual, planned care. There has been a reduction for long waits in north Wales, a more than 20 per cent reduction. There's been a reduction of more than 55 per cent, sorry, in orthopaedic patient waits as well, and there is investment going into the health service in north Wales. Ysbyty Glan Clwyd itself has had a significant refit, not just in the A&E department, but actually a whole-hospital refurbish and refit. We've also seen money going to new mental health units and indeed the orthopaedic unit in Llandudno, which the Cabinet Secretary went to open and to view. So, there is real investment going in. The challenge isn't just in the bricks and the mortar of the hospital, it's in the transformation and modernisation of the service overall, and the need to have not just the numbers of staff, but the way in which they work. It's a partnership for staff and the wider public; a partnership, indeed, with local government and beyond.

Part of our biggest challenge in getting people through hospital-based care is the fact that far too many people who are medically fit are still in a hospital bed. We can't fix that without the resources and the joint working between health, local care, local government and others. And, of course, we're in an environment, as the Member knows very well, where not only our budget has been compromised, with a more than £700 million real-terms reduction in the last three years, but actually that has a real impact on health and its partners as well.

There are real questions for us, and I believe a new page being turned on a UK level will give us more resources and different partnerships to work with. I look forward to listening to the public, understanding the challenges that I know that we face, but, crucially, I look forward to a new partnership that allows us to deliver on the aspirations of this Government and every community across the country.

Reducing waiting times is a priority for this Government, and we've been clear with health boards that they should utilise all available capacity, including through the independent sector, to reduce waiting times. Our overall objective is to have a genuinely sustainable public national health service.

Thank you. Well, interestingly, in Betsi terms, they call it insourcing of external, you know, procedures. Now, 8,568 patient pathways are waiting over 105 weeks, two years, to start treatment, and that's 3,600 per cent more than the whole of England. Now, in an effort to combat this crisis, the health board did turn to insourcing, using private companies. They've been entering contracts with external healthcare providers to provide clinical teams to attend health board sites, see patients and also undertake a number of results from scans. Now, this has only just come to my attention, but, due to funding pressure, the health board recently—. I have constituents waiting several months for scan results. Now, surely, First Minister, you can understand that, anybody going for a scan, it's a worrying time for them; anybody waiting for those results, it's even more worrying. And when those results don't come through, it just causes an additional burden of stress and anxiety. Now, what has happened is, due to funding pressures, the health board made a decision to halt the insourcing of external services on scans with effect from April 2023, a year ago. However, rather than bring in those patients back under the NHS umbrella—

I've been very patient. Please get to a question, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Yes. So, basically, those patients were then just left in abeyance for months and months and months at a time. Now, they've written to me saying—

The question now, please, Janet.

Yes, okay. So, what will you do, working with the health Minister, First Minister, to ensure that you look exactly at how the insourcing of external programmes is working? Because to actually stop it for a year and it not be picked up is disgraceful. I want to make sure that doesn't happen again.

Two minutes is sufficient for the question there.

I think, as the Member acknowledged, insourcing is where people are brought into the NHS to deliver some of the scans that are required, and our challenge is, if we want to generate the capacity we need, we need to invest in people and in equipment to do that. And we need to utilise parts of the independent sector to make sure that we don't have unacceptable waits within the system. And in fact, on MRI scans in the last year, there has been about a 30 per cent reduction in people waiting longer than our expectation, so it has made a difference. And that reduction in people waiting has actually taken place despite there being a 14 per cent increase in demand. Now, I know there has been an issue and some people were missed for follow-up. That's something the Cabinet Secretary is aware of. It's also something the health board are aware of. They've reviewed all of those cases to make sure people are put back into the system where they should have been. Part of our challenge is not just in saying what we want to do to recognise there is a problem we need to resolve; it is also, where things go wrong, about whether you are prepared to put it right. That's exactly what has happened in this instance. And we're going to need to invest more in this area to get to a point of being genuinely sustainable, and then we need to find a way to carry on investing in more preventative healthcare as well. That's the challenge we face. I understand it very well as a former health Minister. The Cabinet Secretary for health understands that very well and that is exactly what she is doing: getting on top of long waits and looking to shift our system to more preventative healthcare.

Finally, question 9, Delyth Jewell.

Access to hospital services in South Wales East under sustained pressure, with record demand and need. This inevitably affects both staff and patients. The Welsh Government will continue to work closely with health boards in this region to improve access to safe and timely health and care services.

Thank you for that. Our hospitals in Wales seem forever to be close to crisis. I was contacted recently by a constituent whose 92-year-old mother was taken to the Grange hospital after a fall. She was unconscious. Thirteen ambulances were lined up outside when they arrived, and after triage they had to wait for five hours in an ambulance outside before this 92-year-old woman was brought back into the building, and only after they'd complained—all of this before it was established whether she'd had a bleed on the brain. Now, I've spoken before here about how ambulances are the new waiting rooms, that it's normal to see queues of ambulances waiting outside A&E. It shouldn't be normal, but it has become normalised. Now, surely you would agree that that is not adequate, that that is not right. In this election, the Labour Party is focusing on the need to modernise our NHS and they are even campaigning on that in Wales, where their own party runs the health service. Isn't part of this your own fault?

I think if you look at what we are doing—. Let's take the specific point. I'm sorry to hear of the instance that the Member has highlighted. I can't address individual matters, but I hope that the Member, together with the health board, is looking at that, and there are other services available, including Llais and others, to help support the Member if there is a complaint or a concern to be raised, and it's important that concerns are raised. I remember, when the Member for Cardiff West was the health Minister, about the gift of complaints, and understanding that, when complaints are made, they're opportunities for improvement, and to do it in an environment where staff don't feel they're under attack, but, actually, how do you do this better in the future. Some of it is about how we cope with demand. Some of it is about how our whole systems work.

I made the point in earlier questions that part of our challenge is that we have too many people who are medically fit for discharge who can't go into the next phase of their care and treatment outside of a hospital. It's also something about the capacity at the front door. So, at the Grange in particular, they're looking to double the capacity for the total waiting area. That should make a real difference for people that come in, and ambulances can be released to deal with the risk that is in the community at that time. But we've got to deal with the back door, where people can get out of the hospital. Now, this is part of what you need to do to modernise the service: to invest in your staff, to invest in facilities. And I make no apology for campaigning for a modernised national health service, together with the resources we need to keep the staff we have and to recruit the staff that we will need.

If you think about what we have already done to modernise the health service, the new treatment fund that we introduced in the last Senedd term, it does deliver better and faster access to new treatments. We made that choice here in Wales ahead of the rest of the UK. Think about what we've done in optometry. Your high-street optometrist can now deal with a whole range of conditions, taking pressure off healthcare services in a hospital on eye care, and that means people get a better experience and faster access to care. I've seen that within my own family. And in pharmacy, the Conservatives in England are now planning to do what we have already done here in Wales, in reforming pharmacy, in modernising it and having new services delivered closer to where people live. That's a record that we want to build on. I make no apology for wanting to modernise and improve a public national health service with the resources to be able to do so, and I believe the result on 4 July or 5 July will be crucial to how quickly we can do that here in Wales.

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item is the business statement and announcement. I call on the Trefnydd to make that statement.

Two debates and two oral statements have been added to today's agenda; the titles are published on the Plenary agenda. Draft business for the next three weeks is set out in the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Minister, can I call for a statement from the Minister for Health and Social Care in respect of the report by the Royal College of Psychiatrists into mental health services at the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board? I think that the report that was published recently was very, very troubling. It found that less than half of the 84 key recommendations and improvements that had been promised because of recommendations following independent reviews into mental health services in the past have yet to be implemented. And, as a result of that, patients have been coming to harm and have even lost their lives as a result of the incompetence of local leaders and, indeed, the Welsh Government in being able to get to grips with the problems in that troubled health board.

It was 2013 when we first read the scandalous report into the situation in Tawel Fan. We've read reports about the very poor services being provided by the Hergest unit, and we've had multiple reports since saying that things still need to improve. Why on earth is it taking such a long time for this health board, which is in special measures, to get to grips with these issues, and what on earth is the Welsh Government doing to sort these things out? People deserve to know, and that's why I think we need an urgent statement. 

Can I also request a second statement, please, from the economy Minister in relation to the report by Visit Wales last week, which found that people were being put off from coming to Wales as visitors because of the Welsh Labour Government's default 20 mph speed limit policy in Wales? This is a significant concern for people in north Wales, particularly in Conwy and Denbighshire, which rely heavily on the visitor economy, and we must do something to make sure that we don't see a significant decline in visitor numbers as a result of this barmy policy continuing. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Darren Millar, for your questions. 

In terms of mental health, of course, you are referring to the report that the Welsh Government commissioned in 2023 from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, and it was to undertake that review of four previous mental health reviews and also to look at the extent to which recommendations had been completed—embedded and completed. Now, that report has been completed and—very timely—it was presented to the health board at its meeting on 30 May. So, it's there before them in terms of the health board's review of those recommendations and their implementation. 

I think it's also important, and you may be aware of this as a local Member, that Betsi Cadwaladr UHB met with a small group of representatives from families with experience of mental health services within the health board on the evening of 20 May 2024 to discuss the findings of the royal college report prior to its publication. And it's really important that that discussion took place with those families, only in the last fortnight, and that the health board, once again, apologised to those affected by past failings, and also that views were given by the families. Their concerns, of course, were expressed at that meeting, and the call for accountability, transparency and candour from those families was important. I think there has been a media response to that, interest in that, but good evidence of implementation in relation to 37 out of a total of 84 recommendations in the four external reports. 

And also, of course, the health board chair has been interviewed and there has been significant media coverage of the report, as well as engagement between the First Minister and an individual who did attempt to present him with a hard copy of the report. So, much engagement with the health board now, and the health board chair—very engaged as it went to the board on 30 May. So, topical to raise today, but, clearly, it is about implementation, and the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, of course, is here with us today.

Well, of course, as for the 20 mph debate, I think you took part, Darren Millar, in the important debate that took place on 22 May, and it was an important debate, and, of course, it was the Cabinet Secretary for North Wales and Transport who responded and made it very clear that, in all his conversations, he's putting communities at the heart of our thinking and listening to the voices of citizens, and also listening to all those partners who are engaging with this. And it was a very positive debate, and I'm sure you will agree with that. 

But what was so important was that this is very important for visitors, and that people must feel safe when travelling, including pedestrians and cyclists, as so many of our visitors are pedestrians and cyclists. And he said he wanted that targeted approach to 20 mph on roads where vulnerable road users mix with heavy traffic, and, of course, that is crucial in terms of having a welcoming, safe community for our tourism and for our visitors, because, finally, I have to say, Llywydd, the principal objective, again, of the policy of 20 mph is to save lives and reduce casualties on our roads. And that's what our visitors want when they come to Wales. And, of course, now we're pressing ahead with refining the policy, which is all to do with engaging with the 22 local authorities and how they're consulting as well, and looking at that from the whole perspective of Wales being a welcoming and open and safe country.

Trefnydd, in a similar vein, my focus is also on the safety of pedestrians, and I'd like to request a statement, please, from the Cabinet Secretary for transport regarding taking forward the recommendations made in the pavement parking taskforce report. Obviously, that was delayed until this year, which was understandable from the perspective of pressure on local government, but there are many people impacted by the delay, such as those who use wheelchairs, the visually impaired, those who use buggies, or pedestrians, all saying that pavement parking is a major issue. Obviously, in Valleys communities, we know that's a huge challenge, because if people were not to park on pavements, then there would be other issues. But, in other areas, it is possible and it is impacting. Therefore, I've had this request from many, many constituents: when will we see progress to ensure that, in terms of those who do park selfishly, which means that people can't use pavements safely, those people are able to see action and progress on this?

Well, thank you very much for your important question, because it is an important question. 

We have to look at this when we look at the safety, as you say, of our pedestrians. And that's where pavement parking is dangerous, and it is also why, of course, this was something that was taken forward by the former Minister for transport. And, now, I will certainly raise this with the Cabinet Secretary for North Wales and Transport to get an update on where we are with this in terms of delivery. 

I'm seeking two statements. The first one is an update on Airbnb licensing and control. There are concerns that Airbnb are reducing the availability of privately rented accommodation and affecting traditional holiday accommodation. Could we have a statement to indicate what progress has been made on creating a register of all types of visitor accommodation and having planning controls on the creation of Airbnb, and when will a draft Bill on these proposals be produced?

Secondly, I've been contacted by pupils at Hafod school in Swansea, who are concerned about the cost of hiring a bus that is wheelchair accessible to take the children swimming. It is substantially more expensive than a bus that is not wheelchair accessible. Can I ask for a Government statement on wheelchair-accessible bus provision and cost?

Diolch yn fawr, Mike Hedges. You raised a really important point about the impact of Airbnb, and, clearly, the evidence is that it does reduce the availability of privately rented accommodation, and it also affects traditional holiday accommodation as well. And I think it's useful to look at the Bevan Foundation report on holiday lets in the private rented sector. And, of course, this is quite regional and local—the local authorities with the largest numbers listed as Airbnbs are Gwynedd, followed by Pembrokeshire and Powys. There are fewer, far fewer, in the south Wales Valleys. But many of them, I think, from that report, of the 21,000-plus listings on Airbnb, 14,000-plus appear to be suitable for long-term habitation, which just proves that—. That's 1 per cent of Wales's dwelling stock. For Gwynedd, it's 4.6 per cent; Pembrokeshire, 3.7 per cent; and Ceredigion, 3.1 per cent.

It's something on which we intend to develop a scheme, where all visitor accommodation providers must show they're adhering to certain requirements to operate. And we've talked about safety for our visitors. We want to show visitors to Wales the importance we do place on their safety, but that's about standards, isn't it, in the tourism sector? And then, of course, we are now looking towards a phased approach, with an initial focus on a statutory registration scheme for all accommodation providers, with the intention of supporting other wider Welsh Government policies, such as a visitor levy scheme and broader housing objectives. It is important, I think, to look back to the statement that was made on 9 January 2024—an oral statement on progress in terms of tackling the Airbnb issue. We've changed planning regulations to allow local planning authorities to control the change of use of permanent homes to short-term lets. And it's interesting to look at Gwynedd county council, who are in the process of introducing local controls using these powers, and others are looking at this. And now England is following the lead provided by Wales. So, thank you for giving us the opportunity to update on that.

But you also raised important issues in terms of public service vehicle accessibility. The regulations are not devolved to Wales and are still led by the UK Government Department for Transport. Those regulations do apply to all new public service vehicles—buses or coaches—which have been introduced since 2000 in England, Scotland and Wales, with a particular capacity. Now, importantly, it's important that all full-size single-deck buses over 7.5 tonnes are fully accessible from January 2016, all double-deckers from January 2017, and they have been required to have wheelchair access from 1 January 2005. It's important to see this in terms of how the operators have got to comply with the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations. So, it is about us being proactive. We've talked about being proactive, engaging the UK Government and the Department for Transport on this matter. But I'm very conscious of the fact we've got a disability rights taskforce, which is now co-chaired by the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and Social Justice. I was a co-chair with Professor Debbie Foster, and we had a very active transport group, a taskforce travel working group—disabled people telling us what it's like, and producing recommendations to support inclusive and accessible transport, which I'm sure will be followed through.

Trefnydd, I'd like to call for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for health on GP provision in rural areas. I've had shared with me an freedom of information response from the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership, which shows that only one small primary care premises has been built in Wales in the last 10 years. That lack of investment is quite troubling, certainly given the disproportionate impact that smaller surgeries can have when they're built in a rural community. It's also troubling that 99 GP surgeries across Wales have closed in recent years, which creates a further barrier for those rural communities. One example that comes up in my region is that of Hanmer surgery, which has been recently covered in a Channel 4 television programme, highlighting the quality of care that people receive there, but also highlighting that the premises is not fit for purpose and that investment is required. Local people are frustrated at the pace of progress, which is painfully slow. So, I'd like a statement addressing what will be done to bring those GP services closer to people who live in rural Wales. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you for that question. Access to primary care services is crucial, because it delivers better access to doctors, nurses, dentists, optometrists and all those other health professionals who are essential to transforming services, and it's a Government commitment.

I think it's important just to say, for the record, that, every month, GPs make contact with 322,000 people in north Wales. They refer 30,000 people to hospitals for secondary care each month. The First Minister was responding to a question on this earlier on. Also, the fact is that there are practices that have experienced recent challenges around staffing and there are financial incentives for GP training in Wales. The targeted incentive scheme in Wales provides £20,000 to GP trainees to take up a training post in north Wales, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire or Powys. I'll just say that, in terms of one particular medical centre, the West End Medical Centre, a new GP is starting this week, the week commencing 3 June, and a further two within the next few months. So, that shows the great efforts being made by the practice team to engage to recruit, to engage with the community to make improvements. Clearly, the Cabinet Secretary and her officials are reviewing progress to improve permanent staffing not just for that practice, but through other practices to make sure that those GP services in rural areas are supported.

I'd like to have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning on Denbighshire County Council's replacement of the mixed recycling blue bin with the three-tier trolley-box system where waste has to be separated—previously, it was a co-mingled system. The new system has been rolled out this week, on Monday, much to the dismay of residents across Denbighshire. My initial concern is that the decision was made without the consent of residents, who deeply dislike the new bin system. The reason given for the change has been the need to increase recycling rates, but Denbighshire already has one of the best recycling rates in Wales, at 65.9 per cent. So, I think the real reason for the change is their desire to cut costs, and I'm sure that the money offered by the Welsh Government was also an incentive for the change too. It's plainly obvious that these new bins will in fact discourage recycling as many residents would rather toss their rubbish into the general bin than spend time rifling through waste, separating it into different compartments. So, could I get a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Local Government and Planning on the Welsh Government's position on Denbighsire County Council ploughing ahead with unpopular policies without the consent of residents?

You've already recognised the good recycling rates in Denbighshire. Let's thank the citizens of Denbighshire, and the local authority in terms of leadership, for achieving those good rates. Wales is absolutely at the forefront globally of delivering on recycling. I hope you are proud of that as well. Actually, in many authorities, including the one I live in, across Wales residents have responded to the changes in the arrangements for our recycling. It is important that we recognise that separating that recycling is important for the destination of those recycled goods, and there's a lot of support given by local authorities. Some authorities have been doing this for decades, or certainly a decade or two. So, Denbighshire is actually catching up with that. I think you will find that people will adjust to it. It is something that is best practice and it is being rolled out successfully across Wales. And, of course, it is again, through the ways in which recycling is now progressing in Wales, making sure that Wales—as I'm sure Denbighshire and the citizens of Denbighshire will recognise—will be at the forefront of those really impressive recycling rates.

And finally, Laura Anne Jones.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to request a statement, please, Trefnydd, from the Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Sport and Social Justice on the mapping of sports facilities in Wales. It's clear from conversations with sporting bodies and organisations that it's currently extremely hard to find a clear list of sporting facilities right across Wales and even harder to find them on any sort of map. This Welsh Government claims to want to encourage sporting participation, lift up our future sporting stars, cut down the obesity rate, and ensure we have a healthy Wales. So, surely, mapping out where sporting facilities actually are is essential to ensure equality of provision for all in Wales. Currently, there is no information available. So, I'd be grateful if the Cabinet Secretary for sport could provide a written or oral statement on mapping out facilities in Wales. Thanks.

Thank you very much for your question. 

Sporting facilities are crucial, aren't they, both locally based and nationally provided. They are key to access sport, physical health and well-being, particularly for our children and young people. Again, local authorities have a crucial role to play in terms of provision and support, although it's really tough and they're hard pressed, because of the austerity and the lack of funding from the UK Government to the Welsh Government, and thence to local authorities, to maintain and improve sporting facilities. But can I also say that Sport Wales plays a really important role as well? The funding that comes through Sport Wales is very accessible, and also information about the sporting facilities is provided locally, regionally and nationally.

I think it's also important to look at this from the perspective of our schools. We were reflecting earlier on the transformational programme of school development, and, actually, many of those new schools that we've got—primary and secondary—have also not just got their own state-of-the-art sporting facilities, but they are available to the community as well, and that's where it's very important. But I'm sure the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and Social Justice will be looking at, in terms of her portfolio, the very important connections, of course, between providing that information, providing the facilities, and the importance of accessibility, particularly for our children and young people, but for our adults as well, as they also take part not just themselves in terms of enjoying a sport, but also enjoying supporting their children and young people on the touchline and in training, which many of them do. 

Thank you, Trefnydd. 

Next, we have a motion to suspend Standing Orders to allow item 3, the infected blood inquiry report, to be debated. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to move the motion. Eluned Morgan.

Formally. 

The proposal is to suspend Standing Orders. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36. 

Next, we have item 3, the debate on the infected blood inquiry report. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to move the motion. Eluned Morgan.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for the opportunity to have this debate today, following the publication of the infected blood inquiry's final report last month. I want to be clear: this was the worst treatment scandal in the history of the NHS. While it predated devolution, as the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care in Wales, I want to apologise to all those who were infected and have been affected by this terrible tragedy. I want to pay tribute to the infected and affected, some of whom I met earlier today and are in the gallery this afternoon to listen to this debate. There's been so much suffering by so many people. They fought for decades for the truth to be told, and they must be commended for this. 

I've just met some of those victims and heard their stories: Tony and Pat Summers, fighting for justice for decades for their son, Paul; Rose, who lost her brother in 1990, aged 44; Suzanne, setting out how her mother was a tiny bit anaemic and received tainted blood from a service that was supposed to heal her but ended up killing her and depriving her of the opportunity of meeting her nine great-grandchildren; the harrowing story I heard from Margaret Sugar about how her son Lee suffered and how her son Craig is still paying a price; Joanne, who explained how her brother-in-law was ostracised in school because he had HIV and the school failed to keep it private; Kirk, who is still suffering and is determined to ensure justice is done; Sharon and Ceri, whose father died and nobody told them he had a hepatoma; Ruth, whose husband died in 1989, and wasn’t told he had hep C. They’ve all fought for decades for the truth to be told.

The culmination of the infected blood inquiry on 20 May and Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendations provided them with many of the answers to so many of the questions they’ve been asking for so long. The sense of vindication and relief is palpable. But so too is the anger that this was ever allowed to happen. I want to thank the members of the cross-party group who have also supported the victims and campaigned for a UK inquiry to take place. I want to pay a special tribute to Julie Morgan, who has worked tirelessly for many, many decades with Haemophilia Wales, helping people like Tony Lane. I also want to pay tribute to the chair, Lynne Kelly. Together, they’ve fought for the inquiry, they’ve lobbied for ex-gratia payments, for parity and a compensation package.

Dirprwy Lywydd, following the conclusion of the infected blood inquiry and the publication of the final report, we’ve already started work to consider its recommendations. We’ve set up an infected blood inquiry next steps for Wales group, chaired by our new deputy chief medical officer, Dr Push Mangat, and it will meet for the very first time soon. It will work with health boards, the Welsh Blood Service, Public Health Wales and policy officials to ensure we look at the wrongs of the past and work together to ensure this can never happen again. There are some issues we can and we will progress quickly; others will take more time. I’ll report back to Members as this work progresses.

I met John Glen, the responsible Cabinet Office Minister, just after the general election was announced, and said the Welsh Government will continue to work on a four-nations basis to implement improvements across the UK. In response, he told me that the election would not hold the work up. Members will recall that this Senedd gave its consent to the provisions in the UK Victims and Prisoners Bill to establish the new compensation arrangements for people infected and affected. The Victims and Prisoners Bill was approved by the UK Parliament as part of the wash-up process, and has now received Royal Assent. This means the new infected blood compensation authority will be formally set up and payments will be made.

Compensation is a matter for and will be funded by the UK Government, but my officials will continue to work with their counterparts in Whitehall to ensure there is a smooth transition for beneficiaries to the new arrangements. Those people who were infected and affected will rightly be able to claim compensation and we will assist them in this process. We’ll also do all we can to ensure that all those eligible for further interim compensation payments receive it as quickly as possible. A second interim payment to those living beneficiaries who are registered on a support scheme will be made within 90 days. Further interim payments will be made to the estates of those registered who were infected and the Wales infected blood support scheme will continue to make ex-gratia payments to provide welfare and psychological support until the transition is complete.

Sir Robert Francis, who wrote the compensation report for the Cabinet Office, will be holding a series of engagement events over the summer about the compensation package put forward by the UK Government. This will help ensure those able to make claims have the correct information and, where necessary, have their views heard on the proposals.

I’m now going to turn to speak in Welsh, so you may need your headphones.

Dirprwy Lywydd, it was a tragedy for everyone who was infected and affected. Sadly, many of them are no longer with us. I want to give assurances to those listening today that changes have been made and, very importantly, that the service and the blood supply is very different now. Everyone who is a blood donor is an unpaid volunteer, and the risk of infected blood going into the UK blood supply is less than one in 20 million for HIV and hepatitis C. Anyone who is concerned that they may have been infected can access a home testing kit through the Public Health Wales online service or through their health board or surgery.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the scandal of infected blood is a dark stain on the history of the NHS and of our public institutions. We must be better, and we must do better than the denials, the false reassurances, the complacency, the cover-ups, the obfuscations and the repeated failures at an individual, institutional and Government level that characterised and compounded this awful tragedy, which cost so many people their lives and their futures.

I have selected the three amendments to the motion. I call on Mabon ap Gwynfor to move amendments 1, 2 and 3 tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to the Government for agreeing to bring forward this debate this afternoon. Although it is a debate that clearly deserves urgent attention, the truth is that we shouldn't be in this situation of having to have the debate in the first instance. 

The findings of the Langstaff report on the infected blood scandal are an utterly damning indictment of an entrenched culture of institutional abuse, governmental neglect and political obfuscation that was allowed to fester in our body politic for decades and that led to tragic consequences on an unprecedented scale. First and foremost, it is right that we pay tribute to the inspirational campaigning of the affected individuals who have fought tirelessly for justice in the face of powerful vested interests that sought to silence their plight at every turn. Thanks must also be expressed to my colleague Rhun ap Iorwerth for his chairing of the cross-party group and his consistent support to all those affected. So too I'd like to thank Julie Morgan for her immense contribution in this fight.

Though nothing will fully repair the damage inflicted on their lives by this scandal, I hope the report can provide those individuals impacted with some degree of closure and finally initiate the long-overdue process of accountability. I also hope that this proves to be a watershed moment in addressing the glaring imbalance of power at the very heart of our criminal justice system. From the Hillsborough disaster to the Post Office Horizon scandal, the wheels of justice can often turn far too slowly when it come to the misdemeanours and failings of the wealthy, the elite and the well-connected, as is sadly attested by the fact that numerous victims have gone to their graves long before justice has come to light.

It is for this reason I believe there is a particular responsibility on us as elected representatives, regardless of our political affiliations, to reflect on the report with the utmost humility that it deserves and to strive at all times to never lose sight of the true meaning of public service. It is in this spirit we have introduced a series of amendments to the Government's original motion to this debate. Last month, the Cabinet Secretary confirmed in her response to my topical question on this matter that she had received assurances from the UK Government that the second interim compensation payment of £210,000 to affected individuals registered on the support scheme will be paid within 90 days of the publication of the report. Our first amendment, therefore, calls on the Welsh Government to do everything it can to ensure this pledge is fulfilled as promised. It is vital that restitution for affected individuals, however meagre it may be in the context of their suffering, is not held up by a change in Government at Westminster.

I'd also welcome an update from the Cabinet Secretary in her response as to the duration of the regular payment scheme. Concern has been raised that regular payments are only planned up to April 2025, at present. So, does the Welsh Government have any intention of extending these payments beyond this point?

We also believe that the Welsh Government has a duty to be proactive in reaching out to the 264 people currently registered on the Wales infected blood support scheme with offers of relevant support and counselling, as set out in our third amendment. Of course, such was the protracted nature of this scandal, it straddled the pre- and post-devolution eras in Wales, over which time the range and complexity of powers assigned to the Senedd have evolved significantly. The report emphasises that the inability of both the Wales Office and the earliest Welsh Governments to challenge or scrutinise the settled position of successive UK administrations on the issue of infected blood use is a sad commentary on the effectiveness of these inter-governmental arrangements. Clearly, therefore, the frameworks of governance both here in the Senedd and on a pan-UK level can never again be allowed to fail so egregiously. And from the perspective of the Welsh Government, this means utilising the levers at its disposal as effectively and as extensively as possible. 

So, for this reason, our final amendment calls on the Welsh Government to implement the recommendations of the report that relate to devolved areas of competence fully and without delay. These darkest chapters in the history of our health service, and the political institution more broadly, are a crucial lesson in the way that institutions that are supposed to incorporate the principle of doing no harm can be exploited, leading to further harm, ultimately. It is a duty upon us, therefore, for the victims of this scandal, to maintain the greatest accountability and transparency in public life, which should include firm safeguarding measures for whistleblowers and empower those most vulnerable in our society. I am confident, therefore, that you will support our amendments this afternoon. Thank you.

There are many Members who wish to speak on this item, so if Members could keep their contributions brief, I'll be able to call more speakers. Sam Rowlands.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I also thank the Welsh Government for bringing forward this important debate today? Whilst, technically, it is a debate, there are no party lines here when it comes to the issue at hand, and we on these benches agree with all the proposals that the Government has set out and also with the amendments that Plaid Cymru have put forward here today. And it's simply because the infected blood scandal is one of the most grotesque miscarriages of justice in British history. Each of the victims had their entire lives turned upside down, destroyed or even lost in such agonising circumstances, and it's entirely right now that the priorities of Governments, both here and in Westminster, are ensuring that compensation gets to those victims and the families of those victims as well.

It's a cliché, but we also need to ensure that lessons are learnt from this as well. It must be a priority that we never allow cover-ups and, essentially, corruption of this kind to happen again in our institutions, and in particular our largest public institutions that are there to protect and serve the people that we represent. Cabinet Secretary, like you, I'd like to share a couple of stories that residents have shared with me in terms of some of their awful experiences. A resident in north Wales, who was a recipient of the Welsh infected blood support scheme, shared his story with me of being infected as a child with hepatitis B and HIV and hepatitis C, spending months in intensive care. He described the lifelong impact on him, his wife and parents as 'long gnawing at our spirits'. So, aside from the physical health impact, that 'long gnawing at our spirits', which was constantly with them. Another constituent was infected with hepatitis C through treatments for Von Willebrand disease, and her mother also infected, and both had to undergo liver transplants—clearly a very, very serious procedure that has long-term impacts for them and their family. And there are many traumatic details to these cases and far too many others. All of these people are in our thoughts here today, as we engage in this debate.

Of course, we did have the opportunity to discuss the inquiry report before our recess a couple of weeks ago, but Cabinet Secretary, as you pointed out, there have been some updates in the interim, and I'm pleased that, on 24 May, as part of the pre-election wash-up process, the Victims and Prisoners Bill was granted, as you say, by Royal Assent, creating the infected blood compensation authority, which will be responsible for making these final payments to victims. There are, of course, a number of moving parts within that, so I wonder, Cabinet Secretary, if, as part of your closing, you'll be able to just clarify that confidence that you have that, with the general election taking place now, and some of those moving parts, you have that confidence that this compensation will indeed get through to people who rightfully deserve it in the quickest timescale possible; we're told that by 24 August is the deadline. 

I'm also pleased, as you mentioned, Cabinet Secretary, that the interim chair of the IBCA, Sir Robert Francis, made a statement that they are working as quickly as possible to be in a position to receive those applications and make those awards, so I'd like to understand how you may be working with the IBCA to help that process happen with the much-needed haste.

I'm conscious that there are many speakers here today, Deputy Presiding Officer, but I simply want to thank the Welsh Government for bringing forward this debate and recognise all of the hard work done by so many people over so many years to ensure that justice is finally being done. Thank you.

I'm very pleased that we're joined in the public gallery by a large group of those infected and affected here in Wales, including my constituents, Sybil and Bev, and chair of Haemophilia Wales, Lynne Kelly. I'd like to pay a particular tribute to Lynne Kelly to thank her for the sensitive, determined way that she has led this group. Because it's those that have had their lives incomprehensibly turned upside down that must be at the forefront of this debate today. I'd like to, therefore, put on record the experiences of two of my constituents, Sybil and Bev, illustrative of the experience, of course, of many others.

Sybil had a heart operation in 1989. Ten years later, she received a letter from the head of the Wales blood transfusion service and got the news that she had blood infected with hepatitis C. She was told not to use the same crockery or cutlery as her husband, and not to have an intimate relationship. Sybil received no counselling. She had to attend the infectious disease clinic at the University Hospital of Wales, and described how she felt dirty because she had hepatitis C. The side effects of her treatment were worse than having chemotherapy. The publishing of the infected blood inquiry's report on 20 May was a milestone in the campaign for justice. In Sybil's own words, 'No-one can possibly begin to understand how I currently feel when hearing Sir Brian Langstaff's opening comments say, "This was no accident".'

I'll now turn to Bev, whose two brothers, Gareth and Haydn, died 10 months apart in 2010 after receiving infected blood contaminated with HIV and hepatitis C. Gareth and Haydn were key figures in the campaign to provide support and justice to haemophiliacs and their families through Birchgrove Wales, Haemophilia Wales, the National Birchgrove Group and the Tainted Blood campaign group, and, in fact, they started off by meeting as a group in the Birchgrove pub in my constituency in Cardiff North, but now, of course, it has become Birchgrove Wales.

When haemophilia patients were told about their HIV diagnosis, it was a terrifying ordeal—a death sentence, with life-expectancy estimates of between two and five years. The stigma was horrendous and the majority of patients kept their status secret. The groups that Gareth and Haydn set up to support those who had been infected were a lifeline. Bev told me that Gareth was angry, outspoken and determined, whereas Haydn was much quieter and measured in his approach, working away and quietly researching. 

With devolution in 1999, campaigning to get the truth gathered strength, and Gareth, as chair of the newly formed Haemophilia Wales, presented the case for a public inquiry at the first cross-party group held in the newly formed Assembly. When Bev travelled to London on 20 May, she described it as an 'emotional, uplifting experience' to hear the outcome and see survivors from across the UK, but this was filled with huge sadness given the fact that her brothers, Gareth and Haydn, with their huge input towards the inquiry, were not there to hear it. She wished they could have been there.

But the fight is not over. Brian Langstaff has said that it was not an accident, and that has been a huge comfort, I think, to many of the people infected and affected. But there are great worries about whether Sir Brian's full list of recommendations will be implemented. There are concerns about the monthly support scheme, and many people are worried that they might be financially worse off if Sir Brian's recommendations are not acted upon. I think many people believe that false hope has been given. And I think, if you look at the history of what's happened to this group, you can absolutely understand why people feel that way. This is a fantastic report, Brian Langstaff was absolutely great in everything he said, but now we've got to make sure that it is implemented, and I know that the Cabinet Secretary will do all she possibly can within our powers here to make sure that all those recommendations are implemented. It's taken 40 years to get to this point, and we need to learn from past mistakes and do the right thing from the outset. 

It was an honour to be in London some weeks ago to listen to Sir Brian Langstaff announcing his final report. Julie Morgan was there as well, and so many of those who have been campaigning over the years in Wales. It was an extremely emotional event, with many in tears, of course, and remembering those who could not be there—those who had paid with their lives for the scandal that should never have happened and, yes, that was no accident. And they were there to hear the findings and to accept the justice that they deserved, and to hear the truth, of course—we all know that it was the truth all along. 

Mr and Mrs Hutchinson, my constituents, presented me to the scale of the scandal, and I've kept in touch with them over the years. It was through them that I learned of this injustice. Through them I became part of the cross-party group on infected blood, which was chaired by Julie Morgan at the time. And when she became a Minister in the Government, it was my honour to take over as chair and co-operate and work closely with Lynne Kelly and all of the individuals and families who have given their lives literally, or their time, their energy and all their passion to fighting for the justice that we haven't quite had yet, but we're very close to getting it. Listening to them again at lunchtime today—the brothers who had lost their sisters, the sisters who had lost their brothers, people having lost their parents, parents who had lost their children; the stigma, the name calling, the shame that has cast a shadow over so many lives.

I'm not going to make additional points in terms of what we need to see from the Welsh Government and the UK Government, more than what has been said by Mabon ap Gwynfor on behalf of the Plaid Cymru benches here, but just to echo those words and just to make the point that we can't miss a second in our determination to reach the end of this journey and get that real justice, because an important milestone has been reached in that statement by Sir Brian Langstaff and the work of the inquiry, but it's only a milestone at present.

The apologies and the strong response from the Ministers in Westminster came just hours, indeed, before a general election was called, so things have been halted, but we now, under the next Government, of whatever stripe, need to be just as determined as we were ever to press ahead with this, for those who are still campaigning, and those who, because they've paid the ultimate price for this, can't do that anymore. It's our duty, and our debt to them is to do everything that we can to ensure that they get that justice. 

Mark Isherwood. Mark, you are unmuted.

Oh, I'm speaking. Thank you. The damning findings of the infected blood inquiry published on 25 May shone a light on one of the biggest treatment scandals in NHS history. An estimated 3,000 people infected with HIV and hepatitis C after being given contaminated blood products have died. Around 400 people in Wales are known to have been infected, excluding those who died without it being known they were infected. Haemophilia Wales state that 283 patients in Wales were infected with hepatitis C in the 1970s and 1980s, and over 70 people with haemophilia died in Wales alone.

As the five-year inquiry stated, infected blood was not an accident and was avoidable. The truth had been hidden and victims had been repeatedly failed. Haemophilia Wales has asked me to speak about the impact of infected blood on North Wales constituent Jane Jones and her family. Jane was infected with hepatitis C through treatment for Von Willebrand disease, a rare clotting disorder. She was not told about her infection. Her late mother Anona was also infected with hepatitis C and both underwent liver transplants due to hepatitis C. Jane travelled from north Wales to London to hear the recommendations made by Sir Brian Langstaff, chair of the infected blood inquiry. She was interviewed by the media in Welsh and English for weeks ahead of the inquiry and on the day itself, and was chosen to represent Welsh victims and Haemophilia Wales. On 21 May, Jane represented Haemophilia Wales and Welsh infected blood victims in Parliament and watched John Glen's statement on infected blood compensation from the Speaker's gallery.

Haemophilia Wales are very grateful for the important role Jane and her mother played campaigning for the public inquiry to finally get to the truth about what happened. Both maintained that they had never been informed about the risks of the treatment and were then not told about their infections. As Jane said in her statement to the inquiry, being infected with hepatitis C is something you would not wish upon an animal.

A Denbighshire constituent, Rose Richards, has also written asking me to speak on her behalf in this debate. She is an affected person both as a carrier of the haemophilia gene and as a sister to a haemophiliac brother who died of AIDS in 1990 aged 46, after receiving contaminated factor VIII treatment in the early 1980s. She is also a core participant in the infected blood inquiry and has submitted two written statements to it. She made a decision on whether to have children based on information that withheld the truth about the known risk of serious harm. Her sons, born in 1983 and 1985, both have haemophilia. Fortunately, neither required factor VIII until it was a safer product in the late 1980s. As she states, however, the experience of hearing of other parents losing their children has been harrowing now that we know the truth about the scandal. She added that, although Sir Brian Langstaff recommended that the current ongoing support payments under the Wales infected blood support scheme should continue for infected persons and spouses or partners of infected persons who have died, and compensation should be paid in addition to the support payments, there's been no commitment to honour this. She concluded that, 'As a group we're very concerned about any further Government delay.’ Victims continue to die at the rate of one every four days without justice.

Speaking here in the 2017 debate, calling on the UK Government to hold a full public inquiry into the contaminated blood tragedy of the 1970s and 1980s, I quoted Monica Summers, whose husband Paul, a contaminated blood bank victim, died on 16 December 2008, aged 44. Their daughter was five years old. Monica said,

‘Every day for 18 months she asked “when is daddy coming home?” She turned 13 years in October and we both struggle. My husband didn’t have a choice, it was made for him and he and he lost his life because of decisions taken by others. Yet over 30 years later we are still trying to get some agreement. Please let the next decisions be made by voices of people who are currently suffering with HIV and Hepatitis C, by the widows and families left behind trying to heal and build a new normal life.'

Their daughter would now be 20. As I said then, contaminated blood has had and continues to have a devastating impact on the lives of thousands of infected people and their families. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm aware of three victims of the contaminated blood scandal from my constituency in Newport East: Colin John Smith, Terry Webley and Bill Dumbleton, all victims of the shocking failures of the health and political systems that were involved and have been set out in the report. At the event earlier held by Haemophilia Wales and chaired by Lynne Kelly, such an amazing campaigner on these issues and such a source of strength and support to the families, I met  Joanne Davies who spoke about her husband Gavin's brother, Terry Webley, who died aged 10, and of the ignorance and fear that we've already heard about, the stigma that existed around HIV/AIDS at that time, which meant that they were avoided within the community, the families involved, that the schools didn't provide the support that they should have, that the local media weren't sensitive or understanding and showed little empathy, there was bullying and name calling involved and, of course, that has an ongoing impact on the health of the families, and, in Joanne's case, the health of her husband Gavin and the wider family.

And also present were Colin and Janet Smith, who lost their son Colin John Smith, who died aged seven of AIDS weighing just 13lb, having been a victim of those failings. And I know that their house, Dirprwy Lywydd, was daubed with abuse and graffiti as a result of the situation of Colin John Smith, that it was difficult to get him into school and that there were problems at the school and, again, that there were these problems within the wider community. It was a terrible scandal and indictment of the systems at the time, Dirprwy Lywydd, and so many families suffered in the way that these families did. Colin John Smith knew that he was dying and was in fact giving his toys, before he died, to his brothers. You just think of that huge torrent of emotion that engulfed families at the time, so many families, and the terrible failings of those systems set out in the report following the inquiry. 

But I would just like to say in closing, Dirprwy Lywydd, that, as we reflect on that suffering—and we'll hear further examples here today, and we've heard those examples through the inquiry report and also proceedings up at the House of Commons in Westminster—when we reflect on the scale of the human tragedy and suffering involved, I really think it's important that we also reflect on the massive human spirit that's involved in those families of the victims, the love and the commitment that was sustained over such a period of time and is still sustained today that produced the campaign, produced the inquiry and the report that got that recognition for the victims and their families, which should now lead to the speedy action that others have called for today. 

And I would just like to close with the words of Janet Smith, Colin John Smith's mother, when she spelt out what this campaign, what the inquiry, what the report is about for the victims and the families. Janet said:

'I want recognition. I want my son to have his name back. His name is Colin John Smith. And that's what I want people to remember.' 

'To save face and to save expense, there has been a hiding of much of the truth.'

Sir Brian Langstaff's damning and shocking words must be at the very forefront of our minds as we consider the impact of the infected blood scandal on the constituents that we represent here. There are two sisters from the Swansea valley in the public gallery today, Sharon and Rhian. They wanted me to highlight their family's situation and suffering in relation to this appalling and unforgivable scandal, because their story highlights how the unique circumstances of each family affected must be considered, recognised and fairly and equally compensated without further delay. Their late father, Arwyn Davies, from Trebanos, was a haemophiliac. He was under the care of, and trusted in, the medical professions that provided treatment for his condition. He attended both Cardiff and Swansea haemophilia centres, and Mr Bloom was his main consultant. Arwyn Davies died on 18 March 1992, aged 60 years. His death certificate stated he died of hepatitis C, hepatoma and haemophilia.

His whole career was spent as a local government officer, but, in the 1980s, his health began to deteriorate and he had to take early retirement from work, and little over a year later he was dead. His wife Eira passed away in 2018, 26 years after her husband, and only after their mother's passing did Rhian and Sharon become aware of what was written on their father's death certificate. During those 26 years, no contact was made to inform any of the family of any of the risks they had been made subject to, or to inform them they were entitled to any kind of benefit payments. It was so hard to hear from Sharon and Rhian about their long and distressing battle to obtain medical records relating to their father, as they campaigned for justice for their family. But they finally got proof, which confirmed their father was given contaminated factor and that the consultants were aware of how he had died.

Since obtaining this information, they've been working with the infected blood inquiry and Haemophilia Wales to ensure that someone is held to account. And although Sir Brian Langstaff took the unusual step of announcing interim compensation ahead of the final report, this was only for the living infected and the bereaved widows. There has been no commitment by the UK Government to the recommendation in the second interim report on compensation, of April 2023, which called for interim compensation payment for the previously unrecognised deaths, and, to date, children who lost parents, like Rhian and Sharon, have never been provided with compensation or recognition of their father's death. They haven't even received a letter of apology from their local health board. So, my question is: how will the Welsh Government endeavour to ensure the UK Government do not delay progress any further?

And within the new regulation of infected blood compensation, under the heading, 'Estate application', it states:

'where an affected person has died it is not possible for the personal representatives of their estate to apply for compensation.'

Cabinet Secretary, do you agree that is unjustifiable when people, such as Rhian and Sharon's mother Eira, suffered and endured financial hardship and ill health, with no financial support, following the death of Arwyn? Does the Welsh Government therefore accept that the right thing to do in circumstances like this family's would be to ensure that the family of the affected be allowed to benefit from compensation? I believe it's not only morally right, it's also a symbol of an apology rightly owed by the state—the state, remember, who covered up—to those impacted by this scandal, those whose whole lives have been scarred by loss and by lies? And how further will the Welsh Government ensure that all of those now currently living with haemophilia, like Arwyn's grandson, Sharon's son, are provided with the best possible support by public services, not having to explain the implications of their condition to education settings and healthcare settings, for example, each time, which is what's happening, so that wider steps can be put in place to increase awareness and ensure safety for all those who live with haemophilia? Diolch.

I remember the day eight years ago, I was sitting next to Julie Morgan in this Chamber, and it was just after lunch time, and she said, 'There's a cross-party group I'm chairing, would you come and meet some of your constituents who are affected by this scandal?' And I went to meet with them—and I can see Kirk Ellis in the gallery today—and it had a huge impact on me and I wanted to join that campaign, so I'm proud to be vice-chair of the Senedd cross-party group on haemophilia and contaminated blood.

I just want to give some examples of those constituents I've met and have been in touch with since then. Janet Morgan and her daughter Felicity wrote to me to talk about their late husband and father who was a haemophiliac, who was infused with factor VIII and, as a result, was infected with hepatitis C. He received a number of clinical trial medications that made him very ill, and he and his family were robbed of a normal life. Felicity was only 12 years old when her father was informed that he had hepatitis C and three to five years to live. The loss of their husband and father in 2010 shook them and still deeply affects them as a family, as he was such a loving husband, father and grandfather, and their lives have never been the same.

I was contacted by Susan Hughes, whose brother Alan Jones was a haemophiliac who was infected with HIV and hepatitis C after receiving contaminated blood in the 1980s at the age of 15. He was told at the age of 17, without his parents being present, that he had contracted the viruses. Alan had learning difficulties after suffering a brain haemorrhage at the age of three, and he passed away in 1994 at the age of just 25 of a brain tumour caused by the AIDS virus. Alan and Susan's parents have now sadly passed away themselves, and they never saw justice.

I was contacted by Professor Nicholas Moran, whose late brothers, Peter and Tim, who were twins, were co-infected with HIV and hepatitis C by NHS contaminated blood products. They died at a young age due to HIV-related illnesses. Their mother's health suffered consequently, and her passing was a direct result of that. Professor Moran is a senior surgeon who's worked exclusively in the NHS for over four decades, but he has told me that he is so shaken by the outcome of this scandal that his confidence in the service has been shattered, particularly by the devastating revelations of Sir Brian Langstaff's report. As a result, he has decided to leave the NHS. He wants to see the recommendations from Sir Brian’s report implemented fully and without delay, and he’s concerned that although the UK Government has announced that interim payments will be made to infected persons, there has been no commitment to support affected relatives or previously unrecognised deaths.

I come to Kirk Ellis. Kirk gave me this tie, which is in the colours of the campaign, outside Wayne David’s office in Bedwas, I think it was three years ago now. We were still working on just basic compensation levels at that point. He regularly attends meetings of the cross-party group, and, as I’ve mentioned, he’s in the public gallery. I met him just after lunch today, and he said he’s got real concerns about the UK Government’s proposed compensation scheme. He could actually end up worse off in spite of the payments if he was to get the lump sum mentioned in the compensation scheme statement, as the support payments he receives would then stop. His lump sum would last him and his family for 20 years at most, and he points out that in Scotland the Scottish Government has guaranteed that ongoing current support payments are for life, as well as the lump sum compensation payments proposed by the UK Government in response to Sir Brian’s report. What he wants the Welsh Government to do—he recognises that this was a pre-devolution issue—is to make sure that that issue is resolved, that he isn’t reliant on just 20 years of funding as a result of the compensation, and that he isn’t caught in the trap of having that income that reduces, then, the disability benefits to which he was previously entitled.

And finally, I want to pay tribute to Wayne David, the now former MP for Caerphilly. Wayne worked very hard on this issue in the House of Commons, and presented a petition recently on the infected blood inquiry in the Chamber of the House of Commons. The petition called for immediate compensation to be given to those who had been affected by contaminated blood, and, jointly, our constituents Lee Stay and Kirk Ellis had added a number of local names to that petition. I think Wayne’s campaigning spirit on this will be missed from the House of Commons, but I think he’s worked hard too to make sure that we see the outcome that we’ve got today, albeit, I still think, as a staging post in the journey of providing full justice to the families and people affected by this scandal.

Firstly, I want to pay tribute to all those who have campaigned on this issue and continue to campaign. Some are here with us today, and we will remember the ones who are not. As the Cabinet Secretary highlighted, before FMQs, there was an opportunity to listen to those affected by this scandal, and I don’t think anyone could have left that room without a clear understanding of the injustice faced by families. You would have heard how people in positions of authority vilified these families for raising concerns, accused them of lying, accused them of giving life to rumours. Corruption is the long and short of it, isn't it—a bid to save money. What an indictment of our system.

Last week, I was contacted by Deborah James, a constituent in Bridgend, who told me the story of her brother. Her brother, a serving police officer, died aged 31 in 1982, as a result of receiving contaminated blood at the University Hospital of Wales in Cardiff. Deborah shared that he had been battling Hodgkin's lymphoma, and had been given the all-clear following chemotherapy. However, complications meant that he had internal bleeding and was taken to Cardiff, where he received several pints of blood to replace the blood that he was losing. They were advised that he had received what was referred to as 'a bad pint', and that he had been infected with hepatitis C. Due to the impact on his liver, Deborah's brother suffered jaundice. It would hurt for him to have them hug him, and—I'm quoting Deborah here—they have not as a family ever recovered from what happened in those last few weeks of his life.

One of the key things that stood out for me in the meeting earlier was something that was said: an apology means nothing if there's no recognition of what people have gone through. Compensation is one way of giving recognition, and whilst an interim compensation payment of £210,000 to those infected will be made, disappointingly there's been no commitment to make the interim compensation payment available for the unrecognised, as highlighted by other Members. I would hope the Minister could comment on this, because this is, of course, a concern for families—specifically how we can help those families whose relatives died but the cause of death was registered as something else.

There's no denying that deaths were covered up, documents were destroyed—it was in the report. For Deborah's family, it has taken 42 years to get to the truth. The worry now is that, despite recognition that what happened was not an accident, families will be denied compensation because of destroyed documents during those cover-ups. I will conclude, Dirprwy Lywydd, by referring back to Deborah's words to me: 'It is inconceivable that, 42 years after his death, and following Sir Brian's report, there is still uncertainty, and battles for those infected and affected are still to be fought.'

We've already heard from the Cabinet Secretary for health and many other people about the tens of thousands infected and affected, as well as the 3,000 people who died of infected blood. But this isn't just about a treatment scandal, as Luke Fletcher has already said. This is about a criminal cover-up. And it's that that I wish to address my remarks to today. Sir Brian Langstaff catalogues three separate sets of documents that were lost, or deliberately destroyed in most cases, and the failure to safeguard these documents, which were supposed to be kept in a safe place, precisely to be able to be called upon by victims to consolidate their claim for compensation.

The first lot were papers relating to the Advisory Committee on the Virological Safety of Blood. It was discovered back in the middle of 1995 that one of the volumes had been destroyed, in September 1994. No attempt was made to safeguard all the remaining volumes of documents, which were then destroyed between October 1997 and November 1998. This is truly, truly shocking. We have to understand how it was that the Department of Health was allowed to continue to try and cover this up, even after Yvette Cooper asked for a report, which was called the self-sufficiency report, when she became the Under-Secretary of State for Public Health in 2002.

This led to an extraordinary cover-up. An initial report by a senior officer at the Department of Health was actually delivered to somebody on the day before Christmas 2002, and it did not emerge to the light of day until a further three years, by which time it had been doctored from a factual account of what the document said about self-sufficiency to an excuse for why it hadn't been possible to avert this terrible scandal. These are really, really devastating points that we really need to take seriously.

Lord Owen's papers, the former Secretary of State for Health, completely disappeared, because obviously they revealed things that they did not want to admit. And in one case, the Department of health was saying it was probably destroyed by a junior member of staff. Really? I just cannot see that. It's absolutely unjustifiable and egregious behaviour by our public servants. 

To this end, we really do have to challenge the defensive culture of cover-up and get behind Sir Brian Langstaff's calls for Ministers to consider statutory duties of candour for civil servants and Ministers in all their day-to-day work. 

I am very pleased that Mark Drakeford, under his leadership, did introduce this duty of candour last year, but we need to ensure that this extends to leaders in our health services as well. There is clearly much more that we need to consider on this. But we have to ensure that leaders in the Welsh NHS, including board members, really are going to be following through with this and that our own civil servants also are not continuing to be less than candid with the truth.

I'd like to associate myself with a number of the comments that have already been made. Sometimes, there is a contact made by a constituent that really strikes you, and I think that we've all received e-mails from families and from those who have suffered and who continue to suffer today that have had that impact. So, I'm going to use my time to give a voice and share some of those stories, according to what has been asked of me. 

Maybe many of you have read about or seen on tv the story of Owain Harris regarding his father, Norman. Norman had haemophilia, and in the 1970s and the early 1980s he began a new treatment for the condition. In the mid 1980s, he was told that he had contracted hepatitis C and that he had HIV. His son, Owain, was four years old at the time, and his parents did not share the full diagnosis with him until he was 26 years old. Norman died in 2012. Owain, his sister and his mother have given evidence as part of the inquiry, but it was only last month that they spoke publicly about this for the first time, with Owain saying, 'This was a total cover-up by the establishment.'

David shared with me in his own words, 'I was infected with hepatitis C in the early 1980s, likely between the age of nine and 13. I was informed of my diagnosis aged 23 in 1994, and ever since this date have been permanently in a state of worry about my health and my mortality.' He went on to share with me the impact this has had on his life, including having to fight tooth and nail to get access to the new retroviral drugs that were becoming available towards the end of 2014.

Another constituent, Paul from Cardiff, said, 'I'm one of the haemophiliacs that has been infected in the mid 1970s, early 1980s, with hep C. This has made life a living nightmare. I had to undertake horrendous treatments. I could not continue working due to my mental health and the stigma. I have hidden myself away, no longer feeling able to interact with others and became isolated. People reacted to my condition at many times with abuse. It has left me with lifelong complications, not to mention not being able to have children and causing many relationship issues through my life.' He urges us as a Senedd, 'Please, with people passing away at an average of four a week, all we want is to have some of our life that is ours and not stolen from us by this deliberate use of infected blood, which has destroyed mine and many others' lives.'

Another constituent, who wants to remain anonymous, shared the story of her father, who died 20 years ago at just 38 years old. Carol told me of her father Ian’s death in 2004, at the age of 48.

Rachel wrote to me, saying,

'My father (who was a haemophiliac) died of AIDS in 1990, after a six-year illness, during which his body and brain wasted away.' 

You referenced at the beginning, Cabinet Secretary, the Sugar family. And it is important that we do tell the story of Leigh, a much-loved son, husband and father, who was a mild haemophiliac, infected with his first and only treatment at the age of 14, following a fall from his horse. He was only told of his infection 14 years later, by which time he was married and had five and three-year-old daughters. He died at the age of 44 from liver cancer, having been infected with hepatitis C. His family shared that he spent the last year of his life in intense pain and suffering, and that his father Graham died three years ago, never seeing justice. They describe their family as 'having been torn apart by contaminated blood'. 

I'd like to pay tribute to all the victims and their families who’ve campaigned for justice and who've been brave enough to share with us their suffering and continued pain. We can acknowledge that today, apologise for all they’ve been through, but also state unitedly that we will ensure everything possible that can be done to right this terrible, terrible wrong is done. It should never have happened and nothing we do will put this right, but we can try and offer that support. This is going to have an impact for generations to come on these families affected. Therefore, I'd like to finish by asking the Cabinet Secretary: what support is being provided to those still living with the infection, who are in pain, who are suffering, but also their families, who are still in pain and suffering? We need to be able to provide not just compensation, but ongoing support, and I'd like to know how they will be able to access that support. Diolch.

Like other speakers before me, I would like to read the testimony of two of my constituents whose lives have been irrevocably changed by the contaminated blood scandal. And I think it speaks volumes, as to the stigma still attached to this, that both of my constituents have asked that their stories remain anonymous. One of my constituents contracted hepatitis C from contaminated blood whilst being treated for leukaemia between 1985 and 1989. They have now lived with hepatitis for 35 years, undergoing five gruelling courses of interferon, numerous invasive and non-invasive tests, reduced career prospects and limitations on the size of their family. Prior to diagnosis, they were sent to one of the first AIDS wards in London and then to a mental health institution in Cardiff, because the medical professionals thought that they were making their illness up. Fortunately, my constituent tells me they have worked hard to manage their condition and are now in good health, but they say there are many less fortunate, who they believe deserve so much more. 

My other constituent was just 17 years old and ready to start their life, when they were told by their haemophilia doctor that they'd contracted HIV from contaminated blood. They were told not to tell anyone, not even their mother. Doctors told them that they would live about 18 months. They've seen their fellow haemophiliac friends dying of AIDS in the hospital, and they thought that they would die in the same way. This was a death sentence. They had three nervous breakdowns over the years, attempted suicide three times, and for years spent spells in and out of hospital. The stigma associated with HIV, they say, is unbearable, and they meet this in all aspects of their daily life. In 1994 this same constituent was told that they were also infected with hepatitis C. They underwent three courses of treatment with horrendous side effects. They haven't been able to have children, get life assurance or mortgage protection, due to the impact of HIV and hepatitis C. 

My constituents say they hope that the inquiry's recommendations will prevent things like this from ever happening again, that people will not be tested without consent, that commercial interests will not take precedence over patient safety. They hope that future generations do not have to suffer the pain and stigma that they have, and that medical professionals will be educated to ensure that they are treated with the respect that they deserve. 

Siân Gwenllian? No. I call on the Cabinet Secretary to reply to the debate. 

Diolch yn fawr. I want to thank all Members who have contributed to this important debate today. I think it's been a really emotional debate, and it has been quite heart-wrenching to hear some of the stories of your constituents. There are just a few points I want to address. First of all, one of the issues that people have asked about is those who are unrecognised. Part of the issue here is that records are required to make claims. Now, we are aware that there have been issues with NHS records in the past. Both our Wales infected blood support scheme and the new infected blood compensation authority will work with those infected and affected to gather the information required for claims to be made. In terms of young beneficiaries, this is an issue that my officials have raised with the Cabinet Office, and we've been given an assurance that this is something that they're looking into. 

In terms of immediate next steps, Sir Robert Francis, along with the interim CEO of the IBCA, David Foley, will meet with the main campaign groups, including Lynne Kelly of Haemophilia Wales, to discuss looking at the proposals for compensation to check if they're fair. They will check if the scheme will work, and they will check if anything has been missed. And what they learn from these meetings will help frame the work of the IBCA. In terms of future and current schemes, representations have been made in each of the nations to retain the support schemes. Discussions, I know, are in their infancy, and officials will take on board the representations received.

I'd like to make it clear that we will be accepting all of Plaid Cymru's amendments. 

I also want to pay tribute to Rhun ap Iorwerth for his work as chair of the cross-party group on haemophilia and infected blood. I know that you have been fighting very hard for many years, along with those who have been battling for justice. 

I'd like some time to go through the report. He has taken years to write this report and we need to give it the respect it deserves, and so we will do that. And I want to assure Jenny Rathbone that there is, as you have noted, already a duty of candour in the NHS in Wales, including the one that applies to leaders in the health service. Tonight I think we unite as a Chamber and as a Parliament, and I'm sure you'll join with me to pay tribute to those who have suffered as a result of this, the greatest scandal in the history of the NHS. Diolch.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 1 is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The proposal is to agree amendment 2. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 2 is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The proposal is to agree amendment 3. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 3 is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

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

Item 4 is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education: a consultation on the school year. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Lynne Neagle. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Three weeks ago I was pleased to come to this Chamber and to talk to Members about my priorities for the education system in Wales. I have always championed the rights of children and young people, and in that statement I made clear my commitment to raising attainment, to being ambitious for every learner in Wales and to supporting our most disadvantaged learners and closing the attainment gap. To me, these are central ambitions and, as I said, ones I want and expect the whole education system to work together to achieve.

As Members know, the Government committed in the programme for government to explore reform of the school year, and I would like to thank my predecessor, Jeremy Miles, for all of his efforts in that work. I would also like to thank Siân Gwenllian for her efforts and support in taking this forward.

With learner outcomes at its core, we have looked at the system as a whole to see how the way we structure the school calendar could better support school staff to improve the educational experiences of our young people, particularly our most disadvantaged, while aligning more effectively with how people and families live and work.

On 13 November last year we announced the launch of the consultation on the school year. Today I am publishing the findings of that consultation, which closed on 12 February. Having received over 16,000 responses, it is clearly one of the Welsh Government's widest reaching consultations, and it is fair to say that the issue of the school year is one that reaches across society, with views on all sides. This is reflected in the responses, where views were split almost evenly on every question posed and every option put forward.

The consultation set out three core proposals. They were, first, to maintain the status quo; the second would see a five-week summer, a two-week break in the autumn, and the flexibility to decouple the Easter end-of-term break from the Easter festival; the third and final option built on this, and would look to move to a four-week summer, introduce a two-week break in May, and arrange for AS, A-level and GCSE results to issue on the same day.

Members will see that while the results indicate there is support for changes to the pattern of the school year, there was no strong preference for any of the options put forward. In this context, I have returned to the evidence base for change, and again, as Members will be aware, this is not clear-cut. 

There is evidence that suggests the summer period contributes to learning loss, and there are obvious concerns around how we support those children for whom school is safer than home. But there is also evidence that shows the benefit of an extended break for the well-being of both children and the workforce, and how that contributes positively to family life. This is just one example of many, and Members can see more detail in the information previously published on our website.

In my statement last week I said I would listen to the views of those working within the education system, and to the views of children, young people and parents, and I have taken time to consider the comments made in response to the consultation and to listen to the differing views and opinions. As a result, I have taken the decision that we will not implement any changes to the pattern of the school year within this Senedd term. It is important to be clear about this, and so I am also confirming today that I have asked local authorities and other relevant bodies to publish term dates for 2025-26. I do, however, want to continue to look at what more can be done to support our children and young people, their learning and the all-important actions needed to raise attainment, standards and aspirations.

Over the remainder of this Senedd term, I intend to continue exploring the proposals set out in our second option in the consultation: a five-week summer, a two-week break in the autumn, and the flexibility to decouple the Easter end-of-term break from the Easter festival. However, getting reform right means ensuring it is properly planned out and has the time and space to succeed. I want to take this time to discuss with children and young people, parents, the workforce and other partners both what these changes might mean and when would be the right time for them. No final decisions will be taken in this Senedd term, as I feel strongly that we need to remain focused on our existing and ambitious programme of reform over this period, and I am acutely aware we are already asking a lot of teachers and schools.

In the coming months, I will prioritise support on curriculum design, progression and assessment. I will work with teachers to ensure the right support reaches their classrooms and that they have the knowledge, resources and confidence to ensure every learner and every part of Wales feel the benefit of the curriculum.

As I set out before recess, I will also focus on ALN reform. I want to ensure firm legislative foundations are in place, and I want to strengthen implementation by improving the consistency of the approach being taken. That certainly does not mean we won’t be doing anything to address the impact of the long summer break here and now. Our immediate priority will be to maximise the support available to learners during the summer holidays, including doing more to target that provision towards the poorest communities and increasing the educational value of that provision.

We will look to increase the impact of the school holiday enrichment programme and enhance our community-focused schools programme, including through the work being undertaken by the school improvement partnership programme. I am pleased Julie Morgan MS has agreed to lead a review of SHEP for the Welsh Government on how provisions can be maximised during the summer holidays to ensure they are reaching those children and young people who need it most. I look forward to working with her on this important piece of work.

The issues raised in the consultation show that this is an area where there are lots of interests, including from sectors and organisations not involved in the education of our children and young people. And so I do need to be clear that, as Cabinet Secretary, my priority is the well-being and learning of our children and young people. That will be the driving force behind my actions and will be central to the further exploration of the proposals.

To conclude, I am fully committed to ensuring our education system supports all children and their ambitions. I will continue to explore changes to the pattern of the school year where these can support attainment, ambition and well-being, particularly for those who are most disadvantaged, to give them the best opportunities in learning and life. And I will do this over the remainder of this Senedd term, working in partnership with the education sector, children, young people and parents to ensure that we make the right changes at the right time. Diolch.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement today and for meeting with me earlier this afternoon to discuss the contents of the statement? I welcome the fact that the Welsh Government has kicked into the long grass its latest plans for changes to the school year. But we should be very clear that these plans haven't gone away for good, and they appear as though they might be back with a vengeance in two years' time, should this complacent Welsh Labour Government remain in power by then.

We know that it was a hugely unpopular policy across a range of sectors in Wales and, back in January, 11 different bodies came together, including teaching unions, farming unions and representatives from the tourism sector and many more, and wrote to the education Minister at the time to warn about the damage that these plans could cause right across Wales. The letter said, and I quote:

'This proposal runs the risk of fixing a problem that does not exist, when there is also little public appetite for such a change.'

End quote. And they're right. The evidence base for bringing forward the change is weak at best. These ideas about lost learning over the summer months are flawed to begin with. We know that this evidence is often based on countries like the USA, which have a much have a much longer summer break than we do. In fact, our summer break is already amongst the shortest in Europe, and these plans would have seen it reduced further. And countries above us in the Programme for International Student Assessment rankings—and there are many of them—have significantly longer summer breaks than we do.

But even recent research from the USA shows that Welsh Government's core assumption that poorer pupils are disproportionately impacted by the summer break is flawed in the first place. Research conducted just before the pandemic by American academics Megan Kuhfeld and Karyn Lewis said, and I again quote,

'recent data does not show that summer test score drops are concentrated among students in poverty'.

End quote. So, does the Welsh Government now accept that the academic evidence about the impact a summer holiday has on lower income earners has changed, or is the Cabinet Secretary still clinging onto outdated assumptions about the issue?

But let me return to that earlier letter, because in it they say, and I quote:

'The education unions are also incredulous that, at a time when schools are facing a crisis in funding, recruitment and pupil behaviour, the Welsh Government should be so engaged in this entirely unnecessary distraction.'

I'm sure they don't use a word like 'incredulous' lightly. But they're entirely right. After 25 years of this Welsh Labour Government we've seen hardworking pupils and staff completely undermined by Labour's record of falling standards. We've been at the bottom of UK-wide league tables in every single subject assessed by PISA every time that we've been assessed. What a damning indictment of the shambolic education policies of this Welsh Labour Government. We also know that the policy so far has cost the Welsh taxpayer £350,000. What a difference that could have made to our schools. The message from parents and teachers alike is clear, Cabinet Secretary: we don't want this proposal delayed; we want it consigned to the dustbin of history for good.

More widely, the tourism and hospitality sector were clear that these changes would mean businesses closed and jobs lost. That's on top of the other policies pursued by this Welsh Labour Government, such as a tourism tax, which seem intended to decimate a sector on which one in seven jobs in Wales relies. The agricultural sector was also clear that it would massively damage those farms that have diversified to capitalise on the summer months. And similarly, the Royal Welsh Show said that schools remaining open during show week would lead to a £1 million loss to the show and threaten its future financial viability. Representatives from across these sectors said in that damning letter that these are

'a few of many arguments that we have all repeated time and again to Welsh Government officials, but no one is listening.'

So, did the Welsh Government do its due diligence on the impact that these changes would have on other sectors in Wales, and why does she think that they said that no-one is listening?

And finally, it would be remiss of me not to note, Llywydd, where this sits in the wider picture of the last few weeks of decisions taken by this Welsh Labour Government. In the last few weeks alone, we've seen a sustainable farming scheme delayed, ALN reform under review, changes to council tax in Wales shelved, 20 mph rowed back on, and now school year reform kicked into the long grass. These are policies brought forward by the Welsh Labour Government in this term—money wasted on development and consultation—and then shelved in the face of opposition. That's simple. The reason for that is simple. It's because this is a divided and a weak Labour Party in the Senedd that can't agree on anything, and a weak First Minister who can't command the authority of his group. And we, the Welsh public, are all paying the price for it. When Keir Starmer said that the Welsh Labour Government was a blueprint for a UK Labour Government, I now understand what he means. [Interruption.] I know he likes to flip-flop, but now I know where he gets his inspiration from.

Allow the Member to finish his contribution, please.

So, in closing, Cabinet Secretary, the next time a Labour Minister gets to their feet in this Senedd Chamber, or a hypothetical Labour Minister in Westminster, and announces a policy, how can we have any faith that it will actually happen?

Can I thank Tom Giffard for his remarks? He started so positively, didn't he, and it all kind of went downhill from there, really, but there we are. I don't regard this as being kicked into the long grass. As you've highlighted, Tom, the evidence base on reform of the school year is a mixed picture. Much of it is based on America, which has an entirely different system to us. Much of it was based on something called year-round education. So, we have looked at the evidence base, but we've also conducted a really thorough consultation, which I hope you've had the opportunity to review, and that consultation was mixed and contradictory. A majority of people thought there were better ways to redesign the school year, but a majority of people also wanted to keep the status quo, and there was no majority for any one of the options available. So, rather than kicking it into the long grass, I regard this as listening—listening to the consultation that we undertook. Why would we have a consultation and we then not listen? And this was a consultation that had more than 16,000 responses. That's the biggest consultation we've ever had in education.

I'm very well aware of the letter that you referred to from the trade unions, which was sent to my colleague Jeremy Miles, and I'm aware of the trade union concerns about the proposals. I've also taken every opportunity I've had since coming into post to talk to front-line staff about these plans. And it is for that reason, as well as listening to the consultation and in recognition that we are asking an awful lot of our schools—they are recovering from a pandemic, they are implementing major reforms with Curriculum for Wales and ALN, they're dealing with some huge challenges with attendance, and I want to make sure that they have the time and the space to focus on delivering those reforms, and, while that happens, we will continue to explore these discussions with our partners and stakeholders.

You referred to the tourism and hospitality sector, and I'm sure you'll have seen that their views were indeed reflected in the consultation, and there was engagement with both sectors and indeed with the Royal Welsh Show throughout the consultation. And I've been very clear, I think, that the decisions that I make on this will be made on the basis of what is in the best interests of children and young people and the school workforce that supports them. But we will still, of course, continue to engage with wider stakeholders, which is right and proper to do.

I'm probably not going to dignify your party political rant at the end with a response.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for the statement today. Evidently, you did refer to the fact that a lot of this stems from the co-operation agreement, and you mentioned Siân Gwenllian's work on this. Evidently, there will be a number of people that will be disappointed that these radical reforms, these long-awaited reforms, aren’t going to happen, and, as you've recognised and as is clear from the evidence, the response has been mixed, very mixed, and a number of people do want to see change, so even though there is nervousness among some people, and, evidently, we have to listen to the stress being experienced by teachers and listen to their voices in this challenging situation, I think that we do have to look also at the broader timetable in terms of how we are going to proceed with that. And maybe the question to ask is: were we looking at enough options? Are there even more radical options that we should be considering?

I am pleased to hear that you have given Julie Morgan the task in terms of improving the SHEP programme, because I think it is very important. Even if we do reduce the school holidays to five weeks, that still leaves five weeks for some children who can't get a healthy meal as they do at school, and who can't have access to the kinds of activities and so forth that are available to others in their peer group.

So, there is a wider problem here, isn't there, in terms of looking at the context of young people and children, in terms of it's one thing to look at the support provided in schools, but what do we do in the holidays? I've been part of the work on the Children, Young People and Education Committee, and I've heard about the great challenges in terms of parents with additional learning needs children and those with disabilities in terms of having access to any kind of childcare during the summer holidays at all. So, it doesn't matter how long the holidays are; there is a lack of provision.

So, am I right to assume that, in terms of the fact that you are going to delay this—? Is this going to be broader work, looking at all of the package of support that's available in terms of childcare and provision during the summer holidays, and are we going to see more radical proposals being submitted? Because one of the things that emerged very clearly from teachers and parents from the research was that people didn't want to see us tinkering just to change things, but that people did want to see change that would meet some of those challenges. There were concerns, obviously, in terms of the Royal Welsh Show and the impact upon the National Eisteddfod, which, of course, as has already been outlined, are not just important in terms of tourism, but also the local economies in many areas, and a very important part of the calendar. So, we need to look more broadly at this.

If I could ask one question as well: in terms of the SHEP programme, what's the timescale for that work, and is it the intention that things are put in place for this summer's holidays? Because I'm already having food banks and so forth contacting me asking me what support will be available.

And could I also ask: will you be looking at the element of Welsh-medium provision? Because often—. Trystan Edwards from Garth Olwg school, who is part of the working group looking at this, was on the radio this morning, and he was talking about the challenges with the Welsh-medium schools in terms of Welsh-medium learning loss that happens over the summer holidays, and, even though there are excellent activities that are organised by the Urdd and so forth, and the mentrau iaith across Wales, not everyone can have access to those activities at present. Certainly, in my region, the SHEP wasn't always available through the medium of Welsh, or there were only a small number of Welsh-medium sessions available. So, how do we ensure that whatever is available also caters for that Welsh-medium element? So, if we could have clarity in terms of the timetable for this coming summer holiday, but also taking this work forward, that it isn't forgotten, but that we do see the radical action that is needed to ensure the best opportunities for all of our learners. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Heledd. As you highlighted, this work was part of our co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru. I was very grateful for the work that we did together on it, especially the very constructive relationship that I had with Siân Gwenllian on this, and also Dafydd Trystan as well, who was helping with that work. As you've highlighted, the response was very mixed, and I'm grateful for your acknowledgement that this is about listening.

In terms of the work that Julie is going to do on SHEP, we've asked that this be a rapid review. I need to have further discussions with Julie about how that will look. I'm sure you recognise that Julie has a really sterling record of working with young people who are experiencing disadvantage, so I also want to take into account her views about what should be included as well. It's my understanding that, for this year's SHEP, plans have already been made, so it will be more likely that this will be for the following year, although we've already agreed to extend SHEP this year despite the really difficult financial circumstances.

I understand completely what you're saying about ALN, and you'll have heard me tell the committee how concerned I am to make sure that we get support for ALN right. My colleague Jayne Bryant leads on childcare issues, and I know that she, like myself and Lesley Griffiths, is waiting for the committee's report on access to childcare and education for disabled children. We will want to make sure that we consider that carefully and respond to the recommendations.

In terms of what you've said about Welsh-medium education, I think that's a very important point. This was something that was considered as part of the consultation in terms of learning loss for those children where they didn't have a Welsh-speaking family at home. Again, the views were quite mixed, and it didn't come out with a strong range of views. But we do provide SHEP in quite a number of authorities through the medium of Welsh, and in some local authorities we have a dual-track provision in Welsh and English. I acknowledge that it could be more and better. I'll certainly make sure that that's one of the things that Julie looks at, and I'm happy, if it's helpful, to write to you with a list of the local authorities that offer SHEP through the medium of Welsh.

Cabinet Secretary, I'd like to thank you for having the courage to resist political pressure and to really listen to the responses to the Welsh Government's consultation on the school year. Speaking as a former teacher and being mindful of the scale of the radical reforms that we are already expecting our schools to undertake, I think that your focus on raising standards is exactly where we need to be. Pausing these plans will allow our schools to focus on that, in particular addressing attendance and attainment issues amongst our most disadvantaged pupils. So, Cabinet Secretary, could you expand on how you intend to tackle these two key issues?

Secondly, Cabinet Secretary, I wholeheartedly welcome your decision to appoint Julie Morgan MS to oversee a review of the school holiday enrichment programme. I make a habit of visiting SHEP programmes in my constituency every summer, and I'm always impressed by the excellent nutritional meals and the fun educational tasks that are on offer. Uptake, though, is always an issue, and what I see is that while SHEP programmes are always located in our more disadvantaged communities, I still don't feel, truly, that they are reaching the most disadvantaged pupils within those communities. So, can you confirm that the review will take a real hard, long, nuts-and-bolts look at how we can truly reach those most disadvantaged pupils?

Can I thank Vikki Howells for her comments and for her support? I particularly welcome you drawing on your experience as a teacher and that recognition of the amount of reform that we're asking schools to manage at the moment. I've been very clear since coming into post that raising attainment is a priority for me. I certainly don't recognise the bleak picture that was painted by Tom Giffard, but I do recognise that our PISA results last time around were disappointing and that we need to focus on raising attainment across the board.

Officials are currently working on a plan that will allow us to raise educational attainment across Wales, putting equity, inclusion and well-being at the centre, and there'll be four strands of work to achieve that. The first is that attainment for us includes inclusion, equity, aspiration and stretch. Secondly, the curriculum and additional learning needs reform are central to our achievement of improved standards in Wales. Thirdly, we need to set up our national leadership to bring our partners together to all focus on improved standards, and you'll be aware of the school improvement partnership programme, which is currently in the second phase of its work. Fourthly, as I've said many times, mental health and well-being is fundamental to this whole agenda.

You're absolutely right to recognise the issues around attendance. The attendance figures in Wales are going in the right direction, but there's more to do. I'm particularly concerned about the attendance of children and young people who are eligible for free school meals. So, we're really looking at what more we can do in that space. I'm chairing the national attendance taskforce, which now has all its work streams and sub-groups in place, and I hope that we can bring a real laser focus to that work.

Thank you for your comments on SHEP; I would certainly encourage any Member to go and visit their local SHEP schemes during the summer. You're right to highlight the issues around uptake and that's something I've been worried about myself. I know that there is a fair amount of soft targeting that goes on with SHEP that's based on local knowledge from the people who are running the schemes, but one of the things I'm very keen for Julie to really look at is how we can make sure that the schemes are reaching those children who are—I hate the term 'hard to reach'—least likely to engage with the SHEP programme, to make sure that nobody is left out.

May I thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary? I think taking a step back in light of the responses to the consultation is sensible. I am surprised that there was no specific reference in your statement to the impact that some of the proposals would have had on the Royal Welsh and the National Eisteddfod, particularly as this was a very prominent feature in the summary that you published of the responses, and certainly something that we, as a party, have made clear in terms of our opposition to changes that would have a negative impact on the Royal Welsh or the Eisteddfod. You've said that no final decision will be taken in this Senedd term, but in your statement, you also say that you now, as Cabinet Secretary and as a Government, will continue to look at the second proposal in the consultation during the rest of this Senedd term. But, of course, that was one of the proposals that would have had an impact on the Royal Welsh particularly. So can you confirm that, as you develop that work, you will not only be aware of the need to protect the interests of the Royal Welsh and the Eisteddfod, but that you will also ensure that any changes ultimately implemented will not lead to a negative impact on those festivals?

Thank you very much, Llyr. As you highlight, the Royal Welsh Show and the Eisteddfod did feature in the consultation and there have been discussions with relevant organisations in relation to that. I want to be really clear, though, that I think this is a decision that has to be taken on the basis of what is best for children and young people, but I know too that there are communities in Wales that really value taking their children and young people to visit the Royal Welsh Show. Indeed, the consultation itself reflected that there was a need to make sure that major events were catered for in that respect. So, I understand that this is a cause of concern for Members representing rural areas, and you do have my assurance that we will continue to engage with the Royal Welsh Show, the Eisteddfod and other organisations about this as we take this work forward.

I wish to welcome the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and there are arguments and value on both sides of this issue. But the consultation on the change to the school calendar in Wales has received 16,000 responses, and we must note that this is the biggest ever education consultation in Wales. The list of organisations opposed is very extensive, as is the very mixed response from parents, pointing to a commonsense approach needing to be adopted. It is right to consult on this matter, and it is also right to listen and then act on that consultation.

Today, as our school communities continue to strive forward away from the shadow of the COVID-19 pandemic and struggle out of the darkness of austerity, we know that their challenges are profound and we cannot, and should not, underestimate this, none more so than the drop in school attendance seen across Wales, critically by some of the poorest children in our society, our most vulnerable cohort.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for the clarity that you've given today; it will be broadly welcomed. In terms of the assurance that you can give us today—to the children, teachers, staff and families across Islwyn—that you will prioritise and focus the Welsh Government on tackling attendance, the implementation of the new curriculum, the needed additional learning needs reform, the development of a stronger school holiday enrichment programme, the reduction in teachers' bureaucracy and, finally, the need to strengthen staff retention across Welsh schools, we need that prioritisation. 

Thank you very much, Rhianon, for that welcome for the announcement today, which is very much appreciated. I'm very happy to give you the assurance that attendance is absolutely critical. Children aren't going to learn and thrive if they're not in school, and we know that we've got more work to do in that space. We're rolling out ambitious Curriculum for Wales reforms, and I've been very clear that we've got more work to do on our ALN reforms. There are the workload issues that you've just mentioned as well—we are doing lots of work on that. We have a strategic workforce group within the Welsh Government; we're developing a digital tool for headteachers to do workforce impact assessments. You raise an important point as well when you talk about retention, because one of the issues that the workforce were concerned about was that these proposals could impact on the retention of the workforce. So, I think it's why it is really important that as we take this work forward, we do so in partnership with the workforce and with our trade union partners. 

I just wanted to draw a focus on the impacts of what the change might have meant. I did post a video on my Facebook page asking people who live in Caerphilly what they thought, and it was very much mixed, which reflects the responses you got. One of the things that came through strongly from the people with whom I attend, with my daughter with ALN, the Sparrows group is that in the summer there are a lot more free activities available for them, and you can't keep a child with additional learning needs in the house continually over the summer holidays, or any holidays. We went to Morgan Jones Park on the weekend; there's a splash pad there, and there are lots of good-weather outdoor activities that tend to close up in the October half term. In the October half term, we tend to see soft play, trampolining—those things that you've got to pay for under a roof—and it is much more costly for families, particularly families who are in that position and also more likely to be on lower incomes. So, I welcome this pause, but I also would ask you to keep in mind what I've said, if you decide to proceed in future.

Thank you very much, Hefin. Indeed, those issues did come out through the consultation: concerns about things like heating your home in an extended October half term and the fact that it is harder to find free activities to do. But the other side of that was that there was also a recognition of the fatigue that kids and the workforce experience during that very long run into Christmas. The debate we're having today really highlights how mixed and contradictory these issues are, and how there is that work to be done to balance out those contradictions.

I listened carefully to the Cabinet Secretary's disappointing statement this afternoon. I noticed that she chose to begin and end her statement by referring to her commitment to the best interest of children. Of course, the quality of her commitment is not an issue this afternoon—that's evident week after week here in the Chamber. It's the quality of her decision making that we are scrutinising, not the quality of her commitment. And let's be clear that what we've heard this afternoon is the abandonment of a manifesto commitment made by the Labour Party at the last election. And the Minister shouldn't seek to shelter behind semantics in saying to me that this was a commitment to explore reform of the school day, because she knows perfectly well that her predecessors published a plan—not an exploration, but a plan—to implement that commitment, and that will now not be happening in this Senedd term. And what was that plan, Llywydd? It would have moved one week—one week—in five years from the school holidays in the summer to the autumn half term. Nobody I think could claim that the Government was rushing headlong down some radical path, but it was a start. It was a start on a journey that would have improved the outcomes for children in Wales. I regret the political damage. I regret the reputational damage that will be done to Wales, just as other parts of the United Kingdom were looking at Wales and pointing to us as an example of what a progressive Government could do. What I really regret is the damage that will be done to the life chances of the children who are at the heart of this policy.

Colleagues here will know of the difficulties experienced on the Ely estate here in Cardiff. I'll say to the Cabinet Secretary: the children that I am concerned about, their families will not be worrying, as was said in your statement, about the quality-of-life opportunities that come with an extended summer break. Those families will approach the summer holidays in a spirit of anxiety, sometimes amounting to fear. And the life chances of those children rely absolutely on what the school can do for them, and the fantastic schools that there are on the estate who do so much to invest in those children who have no chances—[Interruption.]—otherwise, and who work through them all, from September to July. And in July, those children have had—

Hefin David is seeking to heckle at this point. I'm allowing the Member to carry on with his contribution. Mark Drakeford.

Diolch, Llywydd. Those children, in July, have had the benefit of everything that that school can do. [Interruption.] And then those children go away—

Excuse me, don't question my decision to allow Mark Drakeford to—. You said, 'This is ridiculous', me allowing Mark Drakeford to continue. It's not. I've allowed you discretion time after time to continue on important issues for yourself, so remember that, Hefin David. I'm allowing Mark Drakeford to continue.

Diolch, Llywydd. When those children go away in July, in those six weeks, they will not see a book, they will have no opportunity to play in a way that allows them to appreciate what maths can do for them in their lives, and when they come back in September, the school starts all over again. The idea that there is no learning loss in the lives of those children is absolutely absurd. What this policy would have done is it would have begun to close the gap in the lives of those children. Here is a Government that could have done something to help them, but it has decided not to. What explanation does the Cabinet Secretary think I should offer those children who now find their interests in second place, against those of the reactionary forces that will always be attached to the status quo?

Can I thank Mark Drakeford for his comments? I do regret the tone of some of those comments, which I do feel call into question my own commitment to children and young people, which is the only reason I am standing in this job, and the reason I have done every job that I have done in this Chamber: to promote the rights and the well-being of children and young people. And with respect, Mark, I think I have set out very clearly my reasons for this decision today. It is about listening to a consultation. You cannot have a consultation and then just ignore that consultation. That would not be acceptable. But it’s also about recognising that we have to implement a series of major reforms and tackle some serious attainment issues in our schools. And do you know who suffers most from those attainment challenges? It's those very children that you are talking about. Getting those children out of poverty is what I am interested in doing, through implementing our reforms. To think that a week's change in the school year is going to make a difference to the systemic challenges we’re facing in education is, quite frankly, fiddling while Rome burns, and I’m really, really sorry that you have chosen to couch it in those terms.

The persistent absence rates for free-school-meal children at secondary school are 50-plus per cent. That is an astonishing figure, and it is that which we have to address. It is not about tweaking a week here or there. And this is not about reactionary forces. [Interruption.] Can you let me finish? Because I let you speak, didn’t I? I didn't say a word while you were speaking. This is not about reactionary forces. This is about me making a decision based on a 16,000-plus consultation and what I am hearing on the ground about a school system that is struggling and overwhelmed with reform, which is finding it challenging to raise attainment, and which is also struggling for funding. So, that is what I am prioritising, and I make no apologies for that decision. I have made that decision after many weeks of careful consideration, in what I consider to be the best interests of all children and young people, including the children on the Ely estate, who I care passionately about.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary. 

The next item is the statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and Social Justice on reaffirming our values. Cabinet Secretary, Lesley Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I am pleased to make this statement on my priorities for the culture and social justice portfolio. This is a diverse portfolio that reaches across many aspects of Government, and which has the potential to make profound and lasting change to the lives of people and communities across Wales. Culture, heritage, sport and social justice are interconnected pillars, and when leveraged effectively can help build a more inclusive, equitable and vibrant society. I want to harness the collective impact of these elements to address systemic inequalities, strengthen community cohesion and ensure Wales continues to be a nation of sanctuary.

One of my main priorities is to make progress on tackling poverty, in particular child poverty. More than 3,000 people helped to develop our child poverty strategy, and overwhelmingly the message from stakeholders is we do have the right objectives and priorities. Our focus now is on delivering them in a way that is person-centred, kind and compassionate, including ensuring people are financially and digitally included, and able to claim all the benefits they are entitled to.

There is a commitment to children's rights across my portfolio in tackling poverty, ensuring the right to play and the right to meet, addressing discrimination, protection from violence and abuse, and enabling them to participate freely in cultural life.

Another key priority will be to continue our focus on ensuring equality, inclusion and respect for human rights. Our recently published national equality objectives set out our long-term vision for the future. Disabled people are often excluded from employment and other opportunities, including arts, cultural and sporting activities. We will continue our work to advance equity for disabled people, taking account of people's lived experience. The important work of the disability rights taskforce is supporting the development of a plan that will capture our ambition and help us focus on making changes to measurably improve disabled people’s lives.

I am wholly committed to driving forward on the 'Anti-racist Wales Action Plan' and making a reality of our vision of becoming an anti-racist nation by 2030. We have committed more than £5 million over 2022 to 2025 to support this work. I am proud our LBGTQ+ action plan has been recognised by the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance as a good example, and a potential model for others. I will continue to lead the work to make Wales the most LGBTQ+-friendly nation in Europe.

In all areas of my portfolio, as across Welsh Government, the third sector and volunteers play a vital role in delivering services and supporting communities. Tomorrow I will be speaking at Gofod3, as we mark together Volunteers' Week.

Turning to criminal justice, we will continue our efforts to improve outcomes for people in the justice system. Although criminal justice is not yet devolved to Wales, these services regularly interface with devolved areas such as housing, healthcare and education. Through our women’s justice blueprint and youth justice blueprint, we are embedding a preventative, evidence-based approach to justice that addresses the underlying causes of offending and supports people towards fulfilling, crime-free lives. In 2024 to 2025, we will extend the women’s pathfinder approach to the whole of Wales to further strengthen our support for often vulnerable women, as well as maintaining our strong focus on tackling violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence through the VAWDASV blueprint. 

I will also have a clear focus on delivering a strong cultural, heritage and sports offer. The cultural well-being of Wales is indivisible from our society, our environment and our economy. I recognise the intrinsic value of culture and commit to the principle that every person in Wales has the right to access, create, participate in and to see themselves reflected in the cultural activity of our nation. Our ambition is for culture in Wales to be thriving, with a long-term strategic plan for investment. I recently published the consultation for our culture strategy, which provides a policy framework for our public and culture sectors in Wales, defining the strategic direction for the arts, museums, libraries, archives and the historic environment sectors.

The priorities set out in the strategy have been developed during a period of severe financial constraint. It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge the financial landscape, and I know many organisations are facing difficult financial challenges. The public sector in Wales has been impacted by cuts in funding over a number of years, and the culture sector feels fragile and vulnerable. I am aware of the impact the reduction in our indicative grant-in-aid allocation for 2024-25 will have on our culture, arts and sports arm's-length bodies. I have acted to mitigate the full scale of the budget pressures on them, but there is no budget flexibility that can prevent significant reductions to their budgets.

My priority is to ensure the allocations are targeted towards continuing to deliver our programme for government commitments. Collaboration with Government and within the sector is more important now than ever. I know how resilient the arts and cultural sectors are, and I have long admired their can-do attitude. I recognise the very real contribution heritage and the work of Cadw can make to my wider priorities of inclusion and equality—widening access for all to the outstanding historic sites and landscapes of Wales, and telling the wider stories of Wales.

I know there is nothing like a great football match in your hometown for bringing people together, which is why we must continue to work together to find innovative solutions to the challenges we all face across a range of sports. Through working together across Government and with our external partners, we have the opportunity to address and dismantle many of the harmful barriers and causes of inequality and poverty experienced by people in Wales. I am determined to do my part in making Wales a prosperous, equitable and safer place for all its citizens. Diolch. 

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary, albeit a very non-committal one. I have to admit I found the statement rather interesting because you mentioned culture, yet we have the Welsh National Opera's future literally hanging in the balance, and I can't say I'm very reassured by any of the statement. There doesn't seem to be any clear plan ahead on anything that you've mentioned, particularly sport, as what seems to be an afterthought at the end of your statement, with no commitments on how to improve the current state of play in Wales.

You mention your LGBTQ+ action plan. To press ahead with this now, in light of the Cass review findings, would be irresponsible and could potentially put children and young people at risk. The Welsh Government's LGBTQ+ action plan needs to be reviewed in light of Dr Cass's findings. So, Cabinet Secretary, I ask once again: when can concerned Welsh citizens—and this Senedd—expect a review of the plan to be undertaken? These priorities are not the current priorities of the people of Wales.

However, I was pleased to hear you mention, albeit briefly, sport in today's statement, as something known to bring communities together, as you know, and to change lives. The Labour Government, in the last two decades, have completely let down the people of Wales in regards to sporting facilities. Sport just does not and has not ever received the investment it desperately needs, from community to national level, over the last 2.5 decades—embarrassingly so, when you compare it to the rest of the UK. This Government is meant to want to be a leader in sport participation at grass-roots level, and should be wanting to be a leader at elite level too. We will not achieve this, or even come close, on this current trajectory. It is clear to everyone, particularly in rural areas, that access to sporting facilities is increasingly difficult or non-existent, and yet it gets worse in winter time, due to the lack of all-weather sporting facilities, particularly, again, in rural areas, where they're found lacking. Cabinet Secretary, when sport is a leveller, it provides health benefits, it instils national pride, it improves well-being, when is it going to get the level of investment it so desperately deserves, due to the huge role it plays in the prevention of health ailments, as well as, of course, people's right to have access to sporting facilities, wherever they are in Wales, close by?

And finally, Cabinet Secretary, continuing again with sports, it is vitally important that women and girls are supported in order to grow women's sports, going forward. For reasons of both safety and fairness, the Welsh and UK Conservatives support strengthening the Equality Act 2010 to enshrine the rights of women and girls in sports in Wales through an emphasis on biological sex. Everyone should have the opportunity to play sports, but women should not be penalised by having male biological advantage—by having to accept biological males into their category. It is harming female sports and having a negative impact on the participation levels of both women and girls. I suppose, before Labour can start to claim they properly support women, they need to first learn, of course, how to define one. So, Cabinet Secretary, can you commit today to protecting biological women's sports, please? Thank you.

Thank you. Well, I did say at the start of my statement that I've got a very diverse portfolio, so it is very hard to kind of narrow it down to your priorities, but if I can encompass it in three from that statement—and I made this very clear to my Cabinet colleagues—tackling poverty has to be the top priority, and that obviously includes child poverty. But we know children are in poverty because their parents are in poverty, so I use the phrase 'tackling poverty', which obviously includes child poverty. For me, community cohesion or community safety is very important, because I think, for our constituents and for everybody in Wales, they need to feel safe in that community and in their home. And the third is a general bringing together. It wasn't an afterthought at all; it was bringing together arts, culture and sport, because I think the three of them—we have a tremendous amount to offer here in Wales.

I recognise that we don't have enough money to be able to support our arts, culture and sport sector in the way that we would all want to, but we have to be pragmatic and in Government you have to make tough decisions, and, unfortunately, our financial situation meant those tough decisions had to be made. But I do want to reassure everyone that I continue to work with the WNO. I've got a meeting tomorrow with Rhianon Passmore. I've met with WNO. I think, last time I was in the Chamber, I had already met with them to see what we could do, because I absolutely recognise that they're a jewel in our crown, and I think I mentioned, in our question session, that, from a global point of view, they're very widely recognised. So, you know, I can't offer reassurances about funding, but what I can offer is my commitment to continue to work with all parts of the arts sector, the culture sector and the sport sector.

I absolutely agree that sport brings people together, and, if I think about my own experience, my daughter, who comes to the football with me, she lives two hours from home, but, on a Saturday afternoon at 3 o'clock, we get together, and that's the case—. I look around the Racecourse stadium, and I can see that right across the Racecourse stadium, so, for me, that is really important. From an elite point of view, I think we punch above our weight in Wales.

Going back to grass roots, we do need to see more all-weather pitches, for instance, because, as you say, it's not just in the winter, is it, that we have flooded pitches et cetera. I've met with the FAW to discuss the plan that they have, and we just need to work together to make sure that funding is there. We've also got other people who are very happy to help us in this way with grass-roots sports, and I and my officials have had meetings and we will continue to do that. 

Around the LGBTQ+ action plan that you mentioned, as you know, that plan was published in February 2023, so I don't think we need to have a review of it; we need to focus our efforts on implementation and on making substantial and positive impacts to the lives of LGBTQ+ people here in Wales. We will make sure we update progress against each activity and action point in the plan, and they will be monitored.

The point you make at the end, and I think you referred to the Equality Act—. There is no reference to biological sex in the Equality Act. I'm not quite sure what the UK Government—the Tories—are planning around attempts to amend the Act on that basis, but I think they need to tread very carefully.

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. I'm pleased to hear the focus that you have on child poverty in particular. It's shameful, in my opinion, how little we've heard from the leaders of Labour and the Tories during the election campaign about the millions who are without the basics of life, and about the fact that the use of foodbanks is at an all-time high. Throwing around terms like 'growing the economy' is no panacea; economic growth takes years. Without different taxation and spending plans, we will see cuts to public services and levels of poverty being normalised, because, as you know, the level of child poverty in Wales is amongst the highest in the UK.

When I've asked the Government—the Welsh Government—about what it's doing to tackle this national scandal, I always hear in response that the Westminster Government is mainly to blame, and I do agree that there is much that the Westminster Government could and should do to eradicate child poverty, including, of course, removing the two-child cap on benefits, which is exacerbating child poverty in Wales.

According to the End Poverty Coalition, more than 65,000 children in Wales who are in poverty are being affected by this inhumane policy. Torsten Bell, the director of the Resolution Foundation, as he was, but who now hopes to represent Swansea West for the Labour Party in Westminster, has said that the cost of getting rid of the cap is nothing compared to the cost of keeping it—or maybe that's one of the tweets that he has now deleted.

So, do you agree with the Swansea West Labour candidate, or with your leader, Keir Starmer, who has said that this is unaffordable, while arms and weapons are entirely affordable? And will you, as the member of the Welsh Government responsible for measures to eradicate child poverty, make the case for getting rid of the two-child cap to the next Westminster Government, for the sake of the children of Wales? 

And of course, there are actions that are completely within the purview of the Welsh Government. Will you listen to the advice of policy experts and child poverty campaign groups, the children's commissioner, and the report of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, which based its recommendations on international evidence, and ensure that those actions are effective ones—those that are in the child poverty strategy—by setting statutory targets to measure progress, ensure ownership, and focus and drive action? Because, unlike what we had from you in your statement, they weren't content at all with the child poverty strategy. That suggestion is there to use national milestones instead of targets. I think that Dr Victoria Winckler from the Bevan Foundation hit the nail on the head when she said:

'It's a bit like marking your own homework. I think that it's difficult to monitor progress when you don't have clear targets, because you are just reporting on trends. You're not actually reporting on the effectiveness of your own interventions.'

Will we therefore see a change, Cabinet Secretary? Are you ready to listen to this advice and show that you're serious about doing everything possible to ensure that your work in this area is as effective as possible?

You also say that the fight to lift children out of poverty will be at the heart of all of your work. So, what work will you do to drive the work to create a Welsh benefits system, which could be transformative in terms of tackling child poverty? That could be achieved so much more easily if we had the powers in Wales, of course. So, what difference has the benefits charter that has been submitted made already? Will you give us an update on that? And has there been modelling work done in terms of how creating a statutory system would be more effective in terms of alleviating child poverty?

And, of course, we are currently celebrating Pride Month. And as we do so, we must reaffirm our commitment to the LGBTQ+ people of Wales that we respect their rights and that we will fight for their rights. Plaid Cymru believes that powers relating to the Gender Recognition Act 2004 should be devolved to Wales in order to help ensure the right of trans people to live their lives as they wish, with dignity, and free from oppression. And considering what we heard from the Tories yesterday—the cowardly attempt to play politics with the lives of people—are you as a Government sticking to what was in your last manifesto, namely to work to devolve the Gender Recognition Act and support our trans community? Thank you. 

Thank you very much and I absolutely recognise the importance you too put on working with us around eradicating child poverty. When I came into the portfolio, having been in this portfolio 10 years ago, it's incredibly disappointing to see child poverty at such a high level.

I'm very happy to listen to policy experts. I've already met with the children's commissioner, I've met with the Bevan Foundation, and we've had a discussion around the child poverty strategy. I have to say, I am a Minister that impulsively looks to targets, and I had a conversation with my predecessor, Jane Hutt, around that. But I do think the child poverty monitoring framework that we do have in place should be allowed to be exactly what it is—monitored. So, when I met with the children's commissioner yesterday, we will have a report within the first year against this monitoring framework. I think it is based on a range of very relevant measures of poverty. It's an assessment of progress in the delivery of our policy commitments. It's also about listening to children and adults and families with lived experience of poverty. I really think that will support us to have a look at the impact of our approach, but I think it is really important that if, in a year’s time, we look and we think that the implementation of what we are doing to try and reduce poverty, and that includes child poverty—. I'm not somebody that's going to commit for five years and not to do something differently. There's no point just keeping on doing the same things, even the same things differently. You may have to do very different things.

We do have levers as a Government, I absolutely accept that, but we also have to accept that some of those levers are with the UK Government, and I'll be very happy to have those conversations when we do have a Labour Government in place. But, as a Welsh Government, obviously, we've worked with Plaid Cymru as part of the co-operation agreement around our childcare offer, around food in schools—these are things that actively make a difference—the school essentials grant, the education maintenance allowance and, of course, the council tax reduction scheme, because the idea is to get as much money into people's pockets.

You mentioned the Welsh benefits charter. I don't have the figures to hand, but I'll be, certainly, very happy to update Members when we do have that first data to be able to evidence what we're doing, and I do think we have made a big impact. But I think it would be great if the UK Government could perhaps have some sort of campaign that we could all get behind to make sure people are aware of what they are entitled to. And, again, this is something I had started to talk about with the UK Government, but we'll have to wait until after the general election now.

I absolutely agree with what you say around Pride Month. It is something that should be celebrated and respected, and I mentioned in my earlier answer to Laura Anne Jones that our focus has been on the implementation of the LGBTQ+ plan that was published last year.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you very much for the statement, and I'm going to restrain my comments today to the performance sector of Wales. Welsh culture, Welsh arts and the music of Wales are for everyone, and not just for the elite or those who can afford it. But it is also right that excellence as a concept is recognised within our cultural strategy, and currently it is not. Achieving diversity of access and achieving pathways to excellence and achieving individual potential are not mutually exclusive concepts, so that artistic goal of excellence needs to be firmly in place within that strategy. But it is a simple fact, and it is not political point scoring, to state that the shrinkage of the state, public services and public spending has created an arid environment within which the Welsh Government has had to operate to safeguard Welsh cultural life. That is a simple fact. And I acknowledge the Cabinet Secretary's words that, and I quote, 'I'm aware of the impact the reduction in our indicative grant in aid allocation for 2024-25 will have on our culture, arts and sports arm's-length bodies, and I've acted to mitigate the full scale of the budget pressures on them, but there is no budget flexibility that can prevent significant reductions to their budgets.'

This is undoubtedly correct, and raises questions for us as to how our arm's-length bodies operate their governance and their decision making. Why is this so important? Today on the Senedd steps, I met with some really passionate members of the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama junior department, because on Saturdays the learners, aged from four to 18, gather to learn, and the funding decisions that are made by the Arts Council of Wales now threaten that existence. On 21 May, as the chair of the cross-party group on music, I was also able to welcome the renowned conductor, Carlo Rizzi, and members of the Welsh National Opera to the steps of the Senedd, where they protested for their very existence. So, it is absolutely right that we get it right and, Cabinet Secretary, I welcome your willingness to meet with the interim general director of Welsh National Opera, as well as me, to discuss the huge concerns that exist. And it is right that our organisations of excellence, such as the Welsh National Opera, are not lost but recognised and supported by their arm's-length bodies who keep them alive.

Cabinet Secretary, as we reaffirm our cultural values, we must ensure that, as well as grass-roots participation, excellence within our cultural life is safeguarded. We have to do both. Cabinet Secretary, with the forthcoming general election offering a new direction for the British populace, what future options are available to the Welsh Government to reshape the threats to Welsh culture, and how can you work with a new UK Government to revise long-standing bi-national agreements that have supported Welsh cultural life for decades? Thank you.

Thank you. Well, as I think I mentioned earlier, I have already met with the WNO, with the interim director, and I look forward to meeting with you also. I think it's fair to say we've never quite seen or heard a protest like the one we had from the WNO.

Certainly, the discussions I had with the WNO, because—. It's a very unusual organisation in that it's funded by Arts Council England and the Arts Council of Wales, and that was because it had been recognised for the work it does in England too. I also think a lot of people probably aren't aware of the, if you like, extracurricular work that the WNO does, particularly in a health setting. I've had a discussion with my colleague the Cabinet Secretary for health to see if there's anything we can do to help support them there. That was certainly the first time I ever came across the WNO, when they came to my constituency and did work in a very deprived part of my constituency with young children, because, as you say, it's absolutely for everybody.

The priorities that I've set out in the cultural strategy—. And I'd like to pay tribute to the work of my predecessor, Dawn Bowden, because Dawn did most of the work around the culture strategy in very difficult financial constraints. We're not asking the culture sector to do more with less. What we're doing is setting out very clear priorities with them, to help decision making at a more granular level, so asking them to work in partnership a bit more, because even with a new Labour UK Government, we have to accept that there won't be as much money, perhaps, as we would want. But, certainly, I think there will be a focus, if we do have a Labour Government, on arts and culture in a way that currently isn't the case. So, what I've said to the WNO, what I've said to the Arts Council of Wales, is that we mustn't throw the baby out with the bath water. We mustn't lose skills that will be very, very hard to get back. But I pledge to continue having those conversations.

I'd be grateful if you could please respond to one of Sioned Williams's points in your response to me, just in terms of clarifying what the position of the Government is on the two-child cap—something that is, of course, of huge concern to many of us because of that very cruel policy.

I will focus my contribution in terms of arts and culture, and I would ask you, perhaps, to reflect on one of your sentences where you said that you admired the can-do attitude and resilience of the arts and cultural sector. Well, yes, that has been the case but the 'can-do' has turned into 'can't any longer', and everyone has a breaking point and, unfortunately, that has been reached. These are not threats anymore—we have lost experts, key expertise. Those skills are gone. The damage is done in terms of our national institutions, to both the national library and Amgueddfa Cymru. I sponsored at lunchtime an event by Prospect, where there were many of those experts there. It was heartbreaking, Cabinet Secretary, and I would urge you to perhaps have the conversation with Members of both Prospect and PCS to hear about that heartbreaking—. They can't do more. They're really concerned about the future of the national collections, but also the accessibility of jobs within our national institutions, because they say they will not be able to provide opportunities for young people, that it will become elitist, and that's not what we want to see. So, please, can I ask you to reflect on that comment, because there is a seriousness to the situation of our national institutions, and what I'd like to know is how is the Government going to address this in the short term, not just the long term?

Thank you. I have already met with both Prospect and PCS, and I think I'm having a separate meeting with the Musicians' Union, who I've also met, but I think they've asked for a further meeting. You will know that, as part of the co-operation agreement, Dawn Bowden and Siân Gwenllian, one of the things they did, on the funding that I think had been set aside for this financial year to implement the culture strategy, it has been used to save as many jobs as possible. I do recognise, obviously, there have been voluntary redundancies, but I have been reassured that they have tried to ensure that not all the skills from one specific area have gone. Okay, it might be spread a bit more thinly to try and protect some of those skills, but, as I said, I'm very happy to continue working with them. Some of the organisations are requesting a very small amount of money. Now, if that money should come forward, if we do have a Labour Government, because I do think we would have some, if you look at what they're pledging—and, obviously, the manifesto is yet to come out—we would get consequentials of funding. So, what I try to say to everybody is, 'If you can just hang on for a little bit longer and we can see if we can find some more money.' But we are in a very difficult financial position and I don't want to underplay that.

Sorry, I thought I had referred to two-child cap. What I had said is I will continue to have those discussions, because I think we all recognise what a powerful lever that could be.

Finally, Carolyn Thomas.

Diolch, Llywydd. For me, Welsh Labour values are ensuring that nobody gets left behind, and access to play, music, culture can easily become affordable for only those that are wealthy if they're not subsidised by public funding, and that funding's been cut so much over the last 10 years, and it worries me when I hear rhetoric as well saying that we need to grow the economy before we can have funding for public services. I don't think that needs to be the way forward, and I hope you can make representations about that.

Also, I'm worried about much in this is being politicised as well, such as Wales being a nation of sanctuary, which means helping refugees belong to communities that are cohesive; it's not about asylum seekers. So, how do you address that as well, going forward, because when you get a groundswell of the public having that misinformation, then that helps control political decisions and makes the decisions go in the wrong way, if you know what I mean.

And lots of decisions are based on GDP and business. How do we give value to health and well-being? Because most people just need a certain level of happiness and well-being, access to music, culture, equality, to live, not two houses and wealth. We have the future generations and well-being Act, so how do we apply that as a measure? And how can we give measure to all these valuable things to make an equal society? I'm sorry, that's not a really good question, but it's what I feel matters and what makes us as a Welsh Labour Party important, to make sure nobody's left behind. Thank you.

Thank you. I was just reflecting, when you were talking about nation of sanctuary and cohesive communities, that this morning I met with HOPE Not Hate, and we had a very interesting discussion about information sharing and how important that is. We'd focused this morning, because we were talking about lessons to learn—it was before I came into portfolio—about ensuring that we avoid a situation like we had in Llanelli, with Stradey Park, and the importance of two Governments working together. I've been unable to meet the Home Secretary. I've been in post now about 11 weeks and I appreciate now we've got a general election, so I'm not going to meet the Home Secretary until there's a new one. But it's really important that information is given that's correct, that you don't have rhetoric, as I think you referred to it, where people don't understand the facts, because that can lead to the very opposite of what we want in relation to community cohesion. So, I think that is really important.

We have fantastic organisations in our communities who want to be part of nation of sanctuary, who want to be part of welcoming asylum seekers and refugees. We only have to see the way we opened our doors—when I was in this portfolio 10 years ago, it was Syrian refugees. Now, obviously, it's Ukrainian refugees that have been welcomed here. So, we are a nation of sanctuary, and I will do all I can to ensure that that continues.

I absolutely agree with what you say about health and well-being and arts and culture, and I've said a couple of times I think the arts are a great redeemer of life. It is really important that they're not elitist and as many people as possible can do that so that they can thrive and not just survive.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next statement will be from the Minister for Social Care on transforming children's services. The Minister to make that statement—Dawn Bowden.

Diolch, Llywydd. Just before recess, I had the very real privilege of introducing the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill to this Senedd as one of my first acts as the Minister for Social Care. During the statement, there were many questions from Members about children’s services in general. I therefore welcome this opportunity to provide Members with a timely update about our progress in delivering the eight distinct programme for government commitments that will radically transform children’s social care in Wales. So, I hope that this will cover in more detail some of the areas that we discussed during the statement on the health and social care Bill. 

I want to start by saying that I am firmly committed to delivering this ambitious agenda by doing all that I can, and all that this Government can, to support families to successfully care for their children. I also want to pay tribute to my predecessor, Julie Morgan, who has made so much progress in this area. This is the biggest transformation of children’s services in our lifetime. We want to change the way that services are delivered so that we focus on keeping families together, a preventative agenda, with fewer children being taken into care and with children’s needs at the heart of everything that we do. 

Our care-experienced annual summits have provided a voice for care-experienced children and young people to share their experiences and to share their ideas with Ministers about the changes that they think need to be made. We're taking forward work to deliver the commitments made in the care-experienced summit declaration, which was the first of its kind in the UK. The First Minister and I are committed to achieving the ambition outlined by the young ambassadors, and we will both be signing the declaration with care-experienced young people later this month, emphasising our commitment to its delivery.   

Our transformation delivery group has been established for more than a year now, and care-experienced young people have a seat on this group, which has been charged with taking forward two areas of work. The first is focused on data and metrics, and the second on early help and prevention, recognising the need for intensive, wrap-around edge-of-care support for care-experienced parents to reduce the risk of their children being removed from their care. 

We're investing £1.6 million to bolster and scale up parental advocacy. These projects support parents to engage with social workers, third sector organisations, the family courts and other professionals to resolve issues that are negatively impacting their family. The funding will ensure that new services are established in each of the seven regions in Wales as part of a national roll-out of parental advocacy.

At the centre of the transform work is the development and the delivery of the national practice framework. This will be the first set of national standards for children’s services in Wales and will be designed to sit alongside other all-Wales procedures, such as all-Wales safeguarding procedures. We have developed and engaged on the first six standards, and we are now developing the full draft of the framework, which will be shared with professionals and practitioners over the summer. The full framework will be published by the end of the year.

The Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill with its core provision to eliminate private profit from children’s care will, if passed, meet another of our programme for government commitments to help transform children’s care. However, as I explained in my last statement to you, eliminating private profit is about much more than just the future model of ownership and profit. It's about building resilience into this fragile sector; it’s about how we best meet the care and support needs of children and young people; about how we keep them in their local communities and how we do all that we can to support them to be with their families. 

We launched the corporate parenting charter in September last year, and I’m pleased to report that, so far, 40 organisations have signed up, including the Welsh Government and Welsh Ministers. We are continuing to encourage all public bodies and private organisations and the third sector to become corporate parents, and I would urge you to do the same. We will be strengthening guidance for local authorities and health boards about corporate parenting with a dedicated chapter in the Part 6 code of practice under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. This will set out much more clearly their duties as corporate parents and drive a strengthened and cross-sector strategic approach to corporate parenting.

I want to turn now to how we are meeting the programme for government commitment to support children with complex needs. Between 2021 and 2023, we have made £3.5 million of regional accommodation funding available to deliver 15 projects across Wales. This has resulted in the creation of 26 new beds for children with complex needs and support for a further 62 children and young people. Since then, we have allocated a further £23 million and we continue to receive proposals through the housing with care fund. This will deliver an additional 96 beds and, of these, five homes are already operating, with 15 beds.

The health and social care regional integration fund also includes a significant investment of around £18 million a year to support families to stay together safely and to provide therapeutic support for care-experienced children. We have also continued to invest heavily in our national fostering scheme, Foster Wales, to improve the ability of local authority fostering services to recruit and retain foster carers. We are committed to ensuring that kinship foster carers receive the same support as mainstream foster carers, and through the Foster Wales national commitment we're working towards an agreed package of training, support and rewards being consistently available to all foster carers through all 22 local authority fostering services in Wales.

The final programme for government commitment commits us to continue to support and uphold the rights of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and young people and is very much in line with our nation of sanctuary approach. In Wales, we treat all unaccompanied asylum-seeking children as looked-after children. We are proud to take a 'child first' approach, which upholds the best interests, rights and entitlements of providing care and support to all children in Wales. I am committed to working with all local authorities and third sector partners to ensure that all unaccompanied children have access to the care, services and support they need whilst under the care of local authorities in Wales. We will not demonise or politicise these very vulnerable children and young people. We will give them a warm welcome and the same opportunities as children and young people in Wales.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we want all children in Wales to have the best possible start in life and to reach their full potential. Transforming children’s services to put their needs first will deliver better outcomes for children, young people and their families. Diolch yn fawr. 

Thank you for your statement, Minister. Transforming children's care is one of the most important tasks facing the Welsh Government. As the Minister rightly accepts, far too many children are entering the formal care system—higher than any other nation in the United Kingdom. We must do everything in our power to not only ensure the safety of children, but also ensure that they don't needlessly enter into the care system. I therefore welcome the commitment to a preventative agenda.

As I stated in our interaction during Foster Care Fortnight, the Step Up Step Down programme was delivering promising results. Minister, in your response to Julie Morgan, you stated that it was too early to evaluate the programme, but you'd hoped to visit the Northern Ireland pilot. Can you provide any further updates on that visit? I also welcome the development of a national practice framework. We need a national set of standards, and I would be grateful, Minister, if you could expand upon the timeline for the introduction of the full framework and how binding the standards will be upon public, private and third sector providers.

With regard to the corporate parenting charter, Minister, can you outline whether or not there are still local authorities that have not signed up to the charter? Sadly, there is still too much variation in numbers of looked-after children per 10,000 of the population by local authority area. Some local authorities have doubled the number of looked-after children when compared to other councils with similar demographics. Also, more alarmingly, we still have local authorities that have lost track of children in their care. Therefore, Minister, how do you plan to address this variance and do you believe that the charter will help address instances of children missing in care?

Finally, Minister, I want to reiterate my commitment to you to work with you to ensure the transforming of children's services, putting children first and helping to guarantee our children in Wales have the best possible start in life. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you, Altaf. Firstly, can I thank you very much for those comments? I welcome the opportunity to work with you. I think that there is largely consensus around what we're trying to achieve here. This is about trying to reduce the number of children who we find in care across Wales, and everything that we are doing through this transformation programme and our eight programme for government commitments that are seeking to deliver this is about achieving that aim. As we talked about previously, I introduced the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill, which is about eliminating profit in children's care, but it's about much more than that; it is about having a complete rebalancing of the way in which we deliver care for children and, where we have to, how we deliver residential care. This whole programme is about reducing the demand for that type of residential care. Because what we all know is that the best place for a child to be, where that can be done safely, is to stay with their families in their communities. And that is very much what our preventative agenda is all about.

You talked about the national practice framework; we're aiming to have that in place by September, by the autumn, and it is going to be a mix of mandatory requirements and practice pointers. It's about key aspects of practice being consistent across Wales. I'll give you an example. We have 22 local authorities across Wales, and we see some local authorities taking more children into care than other local authorities. And that is not because those children are particularly different; it is because of different approaches that we see in different local authorities. Some social services and some social workers work very hard to maintain those children with their families. They are, if you like, slightly less risk averse, but being less risk averse is quite labour intensive, and you've got to work very hard with those families. We have to see a major cultural shift across all of our local authorities to do that. We hope very much that, with a national framework that develops those pointers and develops those practices, social workers in those areas will feel more confident about working in the way that we want them to work and keep as many children out of care as possible.

On corporate parenting, we're very pleased with the number of organisations so far that have signed up. Forty organisations—and the vast majority of local authorities—have signed up. Some have still not signed up, and it's not because of a lack of willingness to do so. I think for many organisations that have not yet signed up, it's about them not being fully clear about what the responsibility would be. That's why we're going to incorporate and strengthen the guidance, as I said in my statement, to ensure that we incorporate that into Part 6 of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 so it will become much clearer. A number of organisations have said to us that they are willing to do this, but they want to make sure that they are prepared for it before they do it. They don't want to go into doing something and then find that they really can't deliver what we need of them. So, I think it is better for those organisations to work with us on identifying where the gaps are in their organisation that might prevent them from signing up, and then, when they are ready to do so, that we sign them up. It's an ongoing process that we have, but I'm very pleased that we do have 40 organisations now signed up.

The national framework, I think, will also help us to address the issue that you have raised around missing children in care. There are very few of them—statistically, that is a very, very small number—but any number is too many. Unfortunately, in some of the ones that we see with the highest level of children missing in care, it tends to be amongst unaccompanied asylum seekers. That is for a whole number of very complex reasons, not least of all that some of these children coming across here are trafficked and some are just unaccompanied, and they are moved into a new culture and a new environment. It is a frightening time for them, and we have seen one or two of those disappear. That does bother me, because I wonder where those children end up, particularly if they are children who have been trafficked. But I am very confident that the provisions within the national practice framework, when it's rolled out and when it's applied consistently across every local authority area, will help us to identify and ensure that that doesn't happen.

May I start by declaring an interest, as my wonderful wife works for a charity in this sector? Building a nation that enables future generations to prosper, where no child is left behind because of personal circumstances that are beyond their control, is a cause that is at the core of the ethos and values of Plaid Cymru. Because of our unshakeable belief in this, we take pride in the fact that this programme for children's services includes the progressive act of eradicating profit from the children-in-care sector, which was part of the co-operation agreement that existed between ourselves and the Government.

Unlike the core beliefs of the Conservative Party, and, indeed, a large part of the UK Labour Party, including the shadow health Secretary, we totally reject the mantra that it is the market that knows best when it comes to providing for the health and well-being needs of our society, particularly so for vulnerable children. The Competition and Markets Authority made the point clearly in their report in 2022 by demonstrating how the market for children in care leans disproportionately in favour of private providers, with these providers being able to charge extremely high prices for their services, as the ability of local authorities to provide foster services themselves is seriously degraded because of 14 years of Conservative austerity. The result of this is a model of services for children in care that is broken, fundamentally, here in Wales, and that has entirely undermined those crucial elements of the continuity of care when it comes to providing services, and geographical areas.

Reform in this area was long overdue, and we therefore welcome the Government's commitment to take forward the Plaid Cymru policy through the health and social care Bill. But much like the Cabinet Secretary for health's attempt to persuade voters that her party is at the forefront of modernising the NHS in Wales, the idea that Welsh Labour can be trusted with the transformation of children's services more broadly, after 25 years in power, has to be taken with a large pinch of salt. After all, a quarter of a century since the dawn of devolution, almost a third of children in Wales live in a state of poverty, with calls for the Welsh Government to develop child poverty strategies underpinned by robust and clear targets continuing to fall on deaf ears. Meanwhile, recent statistics from Social Care Wales underline alarming gaps in the childcare workforce, with the number of vacancies in children's social care having increased in 2022 by 38.3 per cent, of which over 50 per cent were vacancies for qualified social workers.

We understand the inherent limitations of the Government's resources in this respect, which ultimately stems back to the unfairness of the Barnett formula that has left Wales short-changed year on year. But despite being the nation to which the Labour Party owes, arguably, the most, both in terms of its electoral success and its very existence, it is a damning indictment of how Wales is taken for granted by Keir Starmer that he refuses to commit to scrapping the unjust Barnett formula. This sense of complacency has been encapsulated by Labour's six general election campaign pledges for Wales, of which four have been the devolved responsibility of the Welsh Labour Government for years. Quite frankly, this is an insult to the intelligence of Welsh voters. But instead of calling out the apathy of the UK leader, and demanding better for Wales from the incoming Government, Welsh Ministers have seemingly been content to adopt a 'wait and hope for the best' approach, while our key public services, including children's services, continue to buckle from a lack of funding.

We can't wish for a brighter future for our children into being simply from goodwill alone, you need the practical resources to build it. So, my question, at the end of my contribution to the Minister is: will the Labour Party, UK-wide, commit to reforming the Barnett formula, and funding formula for Wales, in order to achieve what the Minister has set out to achieve here today?

It could change for the worse.

Under Labour?

[Inaudible.]

Diolch, Mabon. Thank you for those comments. We are clearly well and truly in the middle of a general election now, aren't we, so most of those comments were directed at UK Labour, rather than at Welsh Labour, in terms of what I as a Welsh Minister can do and am doing. So, I will concentrate on responding to the things that I'm responsible for, and then we will carry on and campaign for our respective parties outside of this Chamber. I hope that I will see Keir Starmer in No. 10 after 4 July, and I'm sure that we will be in a far better position than we are now.

Clearly, from our financial position at this moment in time, we know nothing about where we will be from March 2025. We have finances and budget settlements up to March 2025. A new incoming Government is going to have a very different approach to a whole range of things, so we can't really speak beyond that. But one of the things that I would say, to keep us on a positive footing, because I don't think there is a huge difference between us on what we are seeking to do here, is that we do have a joint aspiration on the transformation of children's services. And you're quite right, we worked very well together on the co-operation agreement, and I very much regret the ending of that agreement, particularly around areas of the elimination programme in particular. We've worked closely, we've worked collaboratively, and we had a joint agenda and we were on that path to delivering that joint agenda. We now have to deliver that alone, as a Welsh Government, but I hope that it will still continue to receive the support of Plaid Cymru, as it appears to have the general support of the Conservative benches as well.

There are challenges—of course there are challenges. We can't pretend that there are not. I am launching a new workforce strategy this week, which is addressing a number of the points that you have raised. We have done an awful lot in that area already, particularly around bringing in the real living wage into the social care workforce. But beyond pay, training and career development, professionalisation, the setting up of Social Care Wales and all of that—it's all helping towards moving us to a professionalised social care workforce, where we can grow our own as well, where we can have people that come in as social care workers but can develop within that role to become social workers, and eventually become our social services leaders in the future.

So, I’ve got a great ambition for that. This is something that I have championed since way before I came into this Senedd. As you will appreciate, I was a Unison official back in the day, so I have been championing this for an awful long time, and we have seen an amazing amount of success and progress in that area, but there's still a huge way to go. We are working in partnership with our trade unions, and we have the social care forum, and we are delivering now proposals for moving those kinds of pay conditions, progression policies, into the private sector as well as into the public and third sector. So, an awful lot more to do, but I think we are still on that road.

On elimination, I just want to re-emphasise, really, I suppose, the points that you were making, Mabon, that the removal of profit from the care of looked-after children is something that we are absolutely committed to do, and we are committed to do it because we know that it is what children themselves—the voices from care, the care-experienced children themselves—have said, that they are strongly opposed to organisations profiting from the experience of being in care, and we need to listen to them. We need to listen to the voices of care-experienced children. And we’re not talking about very young children—we’re talking about teenagers that have been through the system and are now at that age where they can articulate what they were probably feeling as very young children, but are now able to articulate, and we must listen to them.

The concept of profit being paid to shareholders on the backs of the most vulnerable people in our society is something that is anathema to me, and I am sure it is to you, and I want to see that money that is currently going in profit to shareholders being reinvested in the care of our children and young people.

So, yes, a very ambitious programme. Most of our programme is already costed. I’ve set out quite clearly some of the spending already, and I would look for that to be developed and increase as we go along.

I will be in committee on Thursday with you, where you will be scrutinising the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill, and I am sure we will explore this a lot further then. But as I say, my position standing here today is that we are totally committed to not only delivering the health and social care Bill, but all elements of the transformation of children's services, which will contribute to the success of that Bill.

I want to focus on Parts 3 and 4, but I also want to make the point that I welcome working with Plaid Cymru on removing that profit element from the care sector. But due to time restrictions, I want to focus on 3 and 4. Part 3 is about sharing, through a good practice forum, the needs of children with complex needs who find themselves needing residential care. The money, the £25.4 million that has gone into that integrated care fund and housing care fund for accommodating those individuals, is critical. The reason I am then linking to Part 4, recognising the corporate parental role here, is pretty obvious, because I'm hoping, Minister—and this is my question, really—that that will be underpinned by an independent inspectorate that will report. In my view—. I will ask, request, that that's an annual report to local authorities and local health boards, so that that can be scrutinised, and those people in those areas, particularly local authorities, can be satisfied that the children that they are still responsible for as corporate parents, but may not reside within their jurisdiction—that they can satisfy themselves through those reports that those children have been looked after effectively, efficiently, but also being cared for rightly.

Thank you, Joyce Watson, for those comments, and I think that's a very important point that you make. Inspection is absolutely critical to the development of these services. We have a very good inspectorate in Wales. We have Care Inspectorate Wales at the moment, which is independent of Government. We made sure that that inspectorate is fully funded so that they can continue with those inspections and their joint inspections of child protection arrangements—the JICPAs, as they call them—which are really important where we have joint education, care and so on, police inspections, the whole gambit.

And we've got some really good examples of some of the projects that are delivering the new style or new types of care for children with complex needs. There are two in particular that I'd like to mention. There's an example called MyST in Gwent, and that provides specialist mental health services to children and people up to the age of 21 who are looked after, and involves children through social care and very complex mental health needs arising from early trauma. And that has been a really successful programme. So, again, these are models of centres that have been established with that fund that you referred to that I think could be an example of how we roll out in other areas.

There's another example called MAPS, and they provide up to 12 sessions of therapy to children and young people that are looked after by behaviour analysts, so they can work with young people to stabilise emotions and so on. And it will be absolutely critical that those services receive the proper inspection, that we get feedback on not only that they are delivering what we want them to deliver, but it's being done in an appropriate way in an appropriate setting, and we're getting the outcomes that we very clearly need. And, of course, that will also be covered in the health and social care Act, in the third Part of the Act around the regulations that need to be amended for other Acts to bring them in line with this.

And finally, Gareth Davies. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you very much for your statement this afternoon, Minister, but I do take issue with eliminating the profits, unfortunately, but it's nothing new, you'll be pleased to know, because I've debated this for a long time with your predecessor, Julie Morgan, both in the Senedd and in the Health and Social Care Committee, because I had the social services brief for three years. So, I covered it quite extensively. 

The issue I do have is that, obviously, you make the comparison to shareholders in bigger companies, which is a more valid point, but I was approached when I did have the social services portfolio by small business owners who have invested a lot of money into those businesses, and personal investment into those for many years. And they actually contacted me to say that they haven't been consulted by the Welsh Government in that ensuing period from 2021 when the co-operation agreement was formed, and I was rather hoping that with a new First Minister and the end of the co-operation agreement it would stop, but that's not the case.

Could you update the Senedd this afternoon in terms of what consultation the Welsh Government have had with private childcare providers in that regard, because they do make up 80 per cent of the sector currently? It's an ambitious target, so I'm just wondering what consultation you've had with those sectors. Thanks. 

I think you are also on the health committee, Gareth, so we'll be exploring this—

I'm not anymore. 

Oh, you're not anymore. Okay. So, you won't be exploring this with me on Thursday. Okay. Well, I won't go through the removing the profit aspects because, as you say, that is well rehearsed; we're not going to agree on that, but I do understand the points that you make. We have set out very clearly in the Bill the various models of not-for-profit organisations that we feel can operate in this area, so they are third sector, they are charities, it's local authority and so on.

Now, what we will be doing is giving an opportunity for many of the smaller organisations that you're talking about, many of whom—. I'm not suggesting for one moment that these organisations, these small businesses that are running children's homes are not doing so effectively and they're not doing it in the right way, but we just don't feel that the sector is currently resilient enough, because the private sector, in our view, does not provide that same level of resilience. And local authorities will be expected to produce a resilience plan, where they will have to identify that they have enough places for children in their local area, for their own children, so that we don't have so many children going out of county and so on. What I would say is that we are talking about a transition period; we are not talking about a cliff edge, where all of these private providers will suddenly stop operating in the market. Many of them will have long-term contracts with local authorities, they will have children in their care where, those children, that is their homes, and we're not intending to pull the rug from under those. And there will be very occasional circumstances where the most complex and unusual sets of circumstances may require us to place a child in a private provision, and the Bill does provide for that as well. What will happen is that, from April 2027, no new private providers will be authorised into the market.

But what I would say, in terms of the consultation, is that the third sector, private sector and local authority providers are all part of the eliminate programme board, along with the children's commissioner, along with Voices from Care Cymru, along with service commissioners, trade unions—they're all on that board and have all been feeding into the development of the provisions of the Bill, and we will continue talking to them. The Bill has a long way to go yet; we're still only at Stage 1. I suspect there will be a number of amendments that will come through at Stages 2 and 3, and quite rightly so, because this will need to be tinkered with as we go along. We need to get it right. We need to get it right; we want to make sure that this Bill does not deliver unintended consequences. So, all the people that you're talking about—the private sector, public sector, third sector—will continue to be involved in the discussions with us as we progress the Bill.

I thank the Minister.

Item 7 today is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for North Wales and Transport: transforming rail, an update on the delivery of the south Wales metro and the fleet upgrade programme. I call on the Cabinet Secretary, Ken Skates.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Back in November 2015, the then First Minister Carwyn Jones described the south Wales metro as representing the future of public transport in south-east Wales. With the timetable change taking place on the core Valleys lines this week, that future is fast becoming a reality, with more frequent journeys for passengers, improving connectivity, connecting people and creating opportunity. The new timetable is a step change towards the 'turn up and go' service that the metro will provide.

Transport for Wales are now running six trains an hour between Caerphilly and Cardiff and eight trains an hour between Pontypridd and Cardiff—two additional services every hour on both of these routes, providing more choice and more flexibility for passengers. And for the first time, there are Sunday services on the City line in Cardiff, allowing more people to use public transport for leisure or work in the city centre. The new, improved timetable is designed for the brand-new electric trains that will be introduced throughout this year. We are able to make this change to the timetable because of the progress being made to upgrade the infrastructure itself. Every week we're a step closer to the final delivery of this transformational £1 billion programme. Just last week, TfW successfully completed the energisation of the Treherbert line. This will provide power for the new fleet to begin testing and eventually run passenger services on that line. And last month we made history, as the very first electric train ran north of Cardiff to Pontypridd during daylight hours.  

These incremental milestones mark vital steps in our vision to build a world-class metro, offering passengers a glimpse of what the future holds across the core Valleys lines network, a transformation made possible by an investment of £1 billion. It's enabling us to deliver high-quality 'turn up and go' services, brand-new trains and rolling out pay-as-you-go ticketing across the south Wales metro. These improvements show what can be achieved when Welsh Government has the powers and the funding to invest in our railway. We are delivering real change for passengers.

Now, our ability to make transformational change outside the core Valleys lines is more limited. Those powers, and funding, remain with the UK Government. But I am determined that no part of Wales will be left behind. We are coming towards the end of our fleet upgrade programme—over £800 million in brand-new, modern trains serving every corner of Wales. You can now travel from Llandudno to Wrexham, from Holyhead to Milford Haven, or Ebbw Vale to Cardiff, all on brand-new trains that are more comfortable, more reliable and more accessible. We've now received 70 per cent of the new fleet, with more trains being delivered all the time. Some of these are in daily service and some are being used for driver training. By the end of the programme, 90 per cent of journeys with TfW will be on new trains.

Dirprwy Lywydd, we've gone from having one of the oldest train fleets in Britain to having one of the very newest. We will have 484 carriages available, compared to just 270 carriages that we inherited from Arriva Trains Wales in 2018. And these new trains will underpin the consistent high levels of performance that we are determined to deliver.

We know that performance has not always been good enough. Replacing the entire fleet and delivering the largest ever infrastructure investment in Wales has been difficult to manage, but we are emerging from those twin challenges and we have turned a corner. We're starting to reap the rewards of hard work and years of investment.

Transport for Wales have improved their performance right across Wales and the borders. Overall, they are more reliable than any other train operating service within Wales. The latest performance results show year-on-year improvements. In April, 3.4 per cent of all TfW services were cancelled compared to 7.5 per cent last year, and punctuality on the core Valleys lines was over 90 per cent, an almost 10 per cent improvement on last year. And we are doing this whilst carrying more passengers across our services. Transport for Wales are providing a much more reliable and higher quality service for passengers on the Wrexham to Bidston line. New trains operating additional services are encouraging more people to travel on this important cross-border route.

Of course there is more to do, but we will not be complacent. It is time to recognise the real changes that passengers are experiencing. I'm proud of the journey that we are on, and how far we have come since the establishment of Transport for Wales. We have a unique approach in Wales. We will always put passengers first, adjusting our services to meet the demands of when people want and need to travel. We are providing more capacity on the busiest services, and we are delivering more services to reflect demand. This means that in Wales we are now celebrating increased services, improved performance, better customer experience, better reliability and brand-new trains. In short, we are delivering positive, transformational change and there is even more to come in the future. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you so much, Cabinet Secretary, for this afternoon's statement. All of us here, I'm sure, can agree that we want to see top-quality, reliable rail services and integrated transport across the country, with our communities better connected. I don't think anyone can honestly dispute that. But, as things stand, I would argue that residents aren't getting the service that they deserve, despite huge amounts of public cash being pumped into Transport for Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, you talk about the metro with such positivity, but the scheme's architect has come out with some rather stringent criticism. Now, Professor Mark Barry, the man who actually conceived the idea of the south Wales metro, described the scheme, and I quote, as a 'raw deal' for Cardiff and insisted the city wasn't really getting a metro. Professor Barry also said that the scheme, the cost of which has ballooned to north of £1 billion, would not result in any extra services at more than half of the capital city stations. That's quite a big comment to make, Cabinet Secretary. Do you agree with Professor Barry's remarks? And how will you ensure that this transport project does in fact deliver for Cardiff? Increased services, especially later in the evening and on Sundays, will almost certainly be welcomed by many. However, questions are being raised, Cabinet Secretary, about how you will ensure that they will indeed arrive on time. The reason for my concern is because, as we all know, Transport for Wales has racked up more than 1 million minutes' worth of delays in 2023—the worst on record to date.

You mention in your statement that punctuality on the core Valleys lines was 90 per cent. That is, of course, welcome news, but how will the Welsh Government ensure that this is maintained going forward? Having repeatedly called for an all-Wales travel card to be introduced, I'm genuinely hand on heart thrilled to see the pay-as-you-go rail fares rolled out, with passengers able to use their bank cards and smart devices to get around, and I do hope, even being the regional Member for south-east Wales, we'll be able to see this in all corners of Wales going forward.

Cabinet Secretary, you said that the Government expects 90 per cent of journeys to be made on new trains by the end of the metro programme, so how confident are you that this target will be hit, and when do you expect us to be hitting the 100 per cent coverage? As part of the metro work, some 40 stations are being renovated. One of the big issues I've been working on in this role is ensuring that public transport hubs are indeed accessible for all. So, Cabinet Secretary, can I get a commitment from you today that the needs of people with disabilities, women and vulnerable users have been taken into account as part of the improvement works, and that things like tactile paving, Tannoy systems, in fact accessible and really productive closed-circuit television are going to be installed to ensure passenger safety is paramount, going forward?

New stations are also being built under this project, yet a cloud of uncertainty is hanging over the Cardiff parkway station. As things stand, the east of Cardiff isn't currently served by a railway station, so this development in St Mellons would be key to connecting passengers and ensuring residents in this area benefit from this investment. I've raised this before with you, Cabinet Secretary, and I know you'll be reluctant to perhaps go into specifics right now, but can you please outline a timeline for when a decision is likely to be made on this project?

Cabinet Secretary, there's a lot to be hopeful about, and I do have a level of confidence in you, but it is imperative that the Welsh Government and Transport for Wales get this right and get it right now, because for far too long people in Wales have been let down by a poor public transport network, and that simply has to change. Thank you so much, Deputy Presiding Officer.

Well, can I thank Natasha Asghar for her questions and for her positive tone, indeed? I would agree entirely that the prospect of integrated public transport across Wales is exciting and is shared across the political spectrum. And through the bus Bill and other changes, we hope to be able to fully integrate timetables, ticketing and ensure that people in north, south and mid Wales—everywhere in Wales—are able to enjoy a fully integrated public transport system of the highest standard.

Now, in terms of the comments that have been made about Cardiff, they are specific, I understand, to the City line and the regularity of services on that particular route. My understanding is that it would not be possible to conduct the sort of Metro-level services on that line without infrastructure upgrades to infrastructure that is the responsibility of Network Rail. So, ultimately, it comes down to UK Government, because it's part of the main line infrastructure arrangement, to actually make the decision about financing the infrastructure upgrades that are required. So, actually, it's something that we could work together on, I believe, if we could influence UK Government to make the investment required to ensure that the City line can enjoy the same degree of service regularity.

Now, in terms of 2023’s figures, I would agree that they were not good enough, but they have been improving, and we are at a point now where 84 per cent of rail services arrive within three minutes of the timetable, and if we look at the performance of operators across Wales between 1 April and 27 April—and this is just a snapshot of how things are going in 2024, but it does show that there have been significant improvements in Transport for Wales services—we will find that, in the whole of the Wales and borders area, the punctuality rate is 77.9 per cent for that particular month. That is higher than any other operator, including Avanti, West Coast, CrossCountry and Great Western. And if you also look at the core Valleys lines, as you identified, the punctuality there has been 90 per cent.

In terms of new rolling stock, we have seen an enormous delivery of the £800 million fleet, and that's across Wales. That applies to the whole of Wales—it's not just confined to the core Valleys areas. And within the next two years, we will see the entire train order delivered, and that will, as I said in my statement, mean that we will have one of the newest fleets anywhere in the United Kingdom, compared to us having inherited one of the oldest fleets back in 2018.

I'd agree entirely as well with Natasha Asghar about the need to ensure that stations are accessible for all, and this was something that the spokesperson and I discussed when we met recently, and there is an advisory group that is able to work with Transport for Wales to ensure that the right sort of infrastructure and the right sort of support is put in place at stations. So, we're increasing the number of ambassadors, for example, but we're also looking at tactile paving to ensure that people who are of partial sighted ability or limited mobility are able to navigate around stations safely.

I'm afraid I can't go into any detail regarding Cardiff parkway at this moment. The Member, and I'm sure most Members in the Chamber, will be aware of the review that’s being conducted into that, and it may well come to me for decision, so I can't comment on that I'm afraid. But I'm sure a decision will be made in the not-too-distant future.

And finally, in regard to pay-as-you-go, I'd share again the enthusiasm of the Member for this particular scheme. It's based on the scheme that is widely used in London. Ultimately, what I would love to see happen is full integration of bus and rail service ticketing and the adoption of pay-as-you-go for all forms of public transport in Wales in the future. That won't be achieved in the short term, because of the amount of infrastructure and technology that is required, but, certainly, as an ultimate objective, I think pay-as-you-go across the bus and train network would be a great ambition to deliver on.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary—I can never remember what that is in Welsh—for updating us on these plans. I caught a train on the new timetable this morning, and it was nice to be able to come to the bay without having to change at Queen Street. 

I understand that, while some of the new trains have been rolled out already, more are supposed to be added in time for the National Eisteddfod in Pontypridd that we're all very excited about.  Could I ask if the programme is still on time to be able to deliver that?  And could you outline what part that will play in providing extra capacity to encourage greater attendance, of course, at this Eisteddfod and how it would assist in helping people get home safely at the end of those days?

In order to get the most out of the metro, of course, you have to look further than what will be beneficial for the passengers of today only, in order to make sure that behaviour change does follow.

We need to look at densification of development, particularly what affordable housing will be developed, as well as physical and social regeneration projects near those transport hubs in many of our towns in the Valleys that have previously been overlooked. Professor Mark Barry has already been raised this afternoon. He has previously called for a metro development corporation to lead on that work that I've just mentioned.  Is that something that you would commit to working to achieve, please?

Finally, I'd like to raise the issue of the devolution and the funding of Transport for Wales, and not just Transport for Wales, but transport of Wales and in Wales. A lot of these new developments, really, I think that they are to be welcomed. There is a lot here that is exciting. But the current arrangements that we have that constrain what is possible—and you've already mentioned what's not going to be possible at the moment for the City line—are simply an unfairness, a fundamental unfairness for Wales.  The Welsh Government has had to pay for the south Wales network, these changes, out of the overall budget. Transport infrastructure is not devolved. And one of the most unfair manifestations of this—we'll have a debate on this tomorrow—is the fact that we're having to fork out £4 billion for high-speed rail networks in England, and not a single piece of track for that is laid in Wales.

Now, in the context of what we've been discussing this afternoon, imagine, all of us, what could have been done with that money. Cabinet Secretary, I'm sure that you would agree with how not just frustrating but unjust that is, because, under the current arrangements, would you agree that surely we cannot—? As to the ambition that we can have for transport and throughout the network without those devolved powers, there is a cap on that ambition, isn't there? Without the Barnettisation of transport infrastructure spend for England, there is a cap on what will be possible.

There is no reason why we could not have these powers devolved. Countries across Europe manage cross-border infrastructure effectively. Wales has no say in so many of these decisions.

An economy that is based entirely around Westminster will never work for Wales. We can see this in the failure of the levelling-up programme. We need to have control, surely, over our own funding for our transport network to truly level up our communities. So, do you agree that we need, in order to have that ambition, those extra powers to get us to where we need to be?

Dirprwy Lywydd, can I thank Delyth Jewell for her questions? I share many of the concerns the Member has raised this afternoon. I would say at the outset that I do not have specific detail about the trains that are going to be coming into use in the next couple of months that will be appropriate for carrying passengers to the Eisteddfod, but what I can say is that, on some key routes, we have now seen the train fleet return to around about 90 per cent where they are new. On the north Wales main line it's 80 per cent, and on the Wrexham to Bidston line, for example, all services are provided by new trains. At the moment, we've got 342 of the 484 carriages that will ultimately be available, and 71 per cent of those are new as well, but I will write to the Member regarding how we are introducing new trains to the network in the next couple of months.

Now, in terms of what's being undertaken at a regional level and regarding the south-east Wales metro and, indeed, metro plans elsewhere, the Member will be aware that corporate joint committees at the moment are taking greater responsibility for transport planning, and, at the moment, they are putting together regional transport plans. They are also putting together the regional development plans and, at a regional level, through the corporate joint committees, there is a great keenness to make sure that the two plans for transport and for permissible development are processed at the same time so that they are able to integrate fully and so that sensible decisions can be made regarding development alongside transport provision.

Now, I could talk at length regarding the deal that Wales gets regarding rail infrastructure. If any Member is interested, I can provide the evidence that I gave to the UK parliamentary committee for transport a few weeks ago, but, in brief, what I’d say is we do need to have a phased process of devolution alongside fair funding for rail investment in Wales. As things stand, because we are part of the Wales and western region for investment through Network Rail, we are essentially having to compete with routes right from the Thames valley across to Penzance, and, unfortunately, because of the Treasury Green Book and the way that it operates in terms of investment decisions, we will always be competing with more affluent areas that carry larger numbers of passengers, and therefore we will be at a disadvantage, because, normally, that’s where the investment goes to, to those areas where you get the greatest return, where the Treasury are able to deem that a particular project has a strong benefit-cost ratio. So, we do need reform of not just the decision making that takes place, and to devolve the decision-making process, but we also have to have a fair funding mechanism in place alongside that.

Now, the reason I gave evidence to the committee a few weeks ago is because they were interested in the draft rail Bill in the establishment of Great British rail, and it’s my firm feel that if Great British rail were to be taken forward, then we as Welsh Ministers, Wales as a nation, would have to be able to determine how and/or where funding for rail investment is carried out, and that would obviously be to the benefit of the Wales and borders service area that we are responsible for.

Thank you for your statement. First, I'm sure you'd want to join me in paying tribute to Lee Waters for the excellent ambition and energy he put into driving forward this £800 million investment in brand-new trains. I welcome the improvements on the City line, because it's serving the part of Cardiff where there was a huge number of houses built without a proper public transport system put in, which obviously has caused an enormous amount of congestion and air pollution. So, any improvement on the City line is really going to benefit people in Cardiff.

I wondered if I could ask you a little bit more about the pay-as-you-go ticketing and the link of the bus reregulation programme, so that the south Wales metro is both rail and buses. And the other thing is, I wondered if, before the general election was called, you'd had any opportunity to talk to the UK Government about where and when we're going to get the investment in the four lines running east of Cardiff Central that continue to be the responsibility of the underfunded Network Rail and the UK Government. Otherwise, we are going to continue to have people commuting into Cardiff who live east and north of Newport by car because the services are just not good enough, and so I wondered if you could say a little bit more about that.

Can I thank Jenny Rathbone for her questions and her contribution, and agree that Lee Waters made a huge contribution to this ambitious project? I'd also like to pay tribute to my predecessor as transport Minister, Edwina Hart, and Edwina Hart's predecessor as well, Carl Sargeant, all of whom were heavily involved in the development of the south Wales metro, and the creation of Transport for Wales. Perhaps, above all, I should pay tribute to the former First Minister, Carwyn Jones, as well, effectively whose vision this was. Both Carwyn Jones and Mark Drakeford, as well, as First Minister, were huge supporters of this scheme, and it has truly been a group effort, a team effort, to get to where we are so far today. It will go on being a team effort, involving all of the regions of Wales as we seek to modernise the rail network across our country.

In terms of the four lines to the east of Cardiff Central, I'm afraid no commitment was given to me prior to the general election by UK Government Ministers of the need to upgrade the infrastructure and the willingness to do so. The City line, of course, will see improvements itself. We would like to see further improvements in terms of service provision in the future to that particular line, but, as I said to Natasha Asghar, unfortunately, we are relying on the UK Government for a decision over investment in that particular piece of infrastructure.

With regard to pay-as-you-go ticketing, I think this is a really, really exciting initiative, and, essentially, it's based on new zonal fares, so it will always capture you the least expensive option for tickets. It will also have a capped rate, as well, so that you are never paying more than you would do if you were to purchase the individual tickets. Effectively, it's how people pay for travel on the London underground. It's already in operation on services on the Ebbw line and between Newport and Pontyclun, and it's going to roll out to the entire south Wales metro area this year. But, as Jenny Rathbone mentioned, the ultimate ambition is to have this as an integrated payment system, integrated with bus services, and, ultimately, not just in the south-east Wales metro area. I'd like to see it taken further; I'd like to see this become a national approach, but it would require a huge amount of investment in the infrastructure at stations and in digital infrastructure. But it is not an ambition that we should shy away from.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement? Obviously, there's a great deal of excitement in the region that I represent about some of the changes that are coming into play and, obviously, the new fleet is very welcome. But you will know that one of the concerns was around toilets on the new fleet. This is a huge concern of constituents of mine, especially looking at the timetable where, in the evenings, there will be one an hour. So, there are concerns, then, about what they are supposed to do. Do they have to wait on a platform for an hour? So, if they do need to go to the toilet, the advice was to get off the train, use the facilities at those stations. Is there a guarantee those facilities will be open? Also, in terms of passenger safety, will that be assured, because people are nervous about the idea of getting off a train late in the evening? So, on just some of the practicalities, I wonder if you could clarify.

Also, in terms of the last train from Treherbert back to Cardiff Bay, the last one is at 21:12, which means if you want to enjoy dinner in the Valleys or go to the Parc and Dare in Treorchy, actually, you'd have to leave before the end of the play. So, what plans are there to extend so that we're connecting not only Cardiff to the Valleys, but ensuring that people can access the services and spend money in our Valleys before returning to Cardiff?

These are superb questions that I have raised recently and will be continuing to raise with Transport for Wales in the coming weeks. I am meeting with the chief executive in a couple of weeks' time, and it was my intention, actually, to raise the issue of cleanliness of stations, of safety at stations and the provision of toilets, having myself recently travelled late in the evening between Chester and Wrexham. The service provision was excellent, but it did strike me that we have to ensure, for women in particular, that stations are as safe as they can possibly be.

In terms of toilets, the south-east Wales metro will be no different to pretty much any other metro in the United Kingdom or around the globe. I don't know of another metro that has on-transport toilets. Certainly, in terms of trains, there can be toilets included, but in terms of metro vehicles—so, the trams, if you like—very few manufacturers, if any, provide such vehicles with toilets on board, and it's largely because of how narrow they are and disability access being difficult with how narrow they are. But it does mean that the provision of toilets at stations is vitally important. I'll take up the Member's points with the chief executive of Transport for Wales. I'll ask him to outline any service provision that is going to be improved in the coming months and years regarding toilet facilities and safety at stations, because I think this is a really important point to make for people who would, perhaps, use train services of an evening but are put off because of a fear over their security or the provision of toilet facilities. 

All our services are revenue dependent. Basically, they have to have a subsidy in order to operate, with the exception of very few services, primarily those between Cardiff and Manchester and, I believe, north Wales mainline services to Manchester as well. They are the ones that generate the highest levels of revenue. Our ambition for later evening services is based on the need to increase the farebox from other services. The whole point of the metro within the south-east Wales area is that we'll be providing more services to more passengers, which will generate a higher farebox, which will then enable us to use the subsidy in other areas of Wales and, indeed, later into the evening and potentially earlier into the morning. So, essentially, we're going to be raising the farebox in order to pay for enhanced services right across Wales. 

Cabinet Secretary, as we've already mentioned in this statement, outside the core Valleys lines, the Welsh Government's ability to make transformational change is more limited, and obviously partnership with the UK Government is vital. As you do, I'm sure, I hope for a new UK Labour Government in short order. How would you work with a new UK Labour Government, if we have one, on projects such as new rail stations at Magor, Llanwern and Somerton in Newport East, which could help bring that transformational change beyond the core Valleys lines? And would you agree with me that having CAF, the train manufacturer, in Wales—again in Newport East, in my constituency—has been very important in contributing to the new rolling stock and will be very important for the present and future?

I thank John Griffiths for his questions. I would agree, the presence of CAF in Newport is enormously important for the region and for the whole of Wales. We're very proud to have been able to attract CAF to Wales, building those fantastic 197 trains that many of us use on a very regular basis, increasing the quality of service provided and providing reliability. The presence of CAF, I think, has also brought the attention of decision makers at a UK level to what we could deliver further west in Wales, the global centre for rail excellence. We know that train manufacturers have to undergo testing, but that testing takes place on main lines and on branch lines. It would be something for the whole of Europe to celebrate in terms of the rail industry if we could deliver the global centre for rail excellence. And it's something I would hope a future UK Government—and as I see it, hopefully a future Labour Government—would indeed invest in. 

In terms of the additional stations that John Griffiths outlined, of course, the south-east Wales commission identified these additional stations as being vitally important as part of the report by Lord Burns and his team, and they were also identified through the union connectivity review as being vitally important. So, as we look towards a future UK Government, we will, no doubt, be discussing investment opportunities right across Wales. But, of course, the two big pieces of work recently regarding rail infrastructure have concerned north Wales, with the north Wales transport commission, and then the south-east Wales transport commission, looking specifically at the Newport area and the wider area around the M4. So, we're keen to make sure that we can progress with delivery against those reports, and that would include, of course, additional railway stations. 

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that statement. 

We will now move to the motion to suspend Standing Orders to allow item 8, on the steel industry in Wales, to be debated. If I could call on the Cabinet Secretary to formally move that we suspend Standing Orders. 

I formally move.

Yes, it is moved. The proposal is to suspend Standing Orders. Does any Member object? No. There are no objections, and therefore that is agreed. 

That does enable us to move to the debate on the steel industry in Wales. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for economy to move the motion—Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Llywydd. Steel is an important part of our lives, and we are fortunate to have the opportunity to make primary steel and electric arc steel in Wales. Steel is the basis for our broader manufacturing industry and produces materials that are crucial if we are to move to net zero. As with every sector of our economy, companies in the steel sector have been focusing on how they can too, in order for us to achieve our commitments in terms of the changes to our climate that are seen across the world. It is crucial that the sector continues to be a cornerstone of our economy and continues to be at the heart of our communities. Changing to low-carbon steel is crucially important to reach that objective.

I'm of the view that the steel production industry has a viable future in Wales if we can change in a way that will help to create a stronger, greener future for the Welsh economy. Although the change in Port Talbot means that steel manufacturing will be safeguarded in Wales for the future, I, like you, am very concerned indeed about the scale of the changes by Tata, how quickly they are happening, and about the loss of capacity to produce steel in the short and medium terms.

We recognise, Llywydd, that research and development is taking place to explore how electric arc furnace steel can produce a wider range of products, but key sectors in the UK—automotive and packaging, for example—still require products produced from virgin steel. Tata is having to import the slab and hot rolled coil substrate required during the transition for its downstream businesses.

As Members are aware, Tata Steel announced on 25 April its decision to reject the multi-union proposal. We did not want to see this decision. It will now progress to closing blast furnace 5 in June and blast furnace 4 in September, along with the wind-down of the heavy end at Port Talbot. The continuous annealing processing line will close in March 2025. We believe a better plan is available. Had Tata accepted the recommendations in the multi-union report commissioned by the UK steel committee, this would've meant a longer, slower and fairer transition. It is extremely frustrating that a deal was not reached at an earlier stage in negotiations between Tata Steel and the UK Government. An earlier deal could also have led to a longer and fairer transition. It is also disappointing that the Welsh Government was excluded from negotiations, leaving us unsighted on aspects that touch on devolved competence.

For many months now, steel workers and their families, businesses and communities have been bracing themselves for job losses that would occur as a result of an early transition to electric arc steel production at Port Talbot. The level of job losses that we are facing is devastating. Tata Steel has announced that up to 2,800 jobs are expected to be lost as part of its transition plan, around 2,500 of which would be impacted in tranches over the next 18 months, with the first tranche now expected this September. The company expects that a further 300 roles would be lost in around three years' time at the Llanwern site. The full scale of job losses, including those in the wider economy, is not fully known, but could be up to 9,500.

To ensure immediate support for those impacted, we are working with the Tata transition board to make them aware of and able to access all the support available to the workforce right now. I, and others on the transition board, have made it clear that we want it to be as easy as possible for people to get the support they need and for that to happen quickly. A one-stop-shop information portal has been set up on the Neath Port Talbot website. This provides information on all the support available to people and businesses and I would ask Members for your help in promoting it to your constituents.

The transition board has agreed five broad areas for support. These cover job matching, skills and employability, the establishment of a supply chain transition fund, the establishment of a business growth and start-up fund, support for mental health and well-being, and regeneration projects that will help ensure a future for the economy in Port Talbot. The Welsh Government has programmes already in place to assist employees affected by redundancy to get back into work. Our employability and skills programmes ReAct+ and Communities for Work Plus can provide support for training and mentoring to those who wish to remain in the labour market. Business Wales provides support for individuals facing redundancy should they wish to consider starting their own business, as well as accessing business finance.

Alongside the priority of immediate support to workers, we must look at the opportunities to develop local economies and sustainable employment, particularly in Port Talbot and the surrounding area. We need to retain as many Tata workers as we possibly can. These are highly skilled workers, and we need their talent and their commitment to remain in Wales. The transition board has commissioned a local economic action plan setting out proposals that could, potentially, limit the short-term impacts and provide for a positive future for the region in the longer term. The transition board will use the LEAP as a road map in considering the allocation of funding.

Many of the future economic opportunities are linked to our wider effort to transition to net zero in south Wales. The Celtic free port has a very clear focus on manufacturing and port infrastructure to support floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea, building on their connections to two deep seaports. Celtic has also identified specific opportunities for clean energy linked to hydrogen, sustainable fuel, carbon capture and storage, cleaner steel and low-carbon logistics. From a manufacturing and supply chain perspective, there are opportunities for Wales-based companies in areas such as the development of floating and fixed offshore wind, making our housing stock more energy efficient through the optimised retrofit programme, building our capacity to power vehicles in the future through electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and the manufacture of components for electric vehicles. We are building supply chain maps to help companies bidding for offshore wind licences to be able to find a Welsh supply chain.

Significant increases in renewable generation to meet increased demand will require new electricity transmission network infrastructure. Analysis from our 'Future Energy Grids for Wales' report shows that our electricity demand may almost triple by 2050. This will bring significant supply chain opportunities. Through the work carried out by the south Wales industrial cluster, now being taken forward with Net Zero Industry Wales, there is a vision for how industry can be decarbonised right across south Wales. Developments in potential carbon capture utilisation and storage solutions are looking at significant next-stage investments. These could be critical in enabling decarbonisation of industrial assets and accelerating decarbonisation solutions across south Wales, including the supply of hydrogen.

Recently, Celsa was awarded more than £13 million from the industrial energy transformation fund for a new furnace with all of the accompanying site-based infrastructure to operate with up to 100 per cent hydrogen fuel. The project will be a significant step in Celsa's decarbonisation pathway. I welcome the UK Government's shortlisting of Associated British Ports Port Talbot for a share of its £160 million floating offshore manufacturing and infrastructure scheme. However, it is recognised throughout the sector that the Celtic sea requires more than one port to deliver an integrated solution to maximise the economic benefits for the UK, and I am, therefore, keen to explore additional funding from the UK Government for the port of Pembroke.

Llywydd, the loss of jobs due to the speed of the transition away from blast-furnace steel making is heartbreaking. I'm committed to doing all that we can to support workers faced with redundancy, their families and the wider community. The loss of the capability that blast-furnace technology provides is a huge concern for the economy, and I urge Tata Steel to consider options now in light of the decision to hold an early general election and the very welcome prospect of a Labour Government. The loss of jobs in the wider economy is also potentially devastating, and I'm committed to working with our partners, including a future UK Government, to identify and to support future opportunities in new markets. 

I have selected the six amendments to the motion, and I call on Samuel Kurtz to move amendments 1 and 2.

Diolch, Llywydd. I thank the Government for bringing forward this debate, the topic of which this Senedd has rightly spent much of its time over the last few months debating. I move the amendments in the name of my colleague Darren Millar, and confirm that the Welsh Conservatives will be supporting amendments 3 and 4, but not 5 and 6.

Steel making as an industry is one that contributes to every aspect of the country. We've been clear on this side of the Chamber that we wanted to see one blast furnace remain open during the transition from blast to electric arc. We're disappointed that Tata did not take this course of action.

Cabinet Secretary, I was grateful for the mentions during your opening of this debate to the potential opportunities as we move forward in that transition period. I noticed the mentions to the Celtic free port, floating offshore wind—two elements that I've been a big advocate for. And knowing the contributions of other Members in this Chamber, who I'm sure will speak later on—the Member for Aberavon, for example—the need for that just transition in this instance is really important. The Celtic free port will be an opportunity for new jobs in the area of Port Talbot and the wider communities, but it's that transition from here now to that future point and how we support workers in that area.

I'd also like to commend at this point the work of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee on their inquiry into steel making following the announcement by Tata last year, ably chaired by Paul Davies, and Luke Fletcher on the committee as well, who I'm sure will follow me in speaking in this debate. I think some good work was done in that committee in exploring steel making in Wales. Some opportunities, yes, but also seeing the challenges they're currently facing. Cabinet Secretary, you raised some of those around grid capacity, as one example. But I think the report by the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee does need to be taken into consideration when discussing the future of steel making in Wales, because I think the quality of it really does speak for itself.

But while these changes are set to go ahead and the workforce deal with the anxiety of redundancies, let's ask ourselves what this Labour Government has done to support them. Nothing. What funding has the Welsh Labour Government provided to the workers in Port Talbot since 2019? Nothing. What has the Labour Government contributed to the transition board created to support workers and the wider community? Nothing. And while on this topic, the previous First Minister said in March of this year that the Secretary of State, and I quote,

'has never once visited Port Talbot.'

Well, that's just not true, I'm afraid. The Secretary of State has twice visited Port Talbot, in April and September of last year. And when the Secretary of State for Wales offered to speak to the First Minister, that call was not answered. 

I've raised in this Chamber before the concerns that employees who have specific skills will not be able to transfer those skills to other jobs without undertaking more qualifications, because their current accreditation is for Tata employment only. Now, the Labour Government here has often raised that, when it has supported Tata workers—that was before 2019, as I've noted—it was in terms of training and skills development. So, what I'd like to know is what guarantees were there that the support, once given by the Welsh Government, had specific strings attached to it, meaning employees would have fully transferable qualifications, or was previous Welsh Government support given without any caveats?

We welcome the £500 million-worth of support from the UK Government, without which Tata would have shut Port Talbot completely. Steelworkers will be retained, skills won't be lost, and steel will continue to be made in Wales, just not how we would have liked it to have been in terms of that transition period that I'm sure will be touched on further on. 

We also welcome the £100 million transition fund, 80 per cent of which comes from the UK Government, 20 per cent from Tata, that will go towards, as the Cabinet Secretary pointed out, skills and employability, supply chain, business growth and start-ups, supporting mental health and well-being, and the wider regeneration of Port Talbot. We really should lean into this fund and the work that it could do, not just for those made redundant but for the wider community too. So, it is a shame, a real shame, I believe, that this Labour Government has decided not to contribute in monetary terms to this fund. 

And Labour pose—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

It's going to be part of my contribution, but do you accept the fact that—? You've used 2019, I'll go back to 2016, if you want to, and tell you the UK Government failed to do anything in 2016 for the Welsh steelworkers. But let's talk about the current—. Do you accept that the Welsh Government has actually invested money now? There's money available, people are using it, under the PLA for access to learning—the personal learning accounts—because they've actually changed the cap criteria for workers at Tata and the contractors to allow them to access that. So, there is money available today for people to actually retrain, redevelop, under the PLA.

We could go back to the year 2000 and how little was done by the Labour UK Government in the year 2000. But the point that the Member for Aberavon makes is valid, and I will give consideration to the point that changes have been made. But when it comes to the transition board itself, and the specifics aligned to the transition board, the amount of experience and expertise on that transition board—I think that's where there is sadness that the Welsh Government hasn't taken a more proactive funding involvement in that transition board. I'm very conscious of the time, so I will, if I may, just continue ever so slightly, Llywydd. I'm grateful for the intervention from the Member for Aberavon.

In terms of what Labour's choices will be—and we talked about it, and previous Members have spoken before; let's wait and see what a UK Labour Government will bring—what will a Labour Government bring? They've got £3 billion for a green steel programme, but that already equates and includes the £500 million that the Conservative UK Government has allocated to Port Talbot. So, is there any more money coming from that green steel plan from Labour? We might hear some more of that from Members here today. But what else is happening? Because there's no guarantee whatsoever that a UK Labour Government—an incoming, potentially, I hope not, UK Labour Government—would actually do anything different to what's happened at the moment. And there might be Members here who may have to eat their hat—I may be one of them—but I stand to be corrected. I do not see any involvement there in that sense.

I do believe that there is a positive steel-making future for Wales. I think there is an opportunity for steel making in Wales. We've touched on the Celtic free port, we've touched on the opportunities around infrastructure. Procurement I think is also something that we can look to explore, and, obviously, the opportunities around floating offshore wind. But when it comes to the decisions being made by this Parliament, and this Government specifically, I think Members of the south Wales industrial cluster, and areas along the south-Wales corridor, will understand that the Conservative Government have put their hand in their pocket, and Welsh Labour here in the Senedd have not. Diolch, Llywydd.

I call on Luke Fletcher to move amendments 3, 4, 5 and 6, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Luke Fletcher.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the amendments tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. I'll start by saying that Plaid Cymru support what is set out in the original motion. As far as this goes, we are clear that there is a future for primary steel making in Wales and that our steelworkers should be supported, but this is, frankly, a statement of the obvious. The original motion doesn't get us to taking the actions we need to take to ensure that there is a future for steel in Wales. Without outlining these, there would be little point in passing the motion.

This debate comes at the eleventh hour, with the first blast furnace due to close this month. Despite this, the original text of the motion is almost identical to the one we debated back in February. The motion as presented doesn't condemn Tata's decision, and nor does it set out a vision for a brighter future. It simply says that we believe there should be a future, with no specific steps outlined on the path to it. At a time when workers in the communities are desperate for action, we need to do more than reaffirm what has already been said. We need to move this debate forward as, I must say, I and my colleagues in Plaid Cymru have been trying to do for months.

I will say that I take issue with the way in which the whole debate has been characterised by the Tories. This line being pushed constantly that Welsh Government hasn't contributed financially to Tata is only part of the picture, isn't it? In fairness to the Labour Government, back in 2016, as Dai Rees pointed out, and in fairness, actually, to Carwyn Jones—we all have heard the stories of him camping outside the offices in Mumbai—Tata wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the actions taken back then. I'd also say it's difficult to know where you can slot in support if you're not involved in the initial conversations around setting up the transition board, and are not receiving the correct data either from Tata.

Successive Conservative Governments in Westminster share the lion's share of the blame for why things are the way that they are. They have lacked vision in setting out what the future of steel and, more broadly, the industrial sector could look like, and with straight faces, Conservative Ministers have stood up to say that a £500 million package to Tata in exchange for 9,500 job losses is a fair transaction. They haven't had the courage to take control of the situation and forge a new path—a path independent of a multinational organisation that cares nothing for the communities that rely on it.

We've heard from the Conservatives that this isn't what they would have liked to happen, so why accept that this is it? Unfortunately, it's the lack of courage that Labour and this Welsh Labour Government has risked mirroring. Here is an opportunity to set out what exactly is meant by the £3 billion for steel. So far, no-one has been able to tell me precisely how much of that will go to Port Talbot directly. Here is an opportunity to show a way forward, how this Senedd can make a meaningful intervention. Here is an opportunity to live up to the mantra that we do things differently in Wales. I stand by what I've said all along. Why should we allow a multinational half the world away to dictate the future of our communities? Tata won't change their mind, they've made that clear—even if there is a change in Government. So, why should we continue to stare down the barrel of the gun that is post-industrial deprivation that is threatening to rear its head again?

Take control. Nationalise the site in Port Talbot. Let's make the investments ourselves, let's set the strategic direction ourselves and let's regain some dignity. Because right now, our communities are looking to us for leadership, and I fear that we will have failed them if this motion passes unamended. It's not as if there isn't a plan ready to go, the unions have already done the work.

I don't think any of us here would want to look back at this time and wonder whether one thing or another could have worked. Now, he who dares, wins. Well, the Government should dare to win. Let's push for nationalisation of Tata's site. Failing that, let's look at how we can conserve its assets there, to secure a future for primary steel making in Wales. And let's create a path to a new future for our workers and their communities.

Can I thank the Government for bringing this forward? It is an important debate we have discussed. Because as you've already pointed out—three people already have said—blast furnace No. 5 shuts down this month, blast furnace No. 4 in September. Now, I remember, actually, the explosion at No. 5, where three men lost their lives. That was 20-odd years ago, and it has been rebuilt. So, we understand the timescale for No. 5.

It's about steel making. It's about the industry. The UK has actually been producing steel, and it's one of our sovereign assets. It's a foundational industry. It makes steel in everything we use. How many of us got up this morning and used the microwave for our breakfast, or the toasters? Drove our car in? Came by train? Rode a bike in, possibly? Opened the fridge, got the milk out for their Weetabix this morning. The steel we use every day is here. Some of that, actually, was made in Port Talbot. Whether you've got tins of baked beans, or I fed my dog this morning with a tin. Was that from Port Talbot? We don't know, but it is the steel we use.

It's a foundational industry. It builds our manufacturing base. And yet we are here debating what's happening to that industry. That it's going to disappear. Primary steel making will not be here. We'll get rid of it, or Tata will get rid of it, and unfortunately, the UK Government has supported them in doing that by putting £500 million in without any conditions upon it to ensure there's a transition to other forms of primary steel making.

You can go green with primary steel making. It's a disappointment that the UK government didn't even think about it. And it did take them—what? We nagged and pressurised for how many years to get some form of steel sector deal, or even a strategy on steel? And when they come out with it, their strategy is £500 million, get rid of the blast furnaces. That's it.

So, whether we are living in a geopolitical world or not, we are vulnerable without primary steel making in this country. And so Port Talbot becomes a crucial contributor to that sector. But it's not just steel for our town. It's more than that, because it runs through generations of families in our town. And I go to schools and I see children who want to aspire to what their parents are doing in their job lives, or what their grandparents did, whether that be in the Port Talbot steelworks or in the industries that serve Port Talbot steelworks. They see it. And as one of our Community union officers said at the conference a few years back, steel is in our DNA. It's part of us.

Now, there is an alternative. We've talked about this before. The steel trade unions, as has been highlighted, put this Syndex plan forward. Not their plan, by the way—it's an experts' plan. They put it forward and it has been rejected, and it's a shame Tata just threw it out like that, because it worked. It survived the blast furnaces; No. 4 would keep working whilst they built an electric arc. By the way, the electric arc they're talking about would be the biggest ever built. Most other places are not building 3 million tonne electric arcs, they're building 1.5 million tonne electric arcs, to work with blast furnaces. And Tata are building blast furnaces in India. Germany's building blast furnaces. It seems strange that we're not doing that, that we're getting rid of it, and we're going to rely upon imported steel for our tins and our cars and our microwaves.

But along with steelworkers, we do need to accept change. It's coming. We don’t deny that. But it's how we get that change happening, how we transition into the process of the green direction. And that's what should be grasped. And I hope that any incoming government—and I hope it's a red government, but it could be any government coming in—grasps the opportunity of saying, ‘Actually, let's change it’. Let's work with our communities. Let's get the people who we're putting on the dole, who we're putting out of opportunities, children who are seeing their hope disappear—let’s put something there for them, let's grab those opportunities to do so. And I hope that the UK Government coming in will actually do that. 

Now, the question about £3 billion. Let's be honest about it. We don't know where it'll be spent, but we do know there's a figure there. There was never a figure with the previous Governments. And you do also have to negotiate where that figure is spent and how it's used to actually build a green steel economy. What elements do you want to focus upon? What elements can you encourage other industries to come in and put their revenue in? So, it's important that we know that there's money there, and we know that there is a negotiation that will go on as to how that money is spent. 

The other aspect we've talked about—I'm going to go on; I've got a little time. About the amendments that were put in—. The Conservative amendments, I'm sorry, but, prior to what we've seen in previous years, say MacGregor, 2016, when you did nothing—I'm sorry, I can't listen to those discussions. And I accept what you say—. No. 3, I totally accept amendment 3. No. 4, clarity is okay, we need to get it, but No. 5 and No. 6, I'm listening. I'm keen to listen, but there are so many practicalities. Compulsory purchase of blast furnaces—what does that mean? Who's going to be employed to do that? Are you going to employ people? How is it going to actually transfer raw materials in if you're going to keep it going? Where's the steel going to go if you keep it going? If you shut it down, how is it going to be managed? Where is it going to be staying? How will you operate it? How do you access it, because, actually, the land around it is not accessible?

So, there are a lot of practicalities here. Great headlines, but what actually does it mean to the people in the town, to the people in the works to actually see how it can work? And if you want to mothball it, that's what they're doing now. So, it's no different to what Tata are proposing, just shutting it down and mothballing it. So, it is important, what are the deals there, and with the—. Nationalisation, you and I both, Luke, went to the talk on nationalisation. He put forward a temporary nationalisation just to keep it going temporarily until we actually get somebody to buy into it, but, the investment required to do all that, where's that going to come from? Because, let's be honest, we haven't got it in this Government, in this Senedd. It's not just the £3 billion that we're talking about; we need joint investment in that case, so if you're going to talk about nationalisation, how are you going to fund the nationalisation? How are you going to get the marketplaces? Who's going to manage it? How is it going to be delivered? Because you're in a business world, not a public service world. So, there are a lot of questions I want to hear answers to on those points that I haven't yet heard.

I've gone over my time, Llywydd; I'm going to stop. But one thing. The people of Port Talbot want to see this Government fight for them. They want to see us working for them. They want to see UK Government doing so. And that's why, in my view, we have to change the Government, because the previous Governments have not done that. 

In every statement and debate we have on Tata—and we've had a few, as Members have mentioned—we always hear the Welsh Government refer to the difference a Westminster Labour Government could make to the future of the plant at Port Talbot and the fate of the thousands of its workers, and today was no exception. And, of course, we heard Keir Starmer say when he was in Wales last week that he would fight for every single job and for the future of steel in Wales. But there were no details on what that actually looks like, and you asked a number of questions, David Rees. Well, I would say that the Welsh Government and Keir Starmer are the people who need to work and should have been working on the answers to those questions, because the political reporters who were reporting on Keir Starmer's visit pointed this out. Gareth Lewis of BBC Wales was among those who said of the statement that no-one is quite sure what it means, and of this £3 billion steel fund, what exactly are they going to do with it, Gareth Lewis asked. And so, for me, the question that really needs to be answered today, although it should have been answered, perhaps, months ago, is: what is the plan? 

Tata have not indicated they've got any interest in keeping the blast furnaces open, even if Labour win this election and are in Government by July. So, what exactly will a Labour Government in Westminster do to convince Tata to change their minds? What's the deal that will keep the blast furnaces running? Or is there another plan, as our amendments make clear and outline? Will Keir Starmer act on these calls to nationalise Port Talbot steelworks temporarily? All the ideas that Adam Price and Luke Fletcher have contributed to this debate over many months. 

What will change? Because the workers, their families, their communities and all the businesses that serve them, the clubs and groups that depend on society and social life in this area, they really deserve more than soundbites. They need more than warm words. We have called on Welsh Government to act in that regard. As I said, we've spelt out ways in which Welsh jobs and Welsh steel could be safeguarded, but that action could now be backed and supported by a Labour Government in Westminster earlier than was anticipated. So, we need planning, action and details—yes, we do. What dialogue is happening with Tata? It's Government's job to work these things out, to look at the scenarios, answer the questions, do the modelling. It is disappointing that Tata have rejected the unions' plan, but we can't just wring our hands, we can't say, 'There's a shame.' There are questions here that need to be answered by this Government and the incoming Labour Government in Westminster.

As somebody who used to work in the research centre in Port Talbot pre MacGregor, and when it was under public ownership, I have some comments I'd like to make.

The Port Talbot steelworks is currently an integrated steel production plant, capable of producing nearly 5 million tonnes of steel slab per annum from iron ore. 'Integrated' means that you get the iron ore and the coke in, and you send out the cold rolled steel. So, everything is done on the one site. It's the larger of the two major steel plants in the UK. Over 4,000 people currently work at the plant, probably the same number again are working for contractors, and there's probably the same number again that are dependent on the works. The slab is rolled either on site at Port Talbot or taken to Llanwern to make steel strip products. Iron coming into Port Talbot, iron oxide, needs to be extracted from the ore in a blast furnace. The oxygen must be removed from the iron oxide in order to leave the iron. That's iron making; it's not steel making—steel making takes place later on in the process, at the basic oxygen steel plant. It then moves into steel making. Modern steel-making processes can be divided into three steps: primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary steel making involves smelting iron into steel. Secondary steel making involves adding or removing other elements, such as alloying agents and dissolved gases. Tertiary steel making involves casting into sheet, rolls or other forms.

With an electric arc furnace, you are effectively recycling previously used steel. An electric arc furnace is a furnace that heats steel by using an electric arc, hence the name. To produce a tonne of steel in an electric arc furnace requires approximately 400 kWh per tonne. There are two main problems with electric arc furnaces. The first is the cost of electricity. In 2021, ArcelorMittal temporarily paused production at some of its plants at peak time, as soaring energy costs hit Europe's largest steel maker. That's happened with lots of other people who are using electric arc, when they discover that the cost of using electricity becomes uncompetitive. The company said the pause was aligned with the hourly daily changes in electricity prices, adding that they were in response to the high energy prices, which were making it very challenging to produce steel at an economical price.

In 2019, according to the World Steel Association, there were over 3,500 different grades of steel, encompassing unique physical, chemical and environmental properties. Far too often, we use the word 'steel' in the same way as we use the word 'plastic', as if it is one thing. It's a series of different items. The carbon content of steel is from 0.1 per cent to 1.5 per cent, but most is 0.1 per cent to 0.25 per cent carbon. There are four main types of steel, namely carbon steel, alloy steel, stainless steel, tool steel, plus, we have electrical steel, which the old works used to work on before it was, unfortunately, closed. While carbon steels contain trace amounts of alloying elements, and account for 90 per cent of total steel production, they can be further categorised into low-carbon steels, medium-carbon steels, and high-carbon steels. From this, it's obvious that just collecting steel and melting it will not work. It will need grading into types of steel.

To compulsorily purchase the blast furnaces, first, the Welsh Government need to try and negotiate to buy them. Why would Tata not want to transfer them to someone else, because, when iron and steel making end, they will be a liability? Unless you have a steel-making plant to send the iron ore to, then a blast furnace is of no use. In January this year, Saltzgitter blast furnace A was fired up following a complete modernisation, lasting just over 100 days. With the complete relining of the blast furnace concluded, the Saltzgitter group took a key operational step forward, securing its pig iron supply as it transforms towards low-carbon dioxide steel production by 2033. During the construction phase, blast furnace A was completely relined. Amongst other things, the refractory lining was renewed, with 3,000 tonnes of carbon bricks and other refractory material. The complex process and control technology was also modernised; just over €100 million was invested in the relining and upgrading. Why can the Saltzgitter group upgrade their blast furnace and Tata can't? Why, throughout the rest of the world, are people having blast furnaces that are becoming low-carbon blast furnaces? And although it's not a fully proven technology, the use of hydrogen, instead of carbon, to reduce the iron oxide into iron is feasible, and I think it's a direction in which I would like to see us going. I don't believe there's a future for electric arc furnaces; I think that's just stage 1 of the closure process. And I think that we do need to keep the blast furnace, we do need to keep making iron and steel, and I think that, whatever we do, we may need to, again, take it back into public ownership, like it was when I was working there, though the people who worked there during that time will say those weren't exactly halcyon days.

We need to turn 'save our steel' from a slogan into a plan, don't we, and we've only got days, possibly weeks, to do that. So, we have to work together, and the resources of Government now have to be used, because it's only Government, ultimately, that have the ability, working with the unions, to actually bring forward a plan. And we've seen, haven't we, in the statements in the last few days, the complete arrogance from Tata. We now have to meet that arrogance with steely resolve on our part. Look at what the CEO, Rajesh Nair, has said just in the last few days: (a) they've taken off the table now the offer, in terms of the redundancy payments to the workers, because the workers have had the affront of using their trade union democratic vote to actually vote to defend their communities and their jobs. And so Tata have said, 'Well, we're no longer giving that to you.' But not only that, they've said that they're now

'reviewing whether we should now plan to bring forward the dates for the closure of BF5',

meant to close already this month. And what they're saying is, 'Look, we're going to go in quicker, in the next few days.' So, we need to act. We need to act now. Now, we've got, probably—almost certainly—a change of Government at Westminster in four weeks' time, so that's the gap, right, and we've got to fill that gap. We've got to defend the steel industry in Wales for the next four weeks. We're not going to get any help from Westminster in the meantime; the Parliament there is dissolved. This is the only Parliament for Wales at the moment, and it's the only one that can act. And we have the powers. We have the powers. We've checked. The Government lawyers will say the same, no doubt, as the Senedd lawyers: we have the powers to bring forward emergency legislation, using our Standing Orders—the Deputy Presiding Officer will know the method. It could be done in days. It could be done in days to bring forward a short Bill that will impose a compulsory purchase on those blast furnaces and the heavy end.

Now, Dai Rees, you're absolutely right. The critical thing here is the method of the decommissioning and, you know, there are umpteen different ways in which a blast furnace can be decommissioned, can be switched off, and some of them allow you—. Because sometimes there are outages, in terms of sometimes you manage demand, et cetera, so this happens. Sometimes you do it in order to reline. There are sometimes ways in which you switch off the furnace in order to restart it, and that has happened, indeed, at Port Talbot, hasn't it? It's happened at many steelworks around the world. But there are other ways that you can decommission a blast furnace, because you are absolutely clear that the direction of travel is in one direction only, and there is no way coming back economically from that. And that's what we have to prevent. That's the plan that we need, and what I suggest is: let's work with the consultants that worked with the unions, Syndex, to come up with a plan that actually builds the bridge over the next few weeks. I give way.

I thank the Member for giving way, and I fully understand what you're saying, the plan about decommissioning. You're quite right: decommissioning can either basically decommission it to be reused or decommission it to close it down, effectively. But I still ask the question—a compulsory purchase order on a blast furnace; I understand what you're saying—what do you do with the blast furnace? Who do you employ? How do you employ? What are all those other aspects that I need to know about? I'm trying to get answers for those aspects: how it would actually work and deliver for the people to ensure that we can shut it down and therefore enter a situation in which it can be reignited.

We will have to create a company, a holding company, that will run the blast furnace and the associated heavy end for that period at the minimum that is necessary in order to maintain the integrity of the asset, and we need to do work very, very quickly—over the next few days, ideally—to work out what is the cost of that, what exactly—. The best experts are the ones that you know, Dai—the people that work there. So, there are answers to all of these questions that can be found working with the unions and also with the unions' advisers, the Syndex consultants who are experts in the steel industry, to come up with a plan for a Welsh steel holding company, at least, while we consider what the future could look like. As other Members have said, I believe that the long-term future is in public ownership, though the idea of a Welsh steel co-operative as well should be considered as part of the mix. But our immediate plan has to defend the site against Tata's stated intention, which is to get rid of it, to turn it off in a way that it can be never restored. We have the legal power to prevent that; let's get the plan ready and bring that legislation forward on the floor of the Senedd.

As David Rees mentioned with Port Talbot, so too with Llanwern in Newport: there's a tremendous history of steel making that resonates today, and many people still think of Newport as, to some extent, a steel town, now city.

In the early 1960s, when Llanwern was opened, some 13,000 employees and contractors were on site and there was a huge amount of accommodation created locally to house those workers, and many of the housing estates around Newport were at least partially built for Llanwern steelworkers. It was very much modern and state-of-the-art when it was first opened and very much integrated, and of course it's gone through a series of very drastic changes since that time, with the end of steel making and other partial closures of the works and redevelopment of part of the site. But it still remains a major employer locally in Newport, and of course very significant for employment in the wider south-east Wales area, including many of our Valleys communities.

So, the idea that some 300 jobs will go at Llanwern in a few years' time, as proposed under the current plans, is obviously very, very unwelcome in the Newport and wider area. We have a role to play, those of us who are local politicians, to make sure that Llanwern is considered in that overall steel picture in Wales, because understandably, of course, there is huge concentration on Port Talbot because of the number of jobs there, the capacity there, and of course the integration of Port Talbot with the other steelworks in Wales, but Llanwern, as I say, is very significant as an employer as well, and as with the other steel plants, it's not just those directly employed there; it's the contractors, it's the spend in the local economy, it's suppliers, it's all those wider issues. And the average age of the workforce at Llanwern is much younger than people think, in the early 30s, and we have quite a number of apprentices who very much want a future within the industry. 

When you talk to people—just to echo again what David Rees and others have said—they really do express astonishment at the attitude of the current UK Government in not seeming to realise that fundamental importance of the steel industry, for defence, for example, in what we know is such a dangerous and uncertain world at the moment; the importance for infrastructure, which we so badly need; for renewables, with their significance for the future; for construction and for manufacturing. People are absolutely amazed that there doesn't seem to be enough of an appreciation in the UK Government of that strategic, fundamental importance of our steel industry. So, of course, what we hope for in the Labour movement, working with our trade union colleagues and the workforce, is that we will have that new UK Labour Government in short order, with that £3 billion on the table to be used, with a very new approach, a very different attitude to the importance of steel making and the importance of our steel communities.

And I must say, when I was at the event in Abergavenny, Keir Starmer spoke very, very strongly and very passionately about the steel industry and the need to protect those jobs, the need to take that industry forward. There was a very strong commitment and a very strong sense of prioritisation, and it was one of the issues that he very much stressed on that occasion, and I think that augurs well for the partnership that we can have between a Labour Government in Wales and a new Labour Government in the UK.

The unions have done a lot of work with Syndex. There is a very significant amount of detail. It's there on the table to be used. Yes, decisions have been taken, but the timing of the election has now changed this, as others have mentioned. It's much earlier than nearly everybody expected, and that does give us new opportunities. The question is: will those opportunities be grasped, even at this late stage, by Tata, to understand the difference of this election date and the commitment from a new UK Labour Government? It's not too late. Let's hope sense prevails.

So, I rise to support the motion tabled by Jane Hutt, and I'm fundamentally of the mind that the motion is of profound importance to UK and Wales plc, namely that this Senedd believes retaining the capacity to produce primary steel in Wales is central to Wales's economic interests and the pathway to net zero. And I stress again, not only to Wales, but the United Kingdom. And 'a devolved administration', 'a DA', is how the UK Cabinet refers to Wales, and I can only state what a diminished, blinkered and myopic view of Wales and the United Kingdom the Tories have if they do not wish to see Wales and the UK retain its core ability to produce primary steel in Wales.

A UK Labour Government will invest in our steel industry. It will ensure the just transition to green steel, which is fuelled by the strong skills and true talent and amazing ambition of our Welsh steelworkers. Indeed, as has been said, Labour has earmarked £3 billion in total of investment over five years across the UK steel industry if we are elected. UK Labour's national wealth fund will invest £2.5 billion on top of the Government's planned measly £500 million in UK steel over the course of the next Parliament, and that is significant. Indeed, historic investments are now being made by our European steel-making competitors in green steel, but the Tory Government's chronic lack of ambition for Britain and its abysmal vacuum of any long-term strategy has let thousands of skilled workers down. It has also let their families down, and ultimately will result, if this continues, in a less safe United Kingdom.

Employment in the steel industry has been critically important to the communities of Islwyn throughout the recent decades, and has played a pivotal role in growing the Welsh economy and rising living standards. Indeed, in Islwyn is Tŷ Sign, and that's the largest housing estate in Caerphilly borough council, built in the early 1960s as a housing village for the Llanwern steelworks. It's a proud and strong community, and it's where three of my children were born and where I raised my family, and I know first-hand the importance of the steel industry to communities such as mine. And indeed, the Zodiac plant is critical to the automotive sector too.

But the Welsh Government has, on several occasions, explained to the Welsh Conservatives that Tata has not formally requested any funding since 2019. Over a period of many years, when Tata has applied for funding, whether it be for skills, research and development, or environmental projects, the Welsh Government has provided financial support, amounting to more than £17.5 million since 2009, and it's recognised by the business, by the steel trade unions and the UK Government, as a matter of common sense and fact, that the Welsh Government does not possess the requisite resources or powers that would allow it to intervene on the scale required for the transition necessary. And that's a fundamental issue. The UK Government has offered the £500 million pot to secure the current deal with Tata Steel UK, but this amount is equal to only 2.2 per cent of the annual budget Welsh Ministers are able to allocate directly. And for context, 2.2 per cent of the equivalent annual budget for the UK that Ministers can call on is not worth that; it's worth £11 billion. That context is everything.

So, given the high, but disproportionate role the Welsh steel industry plays in the wider UK sector, it is well understood, outside of political points scoring, that the UK as a whole bears a responsibility for the sovereign asset. This is why the forthcoming general election is so vital for Wales and the United Kingdom. And Labour will prioritise protecting our steel industry and the Tories will not.   

The Cabinet Secretary to respond to the debate, Jeremy Miles. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Well, we've heard in the debate this evening a shared view across the Chamber that there is a viable future for steel making in Wales within that transition that supports a stronger, greener future for the Welsh economy. And I think it is very important that that is a clear message that this Senedd sends on a cross-party basis. We've heard today, in particular, from David Rees and John Griffiths, but from others as well, about how extraordinarily difficult things are right now for employees and their families, as well as those within local communities. 

I want to address a number of points made in the debate, briefly, in closing. Sam Kurtz made a speech that I felt was unusually, if I may say, defensive and misrepresentative of the situation. I don't believe there is an audience for political knockabout in relation to a situation where there are 9,000 plus jobs at risk, and the debate should be based upon facts, even where we disagree. So, for the sake of correcting the record, let me explain what the financial commitments that each party has made are: the £500 million from the Conservative Party, I don't believe has yet even been spent; the £80 million, which has been earmarked for the transition board, not a single penny of that has, actually, been spent. Not a single penny of it is helping a single worker. That's the reality on the ground. The Welsh Government is committing funds. We have budgets around ReAct and Communities for Work, which total about £25 million on a Wales-wide basis. Our personal learning accounts budget on a Wales-wide basis is around £21 million. We've extended the eligibility of that for workers at Tata and in the supply chain. They'll be able to claim against those budgets. Those funds are being spent already. Those funds are actively being spent to support the workforce already. So, I think it's important to have that proper context for the discussion. And he talks about 'strings attached'. If the strings that the UK Government have attached to the £500 million are going to lead to 9,000 plus job losses, I think that's a bad deal. I think that is a bad deal and a better deal could have been struck by a better UK Government. 

I'll address the points that both Luke Fletcher and Adam Price made, in an effort—and I accept the goodwill effort—to seek alternatives to the plan. I don't see how the compulsory purchase of one asset in an integrated steel production facility by a body that has no capacity to manage those assets can be part of the solution. I think that the points that David Rees made in the debate exploring that are good points, they're valid points, they show an open mind. But I think there are very significant questions around that proposal. Similarly, in relation to the nationalisation of Tata, I don't think that reflects—

Would you give way?

Yes, certainly.

Everyone accepts that there are important questions to answer. The issue is that only you, as the Government, have the resources to be able to provide those answers. So, will you be voting, will you be accepting the amendment that refers to this option? And will you then be commissioning that work from your officials, working together with the trade unions and their advisers? 

It's important for the Government to engage with the realities on the ground. And whilst the points that Adam Price and Luke Fletcher are making are important contributions to the debate, I don't think they reflect the reality on the ground at Tata. And I think at this point, it's important that we engage with that.

It is essential that the company does everything it can to avoid compulsory redundancies within a workforce that has been particularly loyal. It is essential that it works with the transition board to ensure that employees get the help and support to reskill that they need, and it is essential that the transition board works faster to deliver that support. [Interruption.]

Thank you for taking the intervention. Do you agree—I think Adam Price highlighted the point—that we do need to talk to Tata, because the threat that Tata are putting on their workforce is totally unacceptable? They've come to an agreement, and now, because the workers have actually come to a view, they wish to express their view of how bad the deal is, and they wish to take action. By the way, it's not strike action; this is just work to rule and this is simply stopping overtime. So, it's not that, actually, they're going on strike, but the threat of taking away the offer to the workers has to be rescinded, and will you talk to Tata to ensure that they too understand that what they're doing, actually, is making the situation a lot worse than it could be?

Yes, and I agree with that point. I think David Rees makes a very, very important point. There have been negotiations around the terms of support for workers, and there has been an enhanced package, as it's been described, and it's important that continues to be available to workers so they have the best available support that Tata can provide. So, I would absolutely endorse the point that David Rees has made. 

What we are seeing is the speed of the transition to electric arc furnace steel making already having an impact today. The loss of the capability that blast furnace technology provides is a huge concern to our economy and makes us effectively reliant upon imports. We have now a decision to call an early general election. That does change the landscape in which Tata has taken its decision, and I would urge them not to take decisions that are irreversible against the context of that new landscape, when we have the prospect of a new Government with a new commitment to an industrial strategy, a new commitment to renewable energy infrastructure and a new commitment to steel production. That is the new reality, and I think Tata needs to reflect on that and look again at the decisions it's taken. We will then have a partner working with us as a Welsh Labour Government to protect steel making in Wales.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection to amendment 1. Therefore, we will defer voting under this item, and the rest of the amendments and the motion, until voting time. And unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will now move immediately to voting time. There are no objections to that.

We will, therefore, move to the series of votes under item 8, on the debate that we've just heard on the steel industry in Wales. The first vote is on amendment 1, and we will vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 36 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed. 

Amendment 2 is next, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 36 against. Amendment 2 is not agreed.

Amendment 3 is next, tabled in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 49, no abstentions, one against. Therefore, amendment 3 is agreed.

Amendment 4 is next, in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, no abstentions, 26 against. Amendment 4 is not agreed.

Amendment 5, in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 39 against. Amendment 5 is not agreed.

Amendment 6, in the name of Heledd Fychan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, the amendment is not agreed.

The final vote is on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 50, no abstentions, none against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

That concludes voting and brings our business to a close for today.