National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon and welcome to today's Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda will be questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language. The first question is from Hannah Blythyn.

I thank the Member for the question, Llywydd. I am grateful to the commissioner for preparing an independent report that gives us a detailed overview of the situation of the Welsh language. We have made progress regarding our targets to increase the number of Welsh speakers, and the use made of the language, and the report sets a constructive challenge to the Government in several policy areas.

Thank you for your response, Cabinet Secretary. Personally, as one who is learning Welsh, I appreciate the opportunity to practise conversing in Welsh every day—for example, by visiting Siop y Siswrn or having a pint in a pub in Mold. So, how is the Government working to expand opportunities for people, particularly in areas where the use of the language is lower?

I thank Hannah Blythyn again, and I congratulate her on everything that she's doing to learn and use the language. Of course, in the commissioner's report, the use of the language is one of the biggest themes in the report. She draws attention to the use of the language outside the classroom, in the workplace, and in the strongholds, and opportunities for people who are learning Welsh to use the Welsh language informally, as Hannah Blythyn said. We are funding those kinds of projects, through the mentrau iaith. We have expanded the Perthyn project during the current financial year. There is now more funding in that programme, and people can bid for funding in any part of Wales. I'm sure that, in Hannah Blythyn's constituency, those bids will be available. We already support the Gwyddgig community festival in Mold, which provides opportunities, activities, and so on, for families, children, young people, and the broader community, to use the Welsh language. I have heard, through the mentrau iaith, about a new scheme, Cymraeg yn y Coed, in Loggerheads park, where people can walk and speak Welsh at the same time.

Cabinet Secretary, you won't have missed, like I didn't, the Reform manifesto launch—what manifesto they had to launch—where Nigel Farage was asked specifically about the future of the Welsh Language Commissioner. He stated that he would want to scrap what he called 'quangos'. Now, we know that the importance of building and growing the language in Wales comes through evidence-based policy making, and then accountability in those targets and in those policies, to ensure that those targets then are met. But what we've seen from Reform is a scrapping of the million Welsh speakers, and now, we hear, a scrapping of the Welsh Language Commissioner itself. The likelihood is that a Reform Government would ultimately lead to a decline in the number of Welsh speakers in Wales on a consistent basis. It comes from a place where there is a lack of clarity and understanding about the position of the Welsh language in Wales from Reform themselves. Nigel Farage said in that press conference, from what I understand, that the Welsh language is thriving in Wales. He obviously is not aware that the last two censuses have shown a decline in the number of Welsh speakers in Wales. So, how important is the Welsh Language Commissioner in holding the Welsh Government, and other organisations, accountable in terms of Welsh language development and policy making, and also how important is it that, when we make policy, we're not doing it off the top of our heads?

I thank Tom Giffard for those remarks, Llywydd. Reform is an English nationalist party, personified in its leader, Mr Farage, who never comes to Wales without putting his foot in his mouth over anything to do with the nature of Wales, and particularly the Welsh language. The commissioner is not a quango at all. The commissioner is a creation of this Senedd, a symbol of our united determination to support the Welsh language, to do more to increase the number of people who speak it, and its daily use, and the commissioner, as demonstrated in her five-yearly report, does, I think, a very skillful job in supporting the efforts that are made through this Senedd, while at the same time providing constructive challenge to the Welsh Government and providing us with new ideas as to where we can do more and do better.

A vote for Reform in Wales is a vote to take Wales backwards, and particularly to damage some of those things that matter most to people in Wales. 

Question 2 [OQ63953] is withdrawn. So, we'll move immediately to spokespeople's questions this week. The Conservative spokesperson, Sam Rowlands. 

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, given that the Institute for Fiscal Studies has found that Wales receives not just the £1.20 Barnett consequential for every £1 spent in England, but, actually, that Wales receives around 25 per cent more funding per person than England for comparable services, do you accept that the issue facing Wales is not simply one of the amount of money coming from the UK Government, but about how effectively the Welsh Government is choosing to spend that money?

Of course, I agree with that proposition. I think it's a curious finding of the IFS. It's out of line with what official figures show—what Treasury figures show. And it's certainly out of line with the Gerry Holtham report on comparability in Northern Ireland, which actually found that current comparability factors don't take account of a number of expenditures at the UK level, which, if they are included—and they were in the Northern Irish context in his report—drive up the need for a more effective comparability factor to reflect the needs of that population.

Whatever the debates about whether it's 120 or 125, or should be more, the proposition the Member makes about the importance of how you spend money is, of course, something that preoccupies me in my job in all my conversations. 

Thank you for your response, Cabinet Secretary. A further report from the IFS yesterday has confirmed what we've been saying on these benches for years, and that is that, despite Wales receiving higher levels of funding per person than England, health and education outcomes in Wales continue to lag behind the rest of the UK. And they cite examples such as school absence, which is still 50 per cent higher than pre COVID, whereas, in England, it's largely gone back to pre-COVID levels. And they also cited that the average hospital stays are 40 per cent higher here in Wales than over in England. So, again, the issue is not simply about funding levels, but policy decisions and the way services are delivered by this Welsh Government. And, of course, at a time when that funding growth is slowing, it becomes even more important that every £1 of taxpayers' money is spent wisely. Yet, people across Wales continue to see examples of wasteful spending and poor priorities, and our front-line services remain under real pressure.

And, of course, within this Senedd term, decisions by the Welsh Government have consistently been supported by Plaid Cymru on the benches opposite me here, and they've prioritised, along with you, non-essential initiatives, rather than focusing on improving those core public services. So, whilst the Labour Government has received criticism for some of these decisions, Plaid Cymru tries to take the credit when things go their way. Do you think Plaid Cymru has had its fair share of criticism around some of these decisions as well? [Laughter.]

It's really not a question for me at all, Llywydd.

Let me make a more serious point to the Member that the other side of the coin from the amount of money you have to spend is the need you are trying to match. And the reason why, throughout the whole of devolution, and before it, Welsh patients spend longer recovering in hospitals than is the case in England is because we have an older, sicker and poorer population here in Wales. The conditions with which people present themselves in hospital require different sorts of treatment, and sometimes longer forms of treatment than would be the case if you had a younger, fitter and better-off population. So, it's a curious absence in the IFS report as well that, while it does provide its own account of the money that is provided and the use to which that money is put, it simply doesn't attend to the differential need that drives those sums of money and lies behind those policies.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Of course, I recognise that this is probably the last time I'll be asking these questions to you in this capacity, so I just want to say, whilst we've absolutely disagreed many a time in terms of philosophy, political positions, and probably policy very much so, I'll certainly acknowledge your principled position on different matters—which I may have disagreed with from time to time, of course—your commitment to this Chamber, and your part in the leadership you've shown over your time here. I wonder, as part of your outgoing few weeks here, Cabinet Secretary, whether you'd want to give any bits of advice for the person who's going to replace you in your position after the election here in May.

I thank the Member for what he's said. You haven't heard from me for the last time—Llywydd, I'm with you, a slight danger of more farewells than Dame Nellie Melba. I thank the Member for what he said. Advice to a successor: be bold, use the opportunity you have, know that the time you will have in any political office will be time limited, be guided by your values, do the things you do, of course, based on evidence, but primarily becuase of the things that you believe in, the things that brought you into the job you do in the first place.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Heledd Fychan.

Thank you, Llywydd. One of the things that I'm pleased that we've been able to do, Cabinet Secretary, in this Senedd is to build a consensus in terms of the Welsh language. As we heard in response to Tom Giffard's question earlier, it's clear that there are at least two Members of the current Senedd and perhaps more in the next Senedd who are going to be against the Welsh language. Could I ask how important do you think the fact that we have targets has been in terms of ensuring that we are in a stronger position in terms of the Welsh language? Do you think that we would see a step backwards in terms of the Welsh language if those targets were to vanish?

Thank you to Heledd Fychan. I think that the fact that we've created a consensus behind the Welsh language does reflect what people in Wales want us to do. That has changed over the time that I have been involved in the discussion. When I was growing up in Carmarthen, there was almost a daily argument about the Welsh language, and that didn't help anyone. Now, in this Chamber, we almost all support the Welsh language, and that is part of the strength of the language in Wales today. Targets are important to that, of course. They help us in terms of our ambition. The targets that we have were agreed across this Chamber. I want to see that continue for the future.

Thank you. I do think that it's important that we don't see the Welsh language being treated as something to score political points in the future, and I'm pleased that we've managed not to do that during this Senedd term.

If I could turn to another issue, namely the £14 billion of investment announced for rail, could you outline how you arrived at the figure of £14 billion? Will you commit to publishing a note explaining this, as there was some ambiguity in the answers given by the Cabinet Secretary for transport on this during questions yesterday, as he admitted that the figure could be higher and could be less? I'm sure that you agree that it's important, in terms of scrutiny and transparency, that this Senedd does obtain detailed information in terms of how much money will be released and when.

I heard Ken Skates responding to questions on the floor of the Senedd yesterday. I heard him explain the figures underpinning that £14 billion investment. He and Transport for Wales have published a document that sets out where the possibilities for investment arise in the future. I also heard Ken Skates saying that he would be willing to provide more information on those figures too. So, of course, I'm happy to speak to him and to try and get more details for Members. What the Cabinet Secretary for transport was saying was that, when you look to the future and you're trying to plan over a decade or more, then of course figures can change. It depends on many different factors and, today, we can't anticipate everything that'll happen in the future.

Thank you very much for that. Of course, we do understand that, but when something is presented as, 'There is £14 billion definitely coming to Wales', that's why we challenge that, because if I could quote you in 2019, in responding to announcements made by the Secretary of State for Transport at the time,

'not a single one of those business cases announced by the Secretary of State for Transport...has...seen...a single penny of funding...and there is no clarity at all on next steps and timescales to live up to that second set of commitments.'

Well, is that same thing not true regarding the £10 billion of the £14 billion that has been announced already? That's what we're trying to understand. Your Government says, 'There is £14 billion definitely coming to Wales', but that's not true from what we're seeing here.

Well, I don't think that is completely fair, Llywydd. The previous Government claimed, when it abandoned its plans to electrify the main line to Swansea, that it had a series of other plans ready to go that would compensate for the loss of the investment that they had promised. That turned out simply not to be true.

In the case of the £14 billion, the Welsh Government, with the UK Government, has published its prospectus. You can see the schemes, you can see the sums of money that are attributed to them, and you have a commitment from the UK Government that, over the period in which those schemes could be delivered, it will find that £14 billion that is needed for investment in Wales. I don't think it's feasible to expect—and I heard Ken Skates explaining this yesterday—to have detailed plans for each one of those schemes at this point in that cycle, but it is surely to be welcomed that we have a UK Government recognising the importance of those schemes and declaring its commitment to fund them.

I thank Rhianon Passmore, Llywydd. The stability provided in the spring statement will ensure that the people of Islwyn go on benefiting from direct investment in coal-tip safety, rail improvements, and town-centre regeneration, to mention just three. Now, an incoming Senedd Government will have an additional £555 million to respond to the needs of Welsh citizens in Islwyn and beyond.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for that initial response. The people of Islwyn will welcome the restoration of stability to the economic and public finances brought about by the UK Labour Government, against the backdrop of scalic geopolitical volatility. And, as a direct result, the Welsh Government settlement, for the first time, over the next three years is nearly £6 billion higher than it would have been under the spending plans set out by the previous UK Tory Government. Cabinet Secretary, what difference, on the ground, throughout Islwyn communities, will be visible from an extra £6 billion of public spending from Labour Governments in Westminster and Cardiff Bay over the years to come?

Well, Llywydd, the good people of Islwyn will see that investment in many different parts of their lives, as they already have, under a Labour Government, because Islwyn has already benefited from the twenty-first century schools investment, there's been new health developments in the constituency and, looking ahead, as I said, Llywydd, the investment in coal-tip safety has a direct relevance to so many communities in the Member's constituency. That's the difference that we are now able to make with that additional £6 billion.

And the spring statement was welcomed. I understand the political knockabout that goes on, but if you look at more serious commentaries, it was welcomed for the fact that it just reaffirmed spending plans, it reaffirmed fiscal plans, it didn't introduce new instability into the system, and the Chancellor was in the happy position of being able to identify £24 billion in a reserve that she will create over the three years of the spring statement period. 

Cabinet Secretary, I quite frankly believe that the Chancellor is out of her depth. Based on her spring statement, it's clear that she is living in a parallel universe and not in touch with what's going on in reality. Unemployment is up, inflation is up, growth is down. The Chancellor has no plan to fix our economy whatsoever. Cabinet Secretary, in response to the Chancellor's spring statement, you said, and I quote,

'What we're seeing today is encouraging for Wales. The global economic picture remains difficult—nobody is pretending otherwise—but the UK government's plan is working. The economy is stabilising, it's growing, and people in Wales will feel the benefit of that.'

Cabinet Secretary, I would love to know which plan it is that you think is going to be working, because quite frankly I'm mystified. Things are getting worse, not better. And I'd really appreciate it if you could kindly explain what specific projects will benefit my constituents within Newport and Islwyn from this spring statement. Thank you.

Well, there are two parts to that question, Llywydd. In terms of the forecasts that the Chancellor set out in the spring statement, inflation is actually down, not up, and the Bank of England and the Office for Budget Responsibility are clear that, on the terms that they knew at the time they wrote those reports, inflation would continue to come down. Interest rates have been cut six times since the general election, and the Bank of England was expecting interest rates to be cut at least twice more over the rest of this financial year. Productivity is up in those forecasts, disposable household income is up in those forecasts. Of course there are difficulties in the economy, that's not a surprise to anybody, but just a partial reading, picking a few things out of it and saying that that's the whole story, really does no service to people in Wales. 

And in terms of where people will see the specific benefits of that £555 million over three years—that's an additional £555 million, of course—that will be for the next Senedd Government to determine, not this one. 

I thank the Member for the question, Llywydd. Many pubs and restaurants in mid and west Wales benefit from the £335 million of non-domestic rates support we are providing in this financial year. This includes our permanent reliefs, worth £250 million annually, and the additional £78 million allocated to retail, leisure and hospitality. We've confirmed a further £8 million of targeted relief for next year.

Diolch, Cabinet Secretary. I very much welcome the recent Welsh Government announcement that pledges further financial support for hospitality businesses in Wales for the year 2026-27. The 15 per cent relief on rates bills for 4,400 hospitality businesses will be vital for the survival of many of these businesses in the coming year. Like many small to medium-sized businesses, pubs and restaurants, cafes and music venues face a number of financial challenges through rising costs and people not visiting these venues as much as they did pre COVID. But they are often at the heart of the community and provide crucial local employment, so our support for them is vital. 

Cabinet Secretary, do you agree with me that this additional support, along with other support such as the small business rates relief, does demonstrate the Welsh Government's commitment to supporting hospitality businesses in Wales?

Well, Llywydd, it is the most tangible demonstration of that commitment, and it's not the only one, as Joyce Watson has just said. I was very glad we were able to provide £8 million next year. That's £3 million more than the equivalent sum that we'll get in the consequential, and that has allowed us to extend the range of businesses that will benefit from that 15 per cent rate relief. So, it's a more generous scheme than in England, and it offers help to a wider range of businesses. And that's on top of two other new things that we're providing this year over and above the general business rate relief. The differential use of the multiplier that we've introduced for the very first time in Wales this year will benefit shops on the high street in those communities that Joyce Watson referenced, and the first year next year of a new transitional rate relief scheme worth £116 million over two years. The Welsh taxpayer makes enormous effort to support those businesses, and we do it on their behalf as a Welsh Government for exactly the reasons Joyce Watson suggested, Llywydd: the importance of these businesses to the local communities where they are rooted.

Last week, I met hospitality businesses in Tenby, many of whom raised serious concerns about the impact recent changes to business rates are having on the viability of their businesses. Indeed, I've raised this with you on the floor of the Senedd before, Cabinet Secretary. And the mood was bleak. But one conversation in particular stood out. A local business owner who now runs three businesses in the town told me that while their turnover has increased fourfold, they were actually more profitable when they were operating just one business. That just can't be right, because entrepreneurs who take risks, invest in their communities and create jobs for local people should not feel that they are being penalised for growing their businesses and employing more people. So, what would you say to those hospitality businesses in Tenby and across Pembrokeshire who increasingly feel that, under the current business rates system, success and expansion are being punished rather than celebrated?

Well, Llywydd, I think I would have explained to the business owner the help that the Welsh taxpayer is providing to businesses in Tenby—all the things that I have just outlined, all those things that those businesses get and would not get if it were not for the help mobilised on their behalf, and gladly mobilised, by this Welsh Government. So, I have no way of knowing the details of the case to which the Member refers, but I imagine that those businesses benefit from a whole range of support that's available to them because of the actions of this Welsh Government, with more help every year, not less.

Good afternoon, Cabinet Member. I just really wanted to come back to mid and west Wales and the issue around our business rates system and the hospitality sector. There are severe challenges, without a doubt. We're seeing, in towns across mid and west Wales, declining footfall, empty properties and struggling community businesses. So, one of the solutions surely is about rebalancing the system. One option, which I discussed with the Federation of Small Businesses, would be to introduce an increased business rates premium for large, out-of-town retail parks, these shopping centres that actually pull customers away from the very town centres that we should be supporting and protecting. So, I just really would be interested in your comments on how we can rebalance the situation with ensuring that our towns and our communities, which have these amazing resources, but are losing customers to out-of-town places, where people literally just drive to, park up, get out, shop and then walk away. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Well, Llywydd, I think I agreed a month ago, in these questions with Sam Rowlands, that there is a strong case for a fundamental review of the business rates system. The balance between in-town and out-of-town shopping is often raised in that context. I would have been pleased to have welcomed the Member to come to the meeting that I held with those large businesses when I was deciding to use a lower multiplier for high-street shops and to have a slightly higher multiplier on those large retail outlets that are often in those out-of-town shopping areas, because they certainly would not have subscribed to the points that the Member just made.

But there are other ways in which I think a rebalancing of the system ought to be explored. We provide small business rate relief to businesses whether they need it or not. There is no assessment of need in this. It's simply if your retail value is below a certain figure, you get the help. And we don't differentiate between those businesses that are thriving and would be perfectly profitable without that help, and those businesses that need more help. We don't distinguish between start-up businesses, where you might think the case for public investment to help a business to get off the ground would be stronger, compared to businesses that have been getting business rate relief for years and years and years. There are many ways, I think, in which the very large sum of money that is invested in this area could be used differently. I know that my party, if we are to be in Government in the next Senedd term, will wish to take a root-and-branch look at the way the system operates.

I thank the Member, Llywydd. The setting of budgets and council tax levels each year is a matter for local authorities. I ask councils to carefully consider the balance between maintaining services and the financial pressures on households, and to engage meaningfully with communities on the decisions they make.

Diolch. Year on year, residents across my region are being hammered by eye-watering council tax rises by Labour and Plaid-run councils, but getting slashed services and getting less for their money. Proposed rises in my region include almost 6 per cent in Monmouthshire and over 6 per cent in Caerphilly. Reform in Wales has committed to capping council tax rises at 4.99 per cent, with any council wanting to go above that being required to hold a local referendum. Do you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that local government has long been underfunded by the Welsh Government, and that that needs to be addressed? There have also been councils who have been very lackadaisical and quick to reach for the levers to increase council tax, rather than find efficiency savings. Putting in place a referendum at 4.99 per cent will encourage councils to find those savings. Diolch.

I've got good news for the Member, which I'm sure will cheer her up, because council tax rises in her region are lower next year than this year, and lower than the year before. So, they will have the lowest council tax rises in the last few years. Again, some good news for her, and indeed for her residents, is that there will be no need to engage her referendum, because in her region, the average council tax rise next year is 4.96 per cent, so it would not be captured by her referendum. People will save all the money that she would spend on holding a referendum in the first place.

Here's another piece of good news for her: there's an extra £112.8 million going into local authorities next year as a result of the budget that was passed in the Senedd and that she voted against. Despite her complaints about underfunding, she voted against an extra £112.8 million for those local authorities.

This Government believes that local authorities are best placed to make decisions on the responsibilities that they exercise, and they face their electorate when they come to the end of their term. That is the way in which to exercise democratic oversight of their decisions. Local authorities should be allowed to exercise those responsibilities, and then their electors can cast a verdict on their discharge.

Cabinet Secretary, I'm sure you will agree it's somewhat ironic that Reform members are raising concerns about council tax and financial efficiency, given that their Worcestershire controlled council has just approved a 9 per cent council tax increase, and they did that by circumnavigating the referendum and asking for Government approval to do so. So much for a low-tax party.

However, Cabinet Secretary, in a similar vein, the Welsh Conservatives, as you know, as it was clearly taken from us to the Reform manifesto, have repeatedly called on you to follow the same sensible system used in England to introduce local referenda. I've heard your arguments many times, and you've rejected that at every opportunity, yet Labour colleagues across the border have kept the system in place. Two countries, two different approaches, but the same party running both—it's difficult to understand the logic. Cabinet Secretary, do you think it's right that in England people have a say in council tax levels, whereas here in Wales, the public just have to pay whatever is proposed?

The logic is called 'devolution'. It's why we have different systems in England and Wales. There would be no point in having the Senedd at all if all we ever did was to copy what somebody else did in their circumstances when we are charged with the responsibility of devising a system that meets the circumstances of Welsh people.

I enjoyed the opening points the Member made. I think Worcestershire is not the only Reform-run council where lower council tax bills now turn out to be entirely mythical. I believe I'm right that the council that was led by the leader of Reform in Wales—a London council, as we'll remember—is having to be bailed out with large sums of money from the UK Government because of the way that council had been run. I'm afraid there's a lesson in all of that. As Reform councils actually have to make decisions rather than deliver leaflets, people are discovering what that actually means.

Lindsay Whittle. 

I just wanted to raise a point of order about the— 

No, no. Not a point of order—

Sorry. A question.

I'm happy for you to raise a supplementary question.

A supplementary question. Thank you, Llywydd. It's about the council tax rise that was referred to by Laura Jones—the increases that both Plaid and Labour councils have undertaken in her region. There are, of course, no Plaid Cymru councils in her region, and there haven't been since 2016. Do you not agree that, in fact, had the deal not been reached with Plaid Cymru and the Labour Party, the situation in the councils in the south-east and across the whole of Wales would be much worse?

I certainly agree with that last point, Llywydd. I was very glad to be able to reach an agreement with Plaid Cymru to provide that additional £112.8 million to support our local authorities. It means that every single local authority in Wales has a minimum uplift of 4 per cent and an average uplift of 4.6 per cent. Indeed, there are a number of councils in Laura Anne Jones's region that have particularly benefited from that additional investment.

I thank the Member for the question, Llywydd. The Welsh Government's settlement over the next three years is nearly £6 billion higher than it would have been under the spending plans set out by the previous UK Government. It will be for the next Welsh Government to allocate the £555 million in additional funding contained in the spring statement, taking into account the needs and circumstances in Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I appreciate you dealt with this at the last session, last Wednesday, with the urgent question—and that's what happens with the tabling arrangements when they catch you out. But I would be grateful to try to understand how some of this money might be allocated for emergency pressures, such as increased fuel costs and energy costs. You highlighted how the NHS, for example, in the last fuel spike, had an £80 million demand placed on it. Could you give us a taste of what we might be expecting if the energy spike continues in its current form?

I thank the Member for that question, because I think that is a really important new context for the spring statement. As I said in an earlier answer, the forecasts provided by the Office for Budget Responsibility were created before the war in the middle east; that creates an entirely new context for the use of money from the spring statement.

We know that Wales is as exposed as anywhere else to hikes in oil prices, to the impact on liquefied natural gas supplies, to the impact on fertiliser. Anywhere between 25 per cent and 35 per cent of the world's fertiliser supplies go through the Strait of Hormuz. That ends up being additional costs borne by Welsh farmers, as it does in other parts of the globe.

It's my belief that an incoming finance Minister will be very glad to have that £555 million, which is not committed as yet because there may be some very serious calls on it as Welsh citizens, Welsh businesses and Welsh public services face the consequences of what we see happening in another part of the world.

Last week, the First Minister announced a pledge for the largest NHS investment programme in Welsh history and for the replacement of the University Hospital of Wales in the Heath, in my constituency of Cardiff North, which is urgently in need of replacement. This was a very welcome pledge. How does the money that will come to Wales through the spring statement support this commitment?

I thank Julie Morgan for that. As a Cardiff Senedd Member, of course I share her welcome for the pledge to invest £4 billion in the health estate over the next Senedd term, and to attend to the needs of the University Hospital of Wales. There is help, of course, in that £555 million towards those costs. A relatively small amount of it comes directly in capital, but the capital that will be needed to meet that pledge will be a combination of conventional capital, capital borrowing—the extended capital borrowing we are now able to deploy—and the new financial instruments that we have developed here in Wales that have allowed the rebuilding of the Velindre hospital in the Member's constituency. I look forward very much to the next four years, where we will see that combination of measures being able to support really important developments in west Wales, here in Cardiff, and, of course, in the Maelor hospital in north Wales as well.

I thank the Member for that, Llywydd. There are currently no visitor levies in operation across Wales, and no local authority in south-east Wales has consulted on whether to introduce a levy. More general impact assessments on the levy are available as part of the documentation presented to the Senedd when the Bill was before Members.

Thank you for your response, Cabinet Secretary. We on these benches know how damaging Labour and Plaid's tourism tax would be on Wales, not just for the region of south-east Wales, but across the county. I can't believe I'm saying this, but in Newport, it appears that there is at least one Labour politician with a commonsense approach. The city council's leader has distanced himself from this policy, confirming that the local authority has no plans to bring forward such a tax, which is a welcome relief for many. Newport has a lot to offer, and I believe we should be doing all that we can to promote the city to tourists, not just slapping them with taxes. Cabinet Secretary, how are you working with your colleagues in the Welsh Government to boost tourism in places like Newport? To me, it looks as though the Labour administration is doing all it can to put people off coming to Wales. Thank you.

There's a great deal of nonsense talked in that question, because it denies the basic premise of the visitor levy, which is that it is a permissive tax for each local authority to decide whether or not they would find that a useful tool to deploy in their areas. If the leader of Newport council feels it's not a useful thing for him, that is every bit as good a decision as the leader of Cardiff's decision that it would be a useful tool in the Cardiff context.

What has happened to the Welsh Conservative Party, Llywydd? I remember the days when, in David Cameron's big society, the Conservative Party believed in shrinking the role of central Government and handing decisions to local authorities, local communities and local residents. That's exactly what the visitor levy Bill does. But now, we have a Conservative Party in Wales that believes that it knows better than they do.

Where local people have decided to do something, the Welsh Conservative Party will step in and tell them, in that Big Brother way, that they know better than they do. That's exactly what the Member has said. It's exactly what your manifesto says. We believe that local people should have that choice. If local authorities decide it's right for them, having gone through all the process, they should be allowed to do it. We turn out to believe in localism, and they turn out to believe in exactly the opposite.

Thank you very much, Cefin Campbell. The UK Government are restoring stability in the economy and public finances. The Office for Budget Responsibility forecast confirmed that productivity, earnings and real household disposable income will increase, benefits that will be felt across Wales through improved living standards, ensuring working people are better off and that children are lifted out of poverty.

Thank you very much. 

So, my question on the implications of the UK spring statement refers to one area of particular concern, which you've referred to already in answer to Joyce Watson's question. It's around the support given to restaurants, pubs and other hospitality businesses in rural areas, which are vital employers and social hubs, yet they're facing rising costs. So, in light of the wider fiscal context, following the spring statement, pubs in England will receive 15 per cent business rates relief in 2026-27, with their bills then frozen in real terms for the following two years until 2029.

In contrast, the Welsh Government has announced the same level of relief as in England in 2026-27, but this support is currently confirmed for only a single year. Given the pressures on hospitality businesses in my region, and in light of the wider fiscal context following the spring statement, why has the Welsh Government chosen only one year of relief when England has provided multi-year certainty?

Well, there is a very simple explanation, Llywydd, and it's this: that we did not know until the final estimates, which we don't get until February, how much money we would get in years 2 and 3 of the scheme. So, it was impossible when we announced next year's plans to anticipate what we could do in years 2 and 3, because we simply didn't have knowledge of how much money we would have. We do know that now. We know it as a result of the spring statement. There is £5 million as a consequential of the scheme in England in the next financial year. As I explained in my answer to Joyce Watson, actually, in Wales, we will spend £8 million next year, £3 million more than the consequential. In the second year of the spring statement, we will get £8 million, and in the third year, we will get £11 million.

So, it is now open to an incoming Welsh Government, knowing the facts, to make provision for years 2 and 3. We have only a one-year budget for next year, so an incoming Government would need to use the first supplementary budget of next year to extend the scheme for two more years. It simply wasn't technically possible at the time of our first announcement. It will be now we're in possession of the full facts.

Finally, question 9 from Gareth Davies. 

I thank the Member, Llywydd. The Visitor Accommodation (Register and Levy) Etc. (Wales) Act 2025 requires levy revenues to be used for the purposes of destination management and improvement. Local authorities that introduce a levy must establish a partnership forum consisting of local tourism representatives, ensuring that spending aligns with local tourism needs.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The Welsh Conservatives, as you know, are pioneers of localism, but, equally, you will know this was a measure that was passed by a Labour and Plaid almost-coalition in this Senedd. The Welsh Conservatives have always been straight that we've always been opposed to this on behalf of our local tourism operators. With the levy due to be introduced from 1 April next year, at the point at which local authorities will have the option of applying the tax, tourism operators and businesses that we represent across Wales are understandably seeking clear assurances about how that money will be raised and actually used.

There is a real concern within the sector that the revenue raised could simply be absorbed into a wider local authority funding pot, and used to meet pressures on other services. In particular, those working in the sector want confidence that the revenue generated from their industry—more accurately, from customers that are attracted to Wales—will actually be reinvested in maintaining and improving tourism infrastructure that those visitors rely upon.

So, can the Cabinet Secretary outline how revenue raised from the levy will be ring-fenced and used to maintain and enhance the infrastructure that supports tourism, rather than being diverted into other areas that do not directly benefit from the sector where this tax is being raised?

Well, Llywydd, the design of the visitor levy is exactly to give confidence to people that the money raised will be reinvested in creating the conditions of success for the industry, and for the communities in which the industry operates. No levy can be introduced until a local authority has carried out a consultation with its local population, including businesses that operate in that area. If a local authority decides to go ahead with the levy, then the legislation requires them to keep any money raised in a separate account that will be visible to anybody. They will then have to report annually on how that money has been spent. Those are safeguards to ensure that the money cannot be diverted to doing things that are not covered by the statutory obligation in the Act that money must be spent only for the purposes of destination management and improvement.

Now, Llywydd, the Member and I had, I thought, an interesting exchange in committee last week about support for the Welsh language, and he'll be pleased, I think, to know that, in the Act, it is specifically allowed for money raised to be invested in supporting the Welsh language, where the language is part of the tourism offer, part of what brings people to visit that area. One of the things that you could use the proceeds of the levy to do would be to sustain the character of that area, continuing to make it attractive to people to visit.

It's the whole purpose of the levy. It was designed from the very beginning to ensure that it gives confidence to local residents and to business owners that the money raised is being spent in a way consistent with the views of the Senedd.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs. The first question is from Carolyn Thomas. 

I will indeed. Thank you, Carolyn. Through initiatives including the Nature Networks programme, Local Places for Nature and Natur am Byth, Welsh Government have now invested over £150 million this Senedd term alone to restore nature and create green spaces right on people’s doorsteps. These projects, as you know, connect communities with nature, they improve well-being and they strengthen Wales’s resilience to climate change.

Thank you for the response. I wanted to highlight how, without the Local Places for Nature funding created by this Labour Welsh Government, local authorities would struggle to employ biodiversity officers, ecologists, and create more than 4,000 green spaces for nature and growing food, with more than 20,000 volunteers involved, transforming their lives. That's more than 2,400 pollinator sites, 700 community orchards and 86 therapeutic gardens for mental health and well-being at the last count. Environmental organisations have also used the Nature Networks fund to enhance biodiversity and access.

Deputy First Minister, I'm really proud that this Welsh Labour Government cares about our natural environment. It's one of its priorities. Would you agree that connecting people to nature is so important for our physical and mental health and well-being, but also for educating them about the importance of biodiversity and healthy ecosystems? We ignore it at our peril, and without it, there's no food, no economy. So, how are you promoting all that good work that is taking place so that it's not undervalued and can continue?

Carolyn, thank you very much. Can I just say, as this will be my last oral questions for the moment—for the moment—I do just want to genuinely thank Carolyn for the way she has championed biodiversity and the natural environment through all the time she's been here, in every oral questions and including the work you've done yourself in organising things such as the Senedd biodiversity event? You, amongst others, have really pushed this hard.

We are pleased as Welsh Government to continue championing the importance of our natural environment and the join-up between people and their green spaces as well. We should absolutely be celebrating all the positive work that's being undertaken across Wales, including with the many volunteers that are involved. There are multiple gains here, including those well-being gains. In fact, it's been one of the delights of my tenure in this role to visit these right across Wales and see the showcase of initiatives that we have. In fact, I'm doing it tomorrow as well. I'm out visiting several of our Nature Networks projects, together, I have to say, with additional announcements planned before the end of this Senedd term as well.

So, yes, it's absolutely key that this Government, and any future Government, does not walk away from its commitments to this agenda, does not ignore the nature and the climate crises, but also goes on the optimistic note that says, we can, together, as a society in Wales, make a difference, lead the way, and that's what we need to continue to do.

I'm in a losing battle here. Not only do I have Members thanking Ministers, now I have Ministers thanking Members [Laughter.] I'm a big fan of thanking you, Carolyn Thomas, so I didn't intervene on the Minister, but if we can, please, focus on the remaining scrutiny of Government that needs to happen over the next two weeks, that would be great. Altaf Hussain.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am privileged and we are privileged that we are here in Wales where we are very near to nature. Cabinet Secretary, I'm sure you'll agree with me that connecting people with nature should not be at the expense of nature and habitats. I would like to draw your attention to the creation of a butterfly garden at the wilderness garden in Porthcawl. Bulldozers and crew armed with chainsaws have been chopping down trees in order to create a habitat for butterflies. Local residents were told that there would be some ivy removal to improve light, and instead a large number of trees have been killed and tonnes of gravel imported to create footpaths for future visitors. Cabinet Secretary, how will the Welsh Government prevent local councils from carrying out this type of habitat vandalism under the guise of connecting people with nature?

Thank you for raising that. I'm not aware of that particular incidence, but I'm more than happy, if you want to drop me a line—I can ask my officials and team, then, to look at it. But the way that we actually promote this is through our investment alongside communities in nature initiatives. Many of them are, indeed, focused on pollinators as well, including in your own area. If you walk across the Downs above Ogmore-by-Sea, the success we've had there in the return of the brown fritillary butterfly is through worker volunteers and also Welsh Government-supported investment there as well, and some real expertise on the ground.

So, please do drop me a line on that particular issue and I'll look into it. We're not there to micromanage every local authority. I would also suggest that you take that up directly with the local authority as well. But balancing between people and places and nature is exactly where we should be, and protecting nature.

Minister, the Maindee area of Newport, on the edge of the city centre, was lacking in green spaces until an organisation called Greening Maindee came along with a hardy small band of volunteers, which, thankfully, has grown since. They've created several green areas by planting, areas where people can sit and rest and chat and it's been an absolutely game-changing initiative for that part of Newport, through Local Places for Nature in partnership with Welsh Government, the local authority, small businesses and others. Their latest initiative is Maindee in Bloom, which encourages the creation of pollinator-friendly gardening and colourful gardening and will be judged in accordance with those criteria. It's absolutely wonderful to meet the people involved, Minister, and to work with them and connect them to some of the support that's available. Would you join me, and I'm sure you would, in congratulating their efforts, and possibly coming to meet with them, if it's possible to squeeze in another such visit in the limited time left in this Senedd?

John, thank you very much indeed for flagging up the Greening Maindee project and Maindee in Bloom as well. This is another example of the fantastic myriad, now, of these initiatives throughout Wales that are being driven by grass-roots activists and volunteers who are really concerned about nature, but supported as well by Welsh Government funding, through things such as our Local Places for Nature, which allows people, for example, to buy specialist equipment, expertise on mowing practices et cetera, to help with pollinators, and not least, as well, our It's for Them campaign, supporting pollinators and other wildlife, encouraging organisations managing areas such as that to develop those areas.

Look, if I have time, I'd love to, but if I can't before, because it's slightly busy at the moment, I'd love to still come along and visit the work that they're doing there. Can I say as well that one thing that Members might want to look at is the connecting people with nature, the latest initiative that I was at only last week, on 4 March, where I was down at Porthkerry Country Park, a wonderful country park, and we launched the first part of what will be the national forest trail, Llwybr Coedwig Cymru, going from north to south, with branches and routes going off through different communities, where you can have a woodland-connected walk throughout the whole of Wales. Let's keep on building on this, green building on this, so that we connect people with nature.

Thank you, Joyce. This Welsh Labour Government has the very highest ambition for healthy rivers and water quality in Wales. It's backed by an additional £56 million of funding in this Senedd term alone, and additional ring-fenced funding for enforcement. Three times as many of our rivers in Wales now achieve 'good' ecological status as compared to England, and we have had an 8 per cent improvement since 2009, showing that we can clean up our rivers. But too many of our rivers are still failing to reach 'good' status, so our reforms, going forward, will tackle all forms of water pollution and deliver the clean rivers, lakes and our seas that Wales and the people and places of Wales deserve.

Absolutely. Thank you for that answer, Deputy First Minister. You know that water quality has been a political passion of mine for 19 years, from proposing legislation to reduce surface water run-off in my first term to campaigning to protect beavers in this one. So, I was delighted to follow the latest water summit and to read the Green Paper on the future of water governance in Wales, which have really moved the dial, with proposals for a new regulator, to upgrade pipes and sewers, and to limit the spreading of sewage sludge on land. It's bold, it's ambitious, but it will necessarily take time to deliver. Can you assure me that, where action can be taken more quickly in tackling inappropriate spreading of sewage and septic tank sludge, as an example, that will be prioritised, because it is, quite frankly, killing our rivers?

Joyce, I can absolutely guarantee to you that we've put in place the measures now to take forward at speed the measures to tackle all forms of pollution, whether those are development pressures, whether that is our antiquated water infrastructure, or, indeed, whether it's agricultural pollution as well. We have said we will take forward Susannah Bolton's recommendations on the control of agricultural pollution—short term, medium term and long term—and we will take them forward at pace. Whether it is me or somebody else in this position afterwards, we will need to hold that Minister to account to take them forward at pace, because whilst we have 44 per cent—three times as many as in England—of rivers in 'good' ecological health, that is 56 per cent that are not. And, on that basis, we need to actually move forward at real pace.

While I welcome any steps being taken to improve water quality across Wales, many people living near the Wye and the Usk still feel progress has been far too slow. As we look ahead, past May, it will be essential that new Ministers continue to work closely with all stakeholders, including environmental groups, regulators, local communities and, crucially, the sectors whose activity interacts with these river catchments. I recently met the new chief executive of Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water, and it's clear there is a real willingness there to continue strengthening that partnership. The agricultural sector also plays a vital role in this discussion, and it is vital that they remain fully supported and engaged as part of a collaborative, long-term solution. Cabinet Secretary, can you outline how the Welsh Government is ensuring this joined-up approach will continue?

Thank you, Peter, for that question. It's been a hallmark of the way we've approached this and the progress that we have made. But you're saying—and I welcome what you're saying—that there is much more to do, and we all have to be willing to get on with this, going forward. Now, that does mean working in collaboration with all the stakeholders within water catchments, including within the Wye water catchment. It's why we put an additional £1 million, which we announced last autumn—no, last summer—into the Wye catchment initiative, alongside UK Government, to take forward initiatives there from the very top of the Wye all the way down that catchment. But it's also why we have held the water summits, the two most recent of which focused on agricultural pollution, but working with the farmers, with landowners, to come up with all the solutions—technical solutions, working-on-a-catchment-basis solutions—but not avoiding the hard truth that we need to do this as well. And they've been good, and strong and collaborative, and I would wish that, as we go into the next term, we take that forward, because we need, together, to clean up our rivers.

And just to counteract one accusation that comes forward as well, I've never solely or primarily focused on agricultural pollution. I've always made it clear that we have development pressures with pollution, we have the antiquated sewer system, we want Dŵr Cymru to do its role as well. And they have to step up and make the most of these billions of pounds of investment as well, and to get on with it now, not to wait for further down—now. That's what we need to make sure that we do now, going forward.

I'm really grateful that Joyce has raised this question, because it's something of such vital importance. Pollution in our rivers is an issue that maddens people. It kills wildlife, it imperils health, and makes it dangerous for children to play near the water. Chemical waste is a growing problem with this, particularly forever chemicals—the rubbish that was dumped decades ago by companies like Monsanto that has leached into the ground and has contaminated waterways. I've raised concerns about Ty Llwyd quarry near Ynysddu countless times. I do so again. But residents across Wales need clarity about any levels of pollution or contamination in their areas. I'd ask what the Government can do to ensure transparency in investigations into suspected pollution from these chemicals. How can we ensure that local residents and councillors are kept aware as part of these processes, and how can lines of responsibility be made clear for clearing this pollution when lots of agencies are involved? And finally, do you agree that polluters need to pay for what they've done?

On that last point, entirely. We have to stick firm to the concept of 'the polluter pays'. No matter how hard that is, we need to stick firm to that. Sometimes, we have to get on with it while we chase those polluters, and we should be doing that as well. But you rightly flag up the emerging body of evidence now around what are termed 'forever chemicals' and PFAS. This is a crucial area, and, as we are more armed with the evidence of the damage that these chemicals can do, we now need to get on with taking the right action. I am very pleased—and thank you for pushing me here today, but also previously on this—that we've taken a step forward with the UK PFAS plan. It's a good first step. It's the first ever comprehensive statement of the UK Government's approach to managing PFAS, with clear benefits for Wales, and clear engagement with us on Wales, seeking to minimise the harmful effect of forever chemicals and supporting the transition to safer alternatives as well.

Now, this will look at tackling pollution at source, understanding further the evidence under PFAS, reducing ongoing exposure, and the co-ordination of action between Governments, between industry, between wider stakeholders, and also what we do at a local level as well. And you rightly flag the issue here, because this is an emerging area that is causing concern. We need also to focus, going forward, on how we engage with communities on this—not only on what is in their local area, but also how we can tackle what is in their local area. So, thank you for raising this.

Good afternoon, Dirprwy Brif Weinidog. We've had cross-party reference in this Siambr to this particular issue, and I do thank Joyce Watson for raising this. And I do pay tribute to those environmental organisations who, for many years—decades even—have been trying to draw our attention to the concerns that they have about rivers being polluted. And we've heard you say, haven't we, that we need to see polluters paying, but, actually, Dŵr Cymru, in 2025, had over 3,000 reported pollution incidents, yet saw little enforcement action against them. So, really, there needs to be a tightening of regulations to ensure that polluters like Dŵr Cymru have to face the consequences that are necessary. 

Just going back to those environmental organisations, I've been working with them to promote their Bil dŵr glân, which is a Bill for clean water to come in the next Parliament and to work with the next Welsh Government. They want to see legally binding water quality targets and stronger discharge permits to ensure that polluters are properly held to account. I've said in this Siambr before that I think targets for everything are the way forward, so I'd like to hear your response to having legally binding targets and ensuring that polluters do pay. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Yes, indeed. Thank you so much. I genuinely think this is one of the most exciting areas of policy at the moment, because of some of the things that are already in train. One of those is actually the Green Paper that we have now put out, which looks at a different type of regulation. Within the Green Paper—even though it's a Green Paper, it's set within what I describe as a Green Paper with white tram lines—it sets a direction of travel for a different type of regulation of the water sector in Wales, a type of regulation that is not the failed experiment of the 1980s, which we're still living with, of that form of economic regulation, but a regulation that will look at affordability for customers, that will look at doing the proper investment that we need in the Victorian infrastructure that we have, but will also address environmental issues as well, in cleaning up our rivers, and good drinking water quality and so on—a different type of regulation, fit for not only today but also fit for Wales, where we proudly have the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 to guide what we should be doing.

Now, I would encourage you and others to actually input your thoughts into that Green Paper, because it does look at the right type of regulation. It does look at systems planning, so we don't look in silos at different aspects of how we deal with water governance, we look at all of the parts that can actually clean up our waterways as well. So, there are great opportunities going forward, and we need to seize them and then act on them, and the means as well—put the money in, the additional money that we've put into enforcement, the additional money we've put into investment, to build the evidence of what works in catchments as well, all of that. But, yes, the regulatory space as well—we have an opportunity to develop a leading-edge regulatory structure here in Wales that does better for the people of Wales and for nature in Wales as well.

Questions now from party spokespeople. Conservatives spokesperson, Samuel Kurtz.

Diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, as a former chair of Pembrokeshire Young Farmers Club, I have seen first-hand the important role played by Wales Young Farmers Clubs as a voluntary youth service in rural communities, with almost 6,000 members, aged 10 to 28, across 12 counties and 138 clubs, and members contributing over 1.4 million hours each year through competitions, events and volunteering. YFC really does play a significant role in developing skills, leadership and community engagement across young people in rural Wales. Indeed, you saw that first-hand at the Wales YFC event that I sponsored in the Neuadd earlier this year. So, what consideration have you and your department given to providing long-term secure funding to support the work of Wales YFC, in recognition of its role as a voluntary youth service and its contribution to rural communities across Wales?

Thank you, Sam, and thank you for organising that event as well. It was a delight, once again, to meet with some of the brilliant young representatives from the young farming community, who I've had the pleasure as well of meeting in so many opportunities throughout many parts of Wales. They do an incredible range of activities that grows the confidence and the skills and the experience of those people. And some of them, my goodness, end up here within the Senedd.

Don't they just. 

They do, and it's commendable. But, look, we've been very pleased, over the tricky challenges of budgets over the last couple of years, to find funding to actually put into young farmers clubs, not only recognising the wide range of support that they do for young people, but what those young people do for their communities, including, by the way, in support of the Welsh language. Now, we've made that possible. The next Government now will need to take that forward and decide how it puts on a level footing that long-term financial stability, in line with what Welsh Government priorities are and the priorities of the people of Wales. And I think the people of Wales do want to see thriving rural economies, young people being given skills, and support to the Welsh language as well. So, I think we're on a good wicket here.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Moving on to my second question, recent reports indicate that the conflict involving Iran and the disruption to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, through which around one fifth of global oil supplies and roughly a third of global fertiliser trade normally pass, are already placing upward pressure on fuel and fertiliser prices and threatening wider food price inflation. So, given the potential knock-on impacts for agriculture, including higher input costs of fuel, feed and fertiliser, what work are you undertaking to assess the impact of the conflict in Iran and the disruption to the Strait of Hormuz on rising farm input costs in Wales? And, what steps are you taking to support farmers facing increases in the three Fs: fuel, feed and fertiliser?

Sam, once again, thank you for raising this. It's a critical issue. Whilst a lot of the media focus has been on the headline issues of impact on oil and gas and so on, that has an impact on farming and food production, but there is also, as you rightly say, fertiliser and other expensive inputs. And the conflict that we see in the middle east is costing lives, but it is also having an impact and, depending on how this unfolds over the days and weeks ahead, it could have severe impacts way beyond what we are currently seeing at the moment. But, yes, my officials are already working with their counterparts in the UK Government and with other devolved Governments to understand and closely monitor the input costs. We are doing that work now, not least as part of our ongoing work with the UK agriculture market monitoring group. We're very closely monitoring the effect of the Gulf shipping crisis through the strait of Hormuz and elsewhere. We've not seen any significant negative impact on food supply or related prices so far, but that's not to say they won't. So, we are very aware of increased fertiliser costs. We'll keep a close contact now with other Governments and stakeholders as this develops, and we will engage with our Welsh stakeholders on this as well.

We are, by the way, Sam—it's helpful to point out—maintaining a web page at the moment on the Welsh Government site, which is signposting to advice for farmers on input costs. Also, the other aspect to bear in mind as well is the work that we're doing through the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board on the nutrient management guide, helping farmers make the most of organic materials that can also help them with some of the sustainability costs of this, reducing fertiliser consumption. But, yes, what is going on in the middle east is not only dangerous in the cost to lives and the region itself, including British citizens who are currently out there, but it has much wider implications and we need to keep a close eye on it here in Wales.

Thank you for that comprehensive answer there, Cabinet Secretary. Now, moving on to my third and final question to you this parliamentary term, I supported the introduction of the genetic technology, also known as the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023, but the Welsh Government opposed the legislation and the Senedd withheld consent at the time. Now, the Act now enables the use of regulation of precision breeding, not GM, in England, while Wales has not adopted a similar framework. However, the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 means precision bred products authorised in England may still be sold in Wales, potentially creating regulatory divergence because of the Welsh Government's refusal to align and maximise the huge opportunities that exist in this field. So, what assessment has the Welsh Government made of the practical impact this divergence is having on Welsh agriculture? And does it intend to review its policy position on precision breeding to ensure Welsh agriculture can really seize the opportunity that exists, especially given our university research strength in precision breeding?

On precision breeding, we never have a completely closed mind on this, but we have to recognise that, at the moment, beyond that trialling and piloting, there is limited applicability here within Wales. There is more direct applicability across the border. However, I do take your point in terms of research and academic institutions and so on. It will be for the next Government to look at this, but what I would say to you as well is we must also jealously protect the ability of this Senedd and Welsh Government here in a devolved context to actually make decisions that occasionally will be, for the right reasons, slightly different from what is happening elsewhere. Very often, by the way, and, in fact, in many of the advice papers that pass across my desk, we actually go in concord with the UK Government, because it makes absolute sense. But, sometimes, there is a need to actually protect our ability in a devolved context to do something slightly different, but it will be for the next Government to consider that.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, the Welsh Government highlights regularly that herd incidence with bovine TB has fallen, but farmers listening to this exchange will probably be asking a very simple question: if progress is being made, then why are more and more cattle being slaughtered every year—more, in fact, than ever before in the last year, which saw over 12,000 cattle slaughtered compared to, I think, 8,000 or so, when I first became a member of this Senedd 15 years ago? Now, I know that you've explained in a written statement today that more stringent, more sensitive testing et cetera would be part of that, but the lived reality for farmers, of course, is escalating losses and the enormous emotional impact that comes with that. Now, today we've learned from the TB programme board that the Welsh Government is clearly off track when it comes to meeting your target for Wales to be TB free by 2041. In fact, the current projection indicates that it will be well into the 2050s by the time we get to that point. So, my question is simple: do you agree with the programme board's position paper that was published today, and will you admit that the current approach and the current strategy are clearly not delivering, because you're not going to meet your target?

Well, the first thing to say is—and I've often been accused of being the eternal optimist on a range of policy areas—we can actually make a difference. You are right in saying that the number of cattle we are now slaughtering is higher than it's been—I'm more than happy for you or for any Members to arrange some discussions with the chief veterinary officer as well—evidenced by the increased and more sensitive testing that we are doing. Even though it is tragic in terms of the numbers being slaughtered, and the impact on the mental health and the well-being of not just the farmer, but the farmer's family and the community is massive, and I've spoken to so many, including, Llywydd, with you, out on farms, sitting down with farmers, hearing first-hand what the experience is like. It is not joyful at all; it is a miserable experience, particularly for those who are in perpetual cycles of testing and slaughter and so on. So, we have to go further.

But I was saying I'm often accused of being an eternal optimist. We are doing some really good stuff that is showing, actually, over the border the way of doing it. We have interest not just from England, but from Northern Ireland and elsewhere about what we are doing through working with on-farm vets in the Pembrokeshire pathways project. It's why we're rolling it out to north Wales. So, even though the incidence of slaughter is going up, we're taking cattle out earlier as we identify them. We are also having progress on managing herds themselves with farmers—not being done to them, but with farmers—and that has to be the way that we go forward. So, what we are seeing is lower levels at the moment of herd incidence, which is good, so we're managing to stop it more. We're having increasing what I've referred to as stickiness, or what the scientists refer to as prevalence within herds, deep within herds. You won't pick it up in the obvious test, but then, a year down the line, that's where it comes. That's why the approaches we're taking are showing a good way forward.

But can I just say one of the greatest achievements, I think, of the last couple of years, the greatest successes, is the establishment of the TB advisory group overseen by the programme board? Why is that so important? It's that we have a scientific, evidence-based approach now for the next stages, and if we're not on target to do it, they will be the ones who advise. So, look, I welcome, and I said in the statement today, that they brought forward a position paper on bovine TB in Wales. I genuinely want to thank both groups for their ongoing work on this. It will now be, Llyr, for the next Government, following the Senedd elections in May, to consider that position paper and then to think about how we hit that ambitious target of 2041. I still think it can be done, but we need to keep thinking what are the ways that we take forward to eradicate TB.

Thank you for that. We got there in the end. Lambing season is well and truly under way, of course, and the Welsh Government's joint consultation with other Governments in the UK on proposals to reform the rules for castrating and tail docking lambs, I think, closed earlier this week, didn't it? We know that farmers in Wales only undertake castration and tail docking when it's necessary for animal welfare and effective flock management, whether that's preventing unwanted breeding or, of course, protecting flocks from fly strike. For those of you who don't know, fly strike is a painful and sometimes fatal condition caused by flies laying their eggs on an animal, which hatch into maggots and then they start eating their hosts. So, the sector has been clear that any changes must be based on scientific evidence, aligned with real-world farming practices and supported by appropriate training and resourcing so that farmers can safely and practically adopt any new methods. Given that, I'd like to ask whether you agree with me that if any changes result from this consultation, they need to be practical, deliverable and workable for farmers across Wales.

Yes, I've no difficulty in agreeing with that, and also that we need to do it in engagement with those stakeholders as well, and importantly, as you say, we base it on the evidence.

Thank you. Good. So, the Gwaredu Scab programme—I'm in the same space here again somewhat—has clearly delivered. [Interruption.]

Well, usually you give us very long answers, Cabinet Secretary. [Laughter.] It's a bit late in your tenure to start giving us succinct answers, but there we are.

I like to surprise.

Yes, but you did catch me out there.

So, on the Gwaredu Scab programme, I just want to ask about that because it's clearly delivered positive outcomes with over 1,700 farms receiving diagnostic visits, over three quarters of them needing treatment, and over a million sheep being treated for scab since its introduction. Now, there's also been training for vets and contract dippers as well, all aimed at getting to grips with the disease that, obviously, can lead to economic losses, but particularly severe welfare issues for sheep. Now, we hear that the new tender may be published sometime in the autumn, if I've understood correctly, or possibly even in the spring next year, leaving, of course, considerable uncertainty for the sector in the meantime. Now, that's exacerbated as well by recent changes to the permitting arrangements for sheep-dip disposal as well. Now, the nature of the work means that you really need to keep up momentum and bear down on scab, otherwise you risk losing the gains that you've made in recent years. So, can you clarify whether the Government is intending to commit to continuation of the Gwaredu Scab programme, and when can farmers expect a clear and confirmed timeline for the next phase of support?

Yes. Thank you, Llyr. So, we will commission an independent review to assess the effectiveness and the long-term benefits and the sustainability of the outcomes achieved to date, and I think this has been an excellent initiative, I have to say. So, the findings of that review will provide that essential evidence base to help inform the scope and the structure and the priorities of any successor programme, but, and I'm in danger of repeating myself now, this will fall to the next Government to do.

And in saying that, Dirprwy Lywydd, and at the risk of inciting your anger here, can I just thank all frontbench spokesmen for their engagement with me at orals over the last two years? Much appreciated, all.

You can thank Members for their engagement with you once, and that will be done and dusted. [Laughter.]

Thank you, Andrew. The sustainable farming scheme supports farm profitability by promoting sustainable and efficient food production. By investing in soil health, grassland management, animal health, habitats and woodlands, the scheme supports more productive, resilient farm businesses. This is, of course, supplemented by our rural grant schemes to help farmers invest in their businesses.

I declare an interest, obviously, as a partner in a farming business. Cabinet Secretary, the pressures that are going to be put on farm profitability by the events in the middle east are huge. The Conservative spokesperson touched on this, but what's important is to make sure that we understand what the Welsh Government is doing to support the sector and to make its case to the UK Government, from a Competition and Markets Authority side of things, because we know that there is price gouging going on in fuel and fertilisers—I mean, the amount of times I've had the explanation that the book has been closed on fertiliser purchasing, and then reopened 24 hours later with £150, £200 put onto the price of fertiliser, and that fertiliser was made prior to the events in the middle east. It is vital that the Government here uses its best endeavours to amplify the concerns of the agricultural community about that price gouging, but also makes the case to the UK Treasury, to assist in any measures they can to secure food production here in Wales and the rest of the UK, because, with those price increases, there is inevitably a drop in production, because to start that tractor and to put that fertiliser on is going to cost considerably more than most people were anticipating at the start of the year. So, can you give us an idea of what you're doing as a Government to bring that information together and amplify it in the corridors of powers at the UK Government level, because it is with their firepower that we'll be able to address some of these pressures?

Thank you, Andrew. I don't not want to repeat the points I made to Sam earlier on, which are on record about not only our engagement with the UK Government, but our involvement with the UK Agriculture Market Monitoring Group as well. That will continue, but it's worth pointing out, to supplement the answer I gave earlier and to inform you a little further, Andrew, that the AHDB are also involved on sector-specific analysis, looking at the potential impacts—and, at the moment, they are potential impacts—on, for example, cereals and oilseeds, the dairy sector, beef and lamb and pork sector. So, they're doing that sector-by-sector analysis.

It is worth pointing out that, as you rightly say, fertiliser is one of the big areas of concern. Fertiliser costs typically account for about 15 per cent to 20 per cent of the costs on any average farm. Farms vary enormously, but it's 15 per cent to 20 per cent. Oil, of course, and oil prices, could have a major impact, including on issues like red diesel, but also, by the way, on things such as on-farm plastics and wrappings and so on, as well as oil-heated homes in rural areas. Ninety-eight per cent of farms actually use red diesel in one form or other. But it's also the strait of Hormuz as well, and the delay of supplies coming through that—machinery and equipment as well. So, Andrew, we're keeping all of this under close scrutiny, and we will engage with the sector as well as UK Government.

Thank you, James. We're supporting a sustainable, productive agriculture sector in Wales and in Brecon and Radnorshire through the sustainable farming scheme. In the Powys region, farm businesses have received over £60 million in basic payment scheme payments for 2025, with further assistance available through the rural investment schemes and, of course, advice via the Welsh Government supported Farming Connect.

Thank you for that, Deputy First Minister. What is becoming clear through the sustainable farming scheme now being open, and what we're seeing through the ready reckoner, is that large landowners and organisations who have large areas of habitat land are gaining massively in terms of financial benefit from the sustainable farming scheme, while farmers who are producing food, without the level of habitat land, are not receiving the same level of support.

With all the geopolitical issues going on in the world at the moment, Cabinet Secretary, do you not think it's right and timely that we reprioritise the sustainable farming scheme to prioritise food production and increase livestock production in Wales, to make sure that we can support food security in this nation and support our farmers across our country?

First of all, I think you're factually a million miles away from being accurate, because, actually, the support is very much targeted at small and medium-scale farms in Wales. There will also be, by the way, of course, in things like Ffermio Bro and the integrated landscape scheme that we put forward, the opportunities for farmers on a grand scale, including common land farmers and tenant farmers in the upland, to come together on a grand scale, join together and get additional funding.

I notice, by the way—and can I just commend you—that even though Reform itself has turned its back on the nature and climate crisis, you have contributed towards recycling in your manifesto, your policies, your MPs and your MSs. So, credit to you on that.

But, actually, if you were to scrap the sustainable farming scheme, which I understand is now your manifesto priority, that would be complete uncertainty, complete instability, and it would be a travesty for those farmers who have worked so hard with us, in proper engagement, to actually put this together. So, your current proposals to actually overhaul the SFS just put complete uncertainty back into it. So, you'll have to explain that to your farmers in your constituency.

Thank you, Janet. Welsh Government policies work right across the supply chain to promote food security. We support sustainable farming, local food partnerships, climate adaptation programmes, processors and retailers. We share market intelligence to ensure tighter supply chain management arrangements, and we continue to support households facing cost pressures. The strategic framework for food policy across Government is brought together in 'Food Matters: Wales'.

Diolch yn fawr. I'm really concerned actually because, like it or not, I do feel that the Welsh Government is putting us on course to have a food security issue. And when you look now, most of our farming land is being taken up by different projects—we've got the Alaw Môn solar farm that will affect 660 acres of grazing land; Llanwern solar farm, 0.25 million solar panels—and we've now learned that we've got 94 per cent of chicken from Thailand and Brazil being served in my constituency to our schoolchildren. Even before—[Interruption.] Sorry?

No, don't respond.

Okay. Even before the middle east bombings—[Interruption.] Even before the middle east bombings, we did have—. You know, we've got food security issues already. We're seeing empty shelves in our supermarkets. You failed to support Peter Fox's Food (Wales) Bill. There is a lack of focus on food security, prioritising other measures, such as tree planting and solar farms. The food processing sector needs stronger Government. We've got falling livestock numbers and we've also got regulatory and tax burdens facing our farmers. Will you, at some stage, and your Government, realise that this is a serious threat now, certainly since the bombing? And will you ensure and guarantee to us that we're not going to see a food security issue any time soon? 

In answer to that question, Janet—thank you for that—first of all, tree planting and renewables on farms and for farms have their place. I have farmers in my constituency who power their farms through renewable energy. I have farmers who are planting trees for cover for their livestock and for their sheep in the hot weather that we now have.

But what we are doing is promoting local food networks. So, the community food strategy and the local food partnerships strengthen local supply chains and resilience throughout Wales. You will have seen—it's happening right now and has been for several years—people like Harlech Foodservice in north Wales, people like Castell Howell in west Wales, who are working with local procurers, small-scale producers, to get their food onto the tables in our public places, in our hospitals, in our schools and so on, but also onto supermarket shelves. Our current awareness campaign, called Rooted in Wales, goes out to consumers to encourage them to eat seasonal, locally produced food, to strengthen food security while protecting the environment.

And Dirprwy Lywydd, I can see you staring at me, but it's of real help to Janet, honestly of real help. In Conwy itself, the Conwy Food Partnership, funded through Welsh Government, describes its purpose as working towards a more resilient local food system, improving access to nutritious, affordable food. Good luck to them, because they've been undertaking public engagement to shape this strategy and the work plan only recently this spring. So, support them. We're doing it. With a bit of Welsh Government support and grass-roots initiatives, we're getting there.

Diolch, Gareth. This year, the Welsh Government provided risk management authorities with £1.6 million to investigate, develop and construct 15 fluvial flood alleviation schemes—I just got there: 'fluvial flood alleviation schemes'—across Denbighshire. Next year, we will provide £3.1 million for 22 schemes, which we estimate, Gareth, will benefit over 1,000 properties in the local authority.

I appreciate that response, and your alliteration, Cabinet Secretary. Many communities across Denbighshire continue to experience repeated problems with fluvial flooding from local rivers and tributaries. And this is particularly felt in Dyserth, with consistent flooding issues around the Waterfall Road area. The Afon Ffyddion runs directly through the village and has a known history of flooding, with several recorded flood events affecting homes over the past two decades. Residents tell me that progress towards a permanent flood mitigation scheme has been frustratingly slow. In the meantime, the local authority has often had to rely on temporary measures, such as providing flood barriers to block entry points to homes. While regular maintenance, such as clearing culverts, is important, the community needs long-term solutions that protect homes, and residents need to know that money will be provided by the Government.

So, could the Cabinet Secretary outline what discussions the Welsh Government is having with Denbighshire County Council and Natural Resources Wales to accelerate permanent flood prevention schemes, particularly in inland areas such as Dyserth, and reassure residents that, once a design has been approved, funding will be provided simultaneously? 

Thank you, Gareth. I extend my sympathies to the people in Dyserth who have experienced flooding. Waiting for these investments to happen, while the business cases are brought forward and the works and the design are done, can be frustrating, but I can give you an update, recognising that. The upper section of the watercourse—. Sorry, first of all, the assessments that have been undertaken recognise that the flooding is attributed to capacity and blockage issues alongside the Afon Ffyddion watercourse flowing through the village. So, the upper section of the watercourse is designated as an ordinary watercourse, but the watercourse is reclassified as a main river as it flows through the centre of the village. So, the outline design was completed in 2019 for both the main river and the ordinary watercourse, and this builds on the 2011 PAR. Now, it is for Denbighshire County Council, who are the risk management authority in the area, to take the responsibility for progressing the flood alleviation scheme, but I can confirm for you, Gareth, that the Dyserth flood alleviation scheme has been allocated £112,301 for the financial year 2026-27, which makes now a total of £471,483 to complete the scheme.

Thank you, Mike. Protecting public health, improving air quality and safeguarding rivers and coastal waters are central to our work in this Welsh Government. We're committed to working closely with our local authorities to deliver this, for the people of Swansea and for the rest of Wales.

Thank you for that answer. But starting with water pollution, I and many of my constituents are concerned about raw sewage entering the River Tawe from the Trebanos treatment works. There is also concern about nitrates and microplastics entering the River Tawe before entering the sea and polluting our coastal area.

With air pollution, we have a serious problem. With air pollution, it's what you cannot see that's most dangerous to health. Swansea Council's 2024 air quality progress report confirmed that PM2.5 levels remain a concern, particularly near busy roads and junctions. While most monitoring sites meet national standards, the report noted that 89 locations—yes, 89 locations—saw increases in pollution compared to 2022. This worsening of air quality is not acceptable. What are the Welsh Government's plans to improve water and air quality in Swansea?

Thank you very much, Mike. Well, there is some significant work that we're doing in collaboration with Swansea, with the local authority there, both on air quality and on water quality, and this includes monitoring. So, from November, mid November 2025 until February 2026, a public consultation was run on target options for fine particulate matter, the PM2.5, and the associated monitoring requirements to underpin them. So, the responses to that consultation are being reviewed, and then the measures that will flow from that, Mike, will need to be taken forward in line with the Air Quality Standards (Wales) Regulations 2010, which we passed in this place.

One of the significant pieces of work in terms of water quality in Swansea is, of course, as you will know, the Trebanos waste water treatment works, and there's a lot of concern locally, which you've raised with me, about water quality on the Tawe, linked to this. Dŵr Cymru have confirmed they intend to submit their formal proposal for Trebanos to Natural Resources Wales. NRW can then assess compliance with the regulatory guidance, and I would expect this process, Mike, to move forward swiftly once the submission is received. Look, my priority, along with you, is to ensure the River Tawe and the local community see lasting improvement. So, I'll monitor this closely and hold both Dŵr Cymru and NRW to account to make sure that the expectations are met.

And finally, question 8, Rhianon Passmore.

Thank you, Rhianon. I expect water companies to provide high-quality, resilient and environmentally responsible services to customers and communities. Welsh Government is working with Ofwat, Natural Resources Wales and others to drive improvement, ensure significant investment is made and, crucially, deliver better outcomes for customers and the environment, now and in the future.

Thank you for those very important words. Natural Resources Wales's latest report confirms that Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water remains a two-star company that requires improvement for the third consecutive year. In 2024, Welsh Water recorded themselves 155 serious pollution incidents from water or sewerage assets. This is the highest total in a decade, and it is completely unacceptable. I believe Jane Dodds also stated the same.

Recently, I organised a productive multi-agency meeting to resolve dangerous flooding and sewage problems at Abercarn Welfare Ground, alongside sportsman Craig Roach, the rugby club, the football club, the Welsh Rugby Union, Welsh Water and Caerphilly County Borough Council. So, Deputy First Minister, rugby, football and cricket have been played for over 50 years—for decades—by Abercarn, where I grew up, on their covenanted ground, but year after year, sporting activities are cancelled due to Welsh Water's discharge of human waste from river water and sewer discharges, whilst the community of Abercarn and its amazing youth teams are desperate to play and survive as clubs. It is no exaggeration to state that their entire future, including access to the WRU programmes and the lifeblood of investment, lies in puddles of excrement on their pitch. Whilst I am pleased at the engagement of the meeting—

You need to ask your question now, please.

Thank you. It is even more disturbing that Welsh Water executives are reported to be earning over £0.5 million. Can I request, then, Cabinet Secretary, that you take a personal interest in this contamination, that these matters are not isolated to Islwyn, but will you ask that your officials speak urgently with Welsh Water to expedite an immediate long-term solution and specifically meet with Abercarn Welfare Ground to support the needs of the people of Abercarn?

Rhianon, thank you very much, and I do fully recognise the seriousness of the situation at Abercarn Welfare Ground. I've had a similar experience in my own area, where we've had sewage going onto a rugby field. Fair play to Dŵr Cymru, they worked with us and the local club to resolve it. It took a bit of time, but we did it. It's unacceptable. It's simply unacceptable. So, I will take a close personal interest in resolving this. I may not be able to come out and visit in the short time between now and dissolution, but I'll ask my officials to engage directly with Welsh Water to ensure that we do identify a long-term, sustainable solution, and that it is expedited so that we can do this as rapidly as possible.

On the issue of Dŵr Cymru's performance, it has to improve. Ofwat's latest performance assessments show that Dŵr Cymru falls short on key commitments: leakage, supply interruptions, pollution reduction. We've been consistently clear that this level of underperformance is not acceptable for communities in Islwyn, or frankly anywhere else in Wales. So, we will hold them to account, both the company and regulators, on delivering improvements for customers and the environment. We will continue to push for measurable progress on behalf of the people of Islwyn and the people of Wales. And again, I would refer you and others to our Green Paper, 'Shaping the Future of Water Governance in Wales', which we launched. It is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to shape a modern, resilient system of water governance for Wales.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

Item 3 is the topical questions. The first topical question will be from Sioned Williams.

We are in regular contact with UK Government counterparts and relevant trade unions to monitor the emerging situation and the potential mitigation options. As you would expect, the First Minister has also written to the UK Government seeking assurance regarding energy security and the cost of energy following disruption to oil markets because of the conflict.

Thank you, and thank you for coming here to answer on behalf of the First Minister, because she, of course, is responsible for international issues.

As Trump and Netanyahu's illegal war continues to escalate in the middle east, which has included the slaughter of almost 300 children according to Save the Children, the inevitable economic repercussions are already reaching Wales. The disruption to the Strait of Hormuz has not only led to a spike in international oil prices, it has also stalled vital shipments of other key commodities, such as fertilisers, that will damage agricultural production.

We should not be supporting this war. This war is killing innocent civilians, endangering UK citizens in the Gulf, and is hitting the pockets of people here in Wales. Unlike Reform and the Tories, Plaid Cymru has been clear from the outset that there is no legal, moral or strategic justification for this war, and that the Labour UK Government should utilise every diplomatic lever at its disposal to bring the conflict to a speedy resolution rather than deepening our involvement. There is no contradiction between abhorring the brutality and oppression of the Iranian regime and lamenting how this war is senseless, directionless, illegal and dangerous.

Cabinet Secretary, there are many warnings, including from National Energy Action, that the conflict with Iran is having an immediate impact on households reliant on heating fuel, which is not protected by the price cap. Of course, we know that many households in some areas of Wales have no connection to mains gas and are reliant on heating fuel. We are already hearing from constituents that the price of heating their homes has skyrocketed.

Could the Cabinet Secretary explain what plans the Government is putting in place, in conjunction with the UK Government, to respond to the economic convulsions of this conflict and to insulate households, especially those already struggling with energy bills, remembering, of course, that a quarter of Welsh households live in fuel poverty? What conversations has she had with Welsh Treasury officials to understand how the inflationary pressures will affect public finances in Wales? Diolch.

I'm grateful for the question and the range of really important points raised this afternoon. In terms of the discussions that we have had with the UK Government, yesterday morning I spoke to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, specifically about people who are dependent on heating oil. During that meeting, we were able to talk about the work that Michael Shanks has been doing—he met with the heating oil industry. And the Secretary of State, Ed Miliband, has also written to them warning against price gouging, because we know that is a particular concern at the moment.

I know from that conversation with the Financial Secretary to the Treasury that the Chancellor has instructed the Competition and Markets Authority to monitor the suppliers very, very closely, to look at price gouging. But I know from my own casework and from letters that colleagues have been sharing with me as well about the difficulty that some people are finding in terms of getting heating oil. Actually, the issue at the moment is an issue around price volatility rather than supply. However, we do know that some suppliers are holding back supply with the aim of profiteering as a result of that.

What I would say there is that we're not that far from the pandemic. We all know and we all remember those suppliers who hiked the prices of essential goods—toilet paper, hand gel and so on—and we will make choices as a result of that. So, people will have choices as to where they're able to procure their oil from in the future, and they will remember those companies who try to take advantage of them at this particular point. The First Minister has, as I say, written to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero. That letter, as well as outlining the issues immediately facing households in Wales—7 per cent of whom rely on heating oil—also asked for additional protections for the other customers outside of the Ofgem price cap as well, and additional support for businesses should there be sustained higher prices also.

I would say that the cross-Government working at the moment is very good with the UK Government in terms of sharing intelligence and in terms of trying to make sure that the industry itself acts responsibly. I've also got a meeting tomorrow to engage further with businesses following my meetings yesterday with the Confederation of British Industry, the Federation of Small Businesses and Make UK, with the trade advisory group. That brings together key sectors from agriculture to the automotive sector to discuss issues in relation to trade. It's very timely that we're meeting tomorrow. No doubt, I will be able to ascertain their latest views on these particular issues and the challenges ahead.

As I say, at the moment, lots of the issues are around price volatility rather than supply, but, of course, in the meetings that we're having with the UK Government, both at ministerial level and official level, we are planning for a range of outcomes depending on how wide the conflict goes and how long it lasts. But to echo the points that were made, we all absolutely hope for a speedy resolution.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The second question will be from Hannah Blythyn.

Media regulation is reserved, but the Welsh Government is working closely with the UK Government, the Electoral Commission, the police and other partners to safeguard the integrity and security of the Senedd election, and with civil society and the electoral management board to improve the supply of credible information to voters.

Thank you for that response, Counsel General.

I've raised previously the question of the use of so-called deepfakes on well-known social media platforms, particularly in respect of the fake sexualisation of girls and women, and called it out for what it is—technology-facilitated violence against women and girls. And now a BBC article has set out the very real threat to our devolved democracy from overseas content farms using artificial intelligence to create social media posts about UK politics. The same article states it uncovered examples of AI-generated videos falsely showing Welsh politicians in compromising situations.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm not going to go into the details on these because I do not wish to provide any further oxygen to the perpetrators, nor cause additional unnecessary distress to those targeted. But the risk is very much, sadly, real, with the videos having the potential to have a detrimental impact on devolved politics, and, indeed, on politicians on a very personal level too. Just because whoever is sharing the image is stating that it's fake or it's clearly satirical, it doesn't make it okay. It's still equally abhorrent and absolutely unacceptable. My belief is that sharing such things should make you just as culpable as creating them in the first place.

Counsel General, I welcome what you said about working with partners such as the Electoral Commission, the UK Government and policing. Are you able to further elaborate on that in terms of what pressure is being put on Governments elsewhere? Because we know that this is not a Welsh-specific problem, it is a global problem, and there are concerns about it at the EU level. I do very much believe—although I know it's not for you now, Counsel General, but for a future Senedd—that more work needs to be done to look at what we can do within the parameters that we do have here in terms of how we can do our own processes and standards around it. Like you say, media regulation is not devolved, but could you set out further what work has been done on this with those partners? Because it's not just a dangerous and destabilising threat to our democracy, it very much risks further dividing communities and doing irreversible individual and institutional damage. Diolch.

I think we can all agree that the way that high-quality deepfake materials can be easily created and disseminated is a real worry for us all, especially those of us who care about democracy and truthful competition of ideas and policies. I completely agree that there is a really worrying misogynistic aspect to many of these deepfakes. We're all aware of cases here in Wales, and in Northern Ireland in particular, of female politicians having fake pornographic images created of them, which is particularly abhorrent.

We are working closely with the Electoral Commission and other partners to prepare for the elections in May. Our electoral management board is supporting returning officers and their teams, and that includes police involvement, in security planning, to make sure that it's as fair and open and honest and transparent as possible. The Electoral Commission recently briefed the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government on its new deepfake monitoring technology trial, and that's providing valuable intelligence to us as well.

We also welcome the UK Government's Online Safety Act 2023, which established a new regulatory regime to address illegal and harmful content online. Ofcom is now the regulator of online safety, and the UK Government has said it's prepared to do a lot more, including response to the creation of deepfake images—we recently had the example of the Grok AI to go by. We've also shared candidate security guidance with all political parties in Wales, and further guidance is available on the gov.uk website and the National Cyber Security Centre website. The National Cyber Security Centre is also offering briefings to candidates, political parties and other local authorities.

The First Minister did mention this yesterday in FMQs, but I just want to reiterate the point, because I really would encourage all political parties and candidates in our upcoming Senedd election to take up the offer of security briefings from the police and the NCSC. I think it's a very important piece of information. Everybody should know how to make sure that their candidates are safe and that people are getting the right information.

In addition to that, we've got enhanced resilience planning structures within the Welsh Government, and that helps us ensure robust co-ordination with UK partners to support the security and integrity of the Senedd election. In fact, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice is today attending the defending democracy taskforce, which is part of the deep joint working between the Welsh and UK Governments, on the secure delivery of the May elections. She's actually gone up to London today, because we take it extremely seriously, and the UK Government is taking it extremely seriously.

Obviously, here in Wales, the Senedd elections are in the forefront of our mind, but there are elections right through the UK, including in the big metropolitan areas. So, this is a matter of serious concern to all of us. We're making sure that the new elections information platform, which the electoral management board has just launched—it's at vote.wales, if you're interested in looking at it—ensures access to reliable and accessible information about the elections as well.

I'm very grateful to Hannah Blythyn for bringing this matter to our attention. I have seen a number of different Facebook pages, for example, being circulated and copied and shared in Blaenau Gwent that presume to demonstrate, certainly, right-wing propaganda, with names such as 'Proud to be British', 'Life of the UK', 'British Lover', and they're all based overseas. The pages I've just quoted are based in Spain and Sri Lanka. There are other pages based in Nepal and Portugal and elsewhere. All of these pages are being used in order to undermine our democracy and to undermine our ability to hold a national debate in Wales.

It's mainly a matter for the United Kingdom Government; it has to address these issues about international and foreign intervention and interference in our elections. At the same time, we have one political party represented here, although they are rarely actually represented in the Chamber, in Reform, who are largely funded from the middle east and the far east, from billionaires who have no interest in any of the people that the rest of us represent, but great interest in their own bank balances, of course. So, we do need to ensure that we address the issues that Hannah Blythyn has raised here about foreign interference and about the manipulation of AI. But we also need to address the fundamental issue of the foreign funding and foreign purchase of our democracy.

Thank you, Alun. I completely agree, of course, that we need to make sure that we have the best information available. The rise in these deepfakes is really worrying. We've all seen them. Some of them are a bit more obvious; the ones that are much more worrying are the ones that are not at all obvious. But just to say that we are working very closely with the UK Government in implementing the Online Safety Act 2023 regime, which tackles some of that problem, alongside Ofcom.

But just to say very specifically, our democratic engagement grant was awarded to Shout Out UK to deliver a media literacy training programme directly to young people in Wales. We've had approximately 920 learners, from year 9 to year 13, supported through those sessions so far. We've also got a stakeholder misinformation toolkit, which aims to help community leaders support people to consider whether information is accurate or intended to cause harm, and what can be done to mitigate this. We've commissioned Cwmpas to deliver a media literacy pilot across the south Wales Valleys, to improve adults' ability to identify and deal appropriately with misinformation and online hate. And then, at the inter-ministerial level, the Interministerial Standing Committee and the Interministerial Group for Elections and Registration, held last month, had really positive discussions on preparations for the upcoming elections.

I just wanted to make sure everybody is aware that the extension of a police protection programme called operation fraud is now extended to all Senedd Members and candidates for the upcoming election. I'm really pleased to welcome that as part of the real need to combat much of the misinformation you've just highlighted.

And Sioned Williams.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I think we can all agree here that deepfakes are becoming a real and growing threat to our democracy and also to the safety of women and girls, because if we're genuinely committed to tackling violence against women and girls, then we have to deal with deepfakes effectively. I think that threat to democracy, as we've heard this afternoon, is a real one. As you'll know, Counsel General, I tabled an amendment in Stage 2 proceedings of the Senedd Cymru (Member Accountability and Elections) Bill that would have provided, on the face of the Bill, a clarification that political material defined as deliberate deception would specifically include deepfake imagery. You didn't support that amendment, as you said the definition as to the type of statement that could count as deliberate deception wasn't needed on the face of the Bill. But given the evidence before us and the research that the journalists have uncovered, do you believe that that should remain the Government's position? I recognise, as regards the UK Government, that some action has been taken on deepfakes, and you've said today that the UK Government is taking this matter very seriously. But the UK Government has an elections Bill going through Parliament, and, unbelievably, it doesn't mention AI at all. So, Counsel General, what pressure are you putting on the UK Government to ensure the elections Bill properly deals with AI and deepfakes?

Diolch, Sioned. So, we've just had the recent publication by the UK Government of the Representation of the People Bill. That has provisions tackling foreign interference and abuse of candidates and electoral staff. We're just working closely on the application of that to Wales and the need to bring forward a legislative consent motion. So, that will be coming—I hope, very shortly; we haven't got very much time, so it has to be pretty shortly—forward. And then, in Wales, the Elections and Elected Bodies (Wales) Act 2024 ensured third parties looking to campaign in Welsh elections had to be UK based. So, that was a fundamental tenet of that. And then, as you know, you've just referenced, we've introduced the legislation, the Senedd Cymru (Member Accountability and Elections) Bill. Assuming that the various things go through next week—Stage 3 is next week—this would place a duty on Welsh Ministers to make provision in a future conduct Order to prohibit the making or publishing of false statements during a Senedd election, although the Bill will not be implemented in time for these elections, which is what Hannah originally asked.

The conversation we had, as you know, but I'll reiterate it because it's worth reiterating, is that our legal advice is that we should—. Although the temptation is to include a list of things, including deepfakes, in the Bill, actually, there's a danger that, by putting a list in, we actually limit it. My legal advice is very firm: that the wording 'prohibit the making or publishing of false statements'—. The statement is wide enough to cover anything you can think of. There's case law to say that the word 'statement' covers AI-generated images, social media posts and so on. We're concerned that, if we start to give examples, we might inadvertently limit the scope of that. You and I have had that conversation, but I'm just reiterating it for the record and for the Chamber. So, I think it is very important we have that in the Bill, but that we have it in the widest possible way, so that it futureproofs it, because who knows what comes next in this terrible journey of misinformation.

Thank you, Counsel General.

Item 4 is the 90-second statements, and the first statement is from Siân Gwenllian. 

Thank you very much. As we have just celebrated International Women's Day, I want to mention one of Caernarfon's most astonishing women.

Central to this story is canolfan Noddfa, a community centre in the heart of Ysgubor Goch, which is now the base for food projects, a nursery, a music project and much, much more.

Canolfan Noddfa was originally a chapel, and this is where the story of Emily Roberts, or Sister Emily, comes into play. Emily was a member of Forward Movement, and the women of that organisation sought to live in disadvantaged areas in order to establish Sunday schools. That's how Emily Roberts came to live and work at the Ysgubor Goch estate in 1955. At the outset, she would take the children to chapels in the town, but she soon came to believe that there should be a chapel on the estate itself.

In 1956, she heard that the Wesleyan zinc chapel in Porthmadog was closing, and she arranged to have it transported to Caernarfon and installed where Noddfa is today. A more permanent building was opened in 1966. 

If it was not for the vision of Emily Roberts, Noddfa would not exist today, and the local community would be at a loss without all of the good work that has taken place there during the last 70 years.

Let us thank Sister Emily for her vision, and let's wish a very happy birthday to the current canolfan Noddfa on its fiftieth anniversary this year.

Last week, I had the privilege of attending the unveiling of a blue plaque to actor and director Ray Milland, following a successful application by Jonathan Davies, chair of the Neath Antiquarian Society to Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council's new blue plaque scheme. 

Born Alfred Reginald Jones, he grew up on Dalton Road in Neath, before moving to Cardiff, and he initially served in the armed forces. But a chance meeting with silent movie star Estelle Brody changed that. He pursued his interest in acting, with limited success at first. When he moved to America, he slowly began to gain more and larger roles. While many of his early roles were in the romantic comedy genre, he began appearing in more action-orientated films at the onset of the second world war, giving him the opportunity to expand his range. The shift towards more serious, dramatic roles culminated in the 1945 film The Lost Weekend. His performance earned him best actor at the Cannes festival, at the Golden Globes and at the Academy Awards. He was the first Welsh actor to win an Oscar. 

Over the span of his career, he starred in nearly 200 films, alongside some of the most recognisable names of Hollywood's golden age—Grace Kelly, John Wayne, Ginger Rogers, Lana Turner and many more. For a man who has two stars on the Hollywood walk of fame, and paved the way for generations of Welsh actors in Hollywood, it's striking that, for most of his life, and for long afterwards, he remained little recognised in his own home town of Neath, a situation that is, at long last, beginning to change. 

To follow on from Siân's statement, celebrating International Women's Day, I want to talk about a woman from Brecon, if I may. 

Gwenllian Morgan was Brecon's first female mayor, and the first woman in Wales to hold mayoral office in 1910. She took office at a time when most women did not even have the right to vote. She was a committed public servant, a campaigner for women's political participation and a champion of education and social reform. Through her work in the temperance movement, and her dedication to community life, she demonstrated that public service is about improving the lives of others. 

Her election more than a century ago was a milestone for Brecon and for Wales. It reminds us that progress is often driven by determined individuals willing to challenge convention. 

So, as we celebrate International Women's Day, we honour Gwenllian Morgan's legacy, and all women who continue to serve our communities, strengthen our democracy and inspire future generations. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

I wish to share a story of exceptional Welsh achievement that spans from the classrooms of Caerphilly to the historic halls of Oxford university. I'm delighted to celebrate the news that Professor Kate Watkins has been named a recipient of the 2026 Suffrage Science Award in life sciences. This prestigious award, inspired by the suffragette movement, recognises not only scientific excellence, but also the vital work of mentoring the next generation of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

Kate is a true product of our local community, a proud daughter of Caerphilly. She was educated at St Martin's and St Ilan's comprehensive schools in the 1980s. From those local roots, she went on to read natural sciences in Cambridge, and she now serves as a professor at Oxford and is the Dean of St Anne's College. It is a journey that proves talent is everywhere, even if opportunity isn't always. Behind every great scientist is a foundation of support. I know that her parents, Christine and Mike Watkins, are watching her success with immense and well-deserved pride.

The Suffrage Science Award involves the passing on of heirloom jewellery from one winner to the next—literally a passing of the torch. Today we recognise Kate for carrying that torch for Wales, for women in science and for Caerphilly. Llywydd, I'm sure the whole Senedd will join with me in congratulating Professor Watkins and her family on this magnificent honour. Diolch yn fawr. Thank you.

Thank you, all.

Item 5 on our agenda is the motion to amend Standing Orders: registration of Members’ interests. I call on the Llywydd to formally move the motion.

Formally move.

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

The next item is a motion to amend Standing Orders: declarations of Members’ interests. I call on the Llywydd to formally move.

Formally move.

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

Item 7, motion to amend Standing Orders: parliamentary business in the seventh Senedd. I call on the Llywydd to formally move.

Formally move.

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

Item 8, motion to amend Standing Orders: Member Bills. I call on the Llywydd to formally move the motion.

Formally move.

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

Item 9, a motion to amend Standing Orders: public Bills. I call on the Llywydd to formally move the motion.

Formally move.

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

Item 10, motion to amend Standing Orders: public petitions. I call on the Llywydd to formally move the motion.

Formally move.

As Chair of the Petitions Committee, I wanted to thank the Business Committee for the changes we have suggested that will be introduced by this motion. However, one of the suggestions that was not accepted in order to preserve flexibility for the next Senedd was that a single committee should have a dedicated lead role in handling public petitions, as happens now. While nothing in the Standing Orders prevents that from happening, our concern was that it's not guaranteed either. The committee has been struck by the benefits of having a committee dedicated to dealing with petitions and petitioners. 'The people's committee', as Jack Sargeant liked to call it. The Petitions Committee is vital in giving people a voice.

During this term, there have been occasions where having a committee that doesn't have to scrutinise budgets and legislation, as the subject committees do, means we have been able to respond in a more agile manner to issues raised by petitioners. We've done some inquiries, we've had some great debates, with action and results as well. It will be up to Members of the next Senedd to decide how to allocate responsibilities to committees. We would encourage them to ensure that a committee for petitions is established at the earliest opportunity. I just wanted to put that on public record. Thank you very much.

I call on the Llywydd to reply.  

Just to quickly respond, I was doing so well in getting these Standing Order changes through until that 'however' from the Chair of petitions. Just to agree with everything you've outlined as the Chair of petitions, the Business Committee does accept and support the fact that the Petitions Committee, since its inception here, has been an excellent contributor to the work of this Senedd. Some of the finest debates I've chaired in this Parliament have been from the Petitions Committee, and it has played a role in exercising change as well.

The point of differentiation, of course, between the Business Committee and yourselves as a Petitions Committee is on whether the next Senedd and future Senedd should be mandated to create a Petitions Committee or, as in most cases on committees, be free to establish its own pattern of committees. So, that's the point of differentiation. I think we would all be united in thinking that, hopefully, the next Senedd will develop further the practice that this Senedd has in having a Petitions Committee, but, as you said, it will be for that next Senedd to decide on that, and it is not precluded from doing that by the Standing Order changes before us today.

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

Item 11 is next, a debate on the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee report, 'Bringing Home the harvest: Supporting the Welsh food processing industry', and I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and, when you wait for one bus, then two buses come along. We've got two debates from my wonderful committee today, so I'm sure everyone's going to be enthralled by them, they are. But I'd like to thank you, Deputy Llywydd, for introducing me, and I move the motion on the order paper today.

We make excellent food here in Wales. The Welsh food sector is something we can be truly proud of. It is big business too. Nearly one in five Welsh jobs are in the food and drink supply chain, and the sector generates around £7 billion of gross value added every year. It is also an ambitious sector, and there is plenty of room for growth. With the right Government support, the industry could achieve even more. Processing is often where the most economic value is added to the food and drink products we consume, so we wanted to look at ways we could improve the offer here in Wales, and to grow capabilities and to keep more of the value added here in Wales.

The report sets out a vision for a resilient, sustainable and thriving Welsh food processing industry. It makes six recommendations, which we believe will help create and secure jobs, increase the GVA for our food sector and build those strong local supply chains. The first recommendation is that the next Welsh Government must co-ordinate an approach to the food system, including creating an overarching and holistic strategy for the whole food system. I was disappointed that the Welsh Government rejected this. The recommendation builds on the committee's food Bill report. The evidence we received both during our inquiry and during the progress of the Bill very much supported the creation of an overarching and holistic strategy for the whole food system. The evidence came from people who work in the industry or are close to it, from people who know the issues and understand how that would be of benefit to fixing some of the issues. So, it is disappointing that the Welsh Government has decided not to take this recommendation forward.

We heard how the decline in Welsh livestock numbers could threaten the viability of our abattoirs. Supporting successful abattoirs in Wales is critical to maintaining high animal welfare standards and keeping value added processing here in our rural communities. We also heard concerning evidence that lower stocking rates on Welsh farms could lead to imports of higher carbon, lower welfare meat. It is important that the Welsh Government examines how we can avoid an illogical scenario of destocking Welsh farms but then importing lower quality, lower welfare meat that has a higher carbon footprint than the meat that we produce. I am pleased to say that the Deputy First Minister accepted our second recommendation on this point.

Recommendation 3 was that the Welsh Government should adopt the Food Policy Alliance Cymru's ambitious target that 75 per cent of vegetables eaten in Wales should be from Wales. The Welsh Government have rejected this, as they believe that this target is unattainable. However, I was pleased to see that the Deputy First Minister strongly agreed with the objectives of increasing sustainable production of vegetables in Wales through co-ordinated policies to improve the profitability, efficiency and environmental impact of the horticultural sector. Deputy Llywydd, as the Deputy First Minister believes 75 per cent is an unworkable figure, I would be keen to hear what he thinks is a realistic and stretching target that could be achieved.

As this is a short debate, I don't have much time left, so I will quickly say that I was pleased that the Welsh Government accepted recommendation 4, around the support for seafood, and recommendation 6, around public procurement. However, I want to concentrate on recommendation 5. This is another recommendation the Welsh Government rejected. We heard a lot of evidence about the missing middle in the Welsh food processing industry. Wales has a great selection of micro and small food businesses. They need support to grow. We heard the impressive feedback about Ireland's 'Food Harvest 2020' document and, ideally, how this should be replicated here in Wales. Whilst I accept that the Welsh Government is working in this area, I would like to thank the Deputy First Minister for his comprehensive response to this recommendation. I believe that more work to identify the gaps and support small processors to grow would really help.

One of the pieces of evidence that really sticks in my mind from this inquiry was the evidence about how relatively low property prices make it harder for Welsh businesses to get commercial loans to cover capital investment. This means that it is much easier to build a processing plant in Swindon than in Pembrokeshire. This wasn't really addressed by the Welsh Government's response, and I would be interested if the Deputy First Minister had any views on how this issue might be tackled.

Before I give way, I would like to quickly thank the Deputy First Minister for not using the dreaded 'accepted in principle' line—actually, the word that is written is 'fudge'—for any responses. I feel that is refreshing. I look forward to hearing other Members' views on this report. Thank you, Deputy Llywydd.

Can I thank you, Andrew, and your committee, for your work on this fundamentally important topic, an issue that I have long campaigned for, as you know? I was very pleased to see the committee once again reflecting on the importance of the Welsh Government's food policy and, in particular, the impact of the Food (Wales) Bill on it. It is clear from the committee's work and the evidence taken that there is still a strong feeling across Wales that we must have a joined-up food policy, and I'm glad that the committee has once again called for the Welsh Government to develop that holistic food strategy.

It is disappointing that there still isn't truly that joined-up food system strategy, especially as stakeholders from every corner of Wales in the food sector are still calling for one. We know the Food (Wales) Bill was voted down by Labour Members and the Liberal colleague. However, we were promised action and, to be honest, we have seen far too little of that. The community food strategy is welcome, but it is a mile away from what needs to be in place to scale up local food production to the levels really needed for the future.

Sadly, the Welsh Government has failed to develop a holistic approach to the food system, but I would hope that lessons have been learned and that the next Welsh Government, whatever that looks like, puts forward meaningful action. I will be willing to work with any Welsh Government, no matter who runs it, to bring about this much-needed change. I'm very happy to take the food Bill off the shelf and work with the next Government to shape legislation that embraces the whole food system, while also addressing the societal issues we see due to poor diets on health, especially in our children. Thank you.

The ability to produce and process food, of course, are important national assets, and we know the contribution of the food and drink sector in Wales, maintaining 0.25 million jobs, responsible for around 17 per cent of all employment in Wales. At the heart of all of this are the primary producers, mainly agriculture, but also aquaculture and horticulture as well. But 95 per cent of food distribution in the UK is dominated by just a small handful of major supermarkets. That concentration of power can squeeze producers very often, and actually exports too much of the profits from our communities. One of the most powerful tools we have in Wales to rebalance that is public procurement, of course, and, at the moment, what is it, just around 50 or 55 per cent of public procurement spend remains in Wales. Well, of course, we need to increase that substantially, to be closer to 75 per cent or even more. And that's important, of course, because for every 1 per cent more that we retain of that spend here in Wales, then it produces thousands of jobs. So if you can keep 10 per cent more, one figure I've seen suggests that you would have an additional 20,000 jobs within the Welsh economy. What's great about that, of course, is that you have that added value with the same spend. You're not necessarily spending in a different way, just spending more wisely and choosing Welsh producers.

When schools serve chicken that's been imported from the far ends of the world, as we've been reminded of recently, whilst we have food producers in Wales who struggle to survive, well, that isn't something that is inevitable. That is a choice, isn't it? It is a choice driven by procurement practices here in Wales, and that needs to change.

But, of course, procurement reform must go hand in hand with strengthening production capacity, and that includes safeguarding local slaughterhouses and regional processing facilities so that that value stays in Wales, and that our supply chains are shorter and therefore more resilient and more sovereign.

Now, a resilient red meat sector needs a network of local and regional facilities that can keep animals moving through the system efficiently, and if investing in processing helps retain more value in Wales, it supports shorter supply chains, it reduces, as the Chair mentioned, the amount of food that we need to import from the other side of the world, so it brings with it then an economic benefit, an environmental benefit and certainly a benefit in terms of animal welfare and production standards as well. So, we should be grasping those opportunities with both hands.

Now, the report references concerns about the pressure that falling livestock numbers places on slaughterhouses and meat processors, particularly those maybe who are already, some of them, operating on tight margins. We need to work with the industry and processors to develop strategies in response to those challenges. I was at the launch recently of a report by NFU Cymru on how suckler beef production delivers multiple economic, environmental, social and cultural benefits for Wales, and the report examines the reasons behind the decline of suckler cows in Wales and sets out recommendations to safeguard their future.

The Government needs to consider options on that front, certainly, and similarly we need greater ambition when it comes to growing the horticulture sector in Wales. Now, we've already heard reference to the Food Policy Alliance Cymru's target that 75 per cent of vegetables consumed in Wales should be produced here sustainably. Now, that is a target we can aim for, albeit it won't be achieved overnight. But, certainly, I've always said there are too many people in this world trying to get halfway up a mountain and making it. If you aim for the peak you might not get there, but you'll get further than halfway. So, there's a lot of good work already happening in that space, and we need to build on it—successful projects such as the Welsh Veg in Schools initiative, which brings with it again the economic, environmental and health benefits we all want to see. But, similarly, a modern, sustainable and resilient seafood supply chain as well for Wales, from catch to plate, with career paths and skills opportunities for new entrants as well. Now, all of this is even more important, of course, given a global food system that's becoming increasingly turbulent, as we've heard with the previous topical question, and as well, of course, in a post-Brexit era where many of our biggest international markets are more difficult to access.

Now, as the report says, Wales needs a more coherent approach to food policy and that's why Plaid Cymru is committed to producing a new national food strategy for Wales, one that aligns farming, processing, procurement and public health, built around Welsh production for Welsh plates to help us bring home the harvest. Diolch.

The UK produces just over half of the food it needs. France, Australia and the United States all produce enough for everyone who is living there. Food sufficiency in Spain is 75 per cent; in the Netherlands, 80 per cent. In Britain we import nearly all our fruit and half of our vegetables. I think it's important to see Britain as all one in the event of a catastrophe such as is developing in the middle east, because obviously there's plenty of trading that goes on across our island. But we have to point out that our domestic production of fruit and veg is concentrated in the east of England, which is also particularly vulnerable to both flooding and drought.

Our rural areas are mainly growing food for supermarkets instead of, and necessarily, our nearby cities. So, we know that, for example, eggs laid in north Wales are transported to supermarket depots in England, to be put in egg boxes marked 'Made in Wales' and then brought back to Wales. If petrol and diesel prices are going to rise, as most people are predicting, this will, no doubt, considerably increase the cost to the consumer. Shorter food miles would reduce the cost of the item from farm to fork, so I am concerned that all three of the strategic recommendations that we put in our report, i.e. numbers 1, 3 and 5, have been rejected. Although I fully acknowledge that the Cabinet Secretary has done a lot of work in this space, I think we are now moving into a new environment where we may have a potential problem. As has already been raised by Janet Finch-Saunders, chicken served in our schools comes from Thailand. In a crisis, I doubt whether that's going to happen, and in any case, under what conditions is it being produced and would our children really approve of it if they knew about it?

Now, in a national emergency, we ought to be able to divert food to feed the most vulnerable people in our population. That happened in the second world war, when we had rationing. But really, are we fit for it at the moment? I was very interested to read about a mapping exercise commissioned by the Welsh Government by Miller Research. It talks about the intense focus on economics, i.e. profitability, and agriculture, which actually have a minimal role in the current community food system, aside from contributing to surplus food. And the stakeholders perceived a substantial structural divide between the community on one side of the map and the influence of the big retailers on the other side. And Tim Lang has already pointed out, both a few years ago and, most recently, last weekend, that the concentration of the distribution centres for supermarkets makes us extremely vulnerable to terrorist attacks or other disruptions, and I think that we really do need to think a lot more about it.

Now, I want to say that I am pleasantly surprised at the amount of work that has been generated by the community food partnerships and the publication of the community food strategy. Because this is something that the Equality and Social Justice Committee had an inquiry on and we're not going to be able to publish this in time for it to be debated here in the sixth Senedd. But I have to say that there is a great deal going on. It's very heart-warming. There are over 100 schools that are properly educating children on where food comes from, as well as endeavouring to educate parents on how to cook, in the context of six out of 10 households never cooking from scratch. They are eating the junk meals that the supermarkets want to sell us.

So, I want to reiterate the concerns I have. I asked Jane Hutt and I also asked you in the economy committee last week what mapping has been done by the Welsh Government on those communities that are least resilient because they have fewer volunteers and fewer on-the-ball schools. What are we going to do if we really do start seeing supermarket shelves being made empty and food simply not arriving into Wales? So, I look forward to hearing the remarks from the Cabinet Secretary.

I will start by thanking the Chair of the committee.

Can I start by giving a word of thanks to the Chair of this committee? I think I speak on behalf of all members of the committee, where the Chair's expertise in this field really came to the fore in this inquiry and made our job, as committee members, far easier, and I think the clerking and research team were grateful for that expertise as well.

This report has come off the back of a lot of good work already done by Peter Fox and his Bill, the food Bill. That ground work—. And I come back to this, Cabinet Secretary, how you, in this old Chamber, before this extension, stood there as a backbencher and said, 'This is a Government Bill', in response to Peter Fox's food Bill. You are now a Government Minister, a Deputy First Minister no less, and I was so hoping that you would have brought forward some of the good work that had been done by Peter in that inquiry, and through the work that he'd done on his food Bill. It's interesting to hear Llyr's commitment from Plaid Cymru to bring forward Peter Fox's food Bill, should they be successful. We would do exactly the same, because this is fundamental to how we feed our nation going forward.

I've been involved with the community food partnerships in Pembrokeshire, led by PLANED, cutting the ribbon on a number of vending machines with them, which has been great to shorten the miles between food and the consumer. But I think there's an opportunity missed there about how we anchor those food producers and those food growers and manufacturers in those areas, so that that supply chain is far more resilient.

I think we do have to look at the Irish model. The Irish have done incredibly well out of this. What they've done is hitched their wagon on some very good, successful processors, and that's where the success has come from, by having fewer who are more nimble and able to maximise the opportunity. That's where the Irish have been successful.

We know that food, raw produce leaving Wales to be processed across the border, the value added is being done elsewhere, and we're not seeing the return on it. So, I will commend the Welsh Government for their investment in Pembrokeshire Creamery and bringing something that we do incredibly well, which is growing grass and producing dairy product, bringing that processing nearer to where that product is made. That has helped reduce the number of wheels under the tanks taking that dairy product up the M4 and out of Wales to be produced, to then be brought back for Welsh consumers. So, I think that's something that really needs to be commended. And more examples like that, that's where there's a successful business in Blas Y Tir, in their brassicas that they grow alongside the dairy now in Pembrokeshire Creamery, where we need to maximise those opportunities. Let's find what we do well, and maximise those opportunities off the back of that as well.

I have to raise concern about the decreasing livestock numbers, especially for the red meat sector, that critical mass that's required to continue to feed the supply chain through our abattoirs and processors. That evidence session was quite stark as to the reality that those companies are fearing might happen should this continual decline—. It's happened over a number of years, Cabinet Secretary, I will admit that; it hasn't been a new phenomenon. But this reduction in livestock numbers and the pressure that puts on the supply chain and the processors needs to be addressed, and we should look at increasing that. Again, coming back to the point, what do we do well, and maximising those opportunities. The beef sector has done incredibly well in the last 12 months. Let's continue to go where we're doing very, very well.

I think something that isn't fully touched on in this report, but something that is around this more broadly and has been touched upon, is the flag loopholes that exist—[Interruption.] Sorry. Yes, Carolyn, go ahead.

Thank you. Just to understand, if you keep increasing livestock numbers, doesn't that mean an increase in slurry, an increase in needing more food and more fertiliser as well, or having to contain them, because I hear about large farms in Pembrokeshire, where they've got 2,000 cattle inside a shed? Just my concerns regarding that.

Look, I understand the concern, but there's a lack of understanding of how the food system works and how agriculture works. So, those dairy farms are few and far between, but you can increase livestock numbers in suckler herds for beef, which is the point I made, because we grow grass very well. That's one raw product that we in Wales do. We're warm and we're wet, therefore, our pasture land is incredibly good. How we do the stock grazing and the block grazing of that can increase our livestock numbers in a regenerative way, because what you're actually doing is putting more of the organic matter back in the soils, as we've previously inquired in our soil report, and I'm looking at Jenny here, because she pushed for that. You can add organic matter back into the soils in a regenerative fashion, which is far better for the environment.

Would you just take another intervention on that, because I'm really interested? Okay. Over the years, silage production keeps increasing, so farmers might grow, I don't know, lots of crops for silage now a year, instead of, like, before it was hay production, wasn't it? And that's had an impact on wildflower meadows and biodiversity, in a way, so that's a concern. I'm just coming from that side of things, if that's useful.

And I understand that as well, and there's far more scope in the new sustainable farming scheme—and I look to the Cabinet Secretary for this—where those can be managed. But you're seeing farms now doing five, six cuts of silage, but what is that silage? It's carbon capture. It's taken carbon out of the atmosphere and it's turned it into a feedstock, which is then going into an animal, that animal, and then it's feeding us. It's a closed cycle. It's not creating new carbon. It's actually a closed carbon system, drawing out carbon from the atmosphere. And if you've got proper deep-rooting things like red clover and other grasses, you can store that carbon in the soils by closing that carbon loop. That's what grass is really good at. That's why grass is at the forefront of the carbon sequestration panel that the Cabinet Secretary set up, looking at this for the sustainable farming scheme. That's a really good option.

I'm going to continue, with the blessing of the Llywydd, just to close my remarks, because I've gone over time with the interventions, and I'm grateful for it. But I just want to say that we are so good in Wales at food production, we're just not very good at adding the value to food. That's where the opportunity exists in growing the economy, as Llyr rightly pointed out, in turning that raw product into a sellable commodity, which has the value added, retained in Wales; we have an opportunity to do something really amazing there.

The final point was closing that flag loophole, where food can be packaged and assembled in the UK and therefore have a union jack put on it, even if it's product from outside the UK. That needs to be shut. There's a campaign led by Victoria Atkins and Robbie Moore in Westminster at the moment on closing this loophole. Cabinet Secretary, I'd really appreciate your views on whether you are supportive of that. Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd.

The Cabinet Secretary to contribute. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you very much to the committee and the committee Chair for doing this important work on their inquiry into food processing, and thank you for the opportunity to respond.

There is much that we agree with the committee on, as we put in our response as well. First of all, food processing is critical to the Welsh economy. It's one of Wales's most important foundational sectors. It supports businesses across the supply chain, contributes towards local prosperity and food security. I'm deeply proud of the sector's achievements. In 2023, as we've heard, the supply chain employed nearly 0.25 million individuals in Wales—in every single constituency, quite frankly. It accounts for 17 per cent of Wales's total workforce, and behind every headline figure like that are people and businesses who continue to deliver for Wales. So, I just want to recognise that contribution today.

So, our Welsh Government approach remains clear. That joined-up and whole system focused on delivery to support a sustainable, a competitive and resilient food sector. So, let me now respond to each of the committee's recommendations and some of the points that have been raised. And can I say, and acknowledging the kind remarks of the Chair there, where we disagree with the committee, we make it clear, but we disagree respectfully, and we've tried to be clear also where we support as well.

So, the committee proposes an overarching food strategy. Now, look, that decision can lie with the next Welsh Government. Yet, what we already have is a co-ordinated approach for the whole food system, and much of it, by the way, is reflective of the themes that were picked up in Peter Fox's Bill originally. We've moved on, and we've done things since then.

So, the vision for the food and drink industry provides a strategic vision on sustainability, productivity, skills, innovation, market development, and that's complemented by the sustainable farming scheme and the community food strategy. These pieces come together. The food forum provides the co-ordination and the oversight right across Government departments, and 'Food Matters: Wales' shows our food-related policies all mapped against, including the well-being of future generations Act.

Taken together, this provides not a static document of a strategy, but a live cross-Government framework for food policy in Wales. It brings together partners across the whole of the supply chain, and it's been tested, by the way, through the EU exit, through the pandemic, tested through the cost-of-living crisis, and it continues to evolve, including on food system resilience, which I'll come to in a moment, and emergency food security. There will be, by the way, Members, an updated 'Food Matters: Wales' document that will be published later this month, as we've previously agreed within the Senedd.

I just want to refer to the Tim Lang piece that has been mentioned, and it's particularly pertinent in terms of the conflict we currently see occurring. Tim argues for turning on its head the just-in-time management that we've developed since I was studying for a higher national diploma back in the 1980s, into a 'Just in case, what if we have these shocks?' And I think that is something that we and the future Government will need to actually turn our attention to, going forward. How prepared are we? What actions do we need to be prepared for that? Tim leads the way in the thinking on this.

We absolutely recognise, by the way, the importance of a stable livestock supply for red meat and dairy processing. Cattle and sheep numbers have indeed declined over two decades, but production, interestingly, has remained broadly stable. So, Wales is well placed, as you say, Sam, to produce low-carbon, high-quality meat. That's our defining characteristic.

The sustainable farming scheme encourages efficiency and emissions reduction, including actions on age at slaughter and sire registration, supporting productivity and competitiveness. We don't support reverting to an old-style headage scheme, but we do agree it's essential that sustainable Welsh meat underpins our domestic processing capacity and continues to access strong markets, both within Wales and far beyond. Increasing the visibility in domestic supply chains will complement the sector's long-standing success as a major exporter. We should be proud of that.

We do, by the way, share the ambition to expand horticulture, but what we cannot do, as we've said in our response, is commit to a target to produce 75 per cent of the vegetables consumed in Wales, given our seasonal and climatic realities. Progress, however, is being made. The latest planning guidance supports business growth, and Welsh Government capital schemes for horticulture start-ups and agricultural diversification deliver investment in infrastructure and equipment for horticulture. Farming Connect is now providing training, advice and peer learning, with rising engagement every week from horticultural enterprises. And public procurement, as we've said so often, also plays a key role. Initiatives such as Welsh Veg in Schools show how co-ordinated demand can stimulate local supply chains. But we do need to do more as well. [Interruption.] Yes, I will give way.

You talked about seasonal and climatic reality. With polytunnels, you can produce vegetables 11 or 12 months of the year.

Indeed, and we need to build the investment in the infrastructure and the confidence and the knowledge and the understanding to do that, because you're right, we can do this. The question is getting everybody lined up to say, 'Let's do this', and increase the resilience and food security aspect of producing more here on these shores.

We accept the recommendation to set out our work to support the Welsh seafood processing industry. This is very important. Through the Welsh marine and fisheries scheme, we fund investment across the seafood supply chain, including upgrading of processing facilities. The fisheries management plans, which are working really well, under the Fisheries Act 2020, help manage the stock sustainably—we're doing really well in Wales—and to secure long-term resilience for our processors and for coastal communities. We have commissioned an analysis of Welsh fisheries and processors to inform where future support should go.

We're also promoting sustainably sourced Welsh seafood in schools and wider public services, though I know we've got more to do—that's why we're commissioning this. It's supported by the updated healthy eating in schools regulations and guidance, which also tries to direct seafood onto our plates. The Welsh Government provides comprehensive business support under the Food and Drink Wales brand—very important. The Welsh brand is selling our food, both domestically and internationally. I've gone over time, but this is focused on sustainable growth, innovation, skills, market development, and resilience.

On the challenge on how we provide the support, our national food centres, our cluster programmes, deliver the technical expertise on reformulation of products, accreditation, process improvements, capital grants, including the food business accelerator scheme, help to upgrade facilities, and increase capacity. Food and Drink Skills Wales supports the workforce developments through diagnostics and training. I have to say we are the envy of other countries in what we're doing in this, with the right investment really cleverly targeted.

Collectively, these measures are strengthening our domestic capability, and support the missing middle identified within the report. Since the vision for the food and drink industry was published in 2021, the sector has faced unprecedented shocks, and the Food and Drink Wales offer has supported resilience across the supply chain. Some barriers to growth, including infrastructure capacity and planning, can't be addressed by capital funding alone.

Llywydd, you're asking me to wind up. I'm happy to do that. I was going to touch on things such as the offer that we're making through the free school meals and how that supports local supply chains. I was going to touch on the community food strategy and the carbon reduction pilot working with suppliers, but I can't go into detail on that.

Therefore, may I say that the committee's report identifies challenges and opportunities? The Welsh Government continues to be committed to a food processing industry that prospers and is sustainable and resilient, supporting businesses, assisting communities and providing for Wales, today and for future generations. Thank you very much.

The Chair of the committee to reply. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I thank everyone who took part in the debate this afternoon and, in particular, the Cabinet Secretary? I don't think that anyone is not enthused by what we're doing here in Wales with adding value to the food, it's just that there's so much more we could be doing and capturing that value here in Wales. The Cabinet Secretary, in fairness to him, and I in my opening remarks, highlighted the scale of the operation we're talking about. We're not talking about some cottage industry, we're talking about over 200,000 jobs involved in the food processing sector and £7.2 billion-worth of value at the moment. This is a huge opportunity for Wales. Whoever sits at that bench after May I hope will embrace this report and embrace these recommendations.

It was so good to hear Peter, who was a new Member here in 2021 and got pulled out of the ballot for the backbench Bill, and he chose the food sector to be the theme of that Bill. It is such a shame that that Bill never got taken up by the Government and brought forward as a substantial package to enhance the offer that we could do to build more in public procurement, in safeguarding the authenticity of Welsh produce, and giving that drive to public procurement in particular to make sure that we do get that healthy food through the food chain that has the health benefits that Peter touched on.

Llyr touched on public procurement as well and the importance of public procurement, but the one thing we did get back was a bit of pushback from processors, who highlighted how they weren't really that interested in public procurement because it was quite difficult to access and navigate the rounds, and ultimately, very often, it was the lower value product that was going into that public procurement sector. The British meat federation, I think it was, were highlighting how they tend to look more at the—. I was going to say the dearer end, but the added-value end that actually gets the premium cuts, if you like. So, there is a bit of a disconnect between what we would like to see as greater driven public procurement, but ultimately there's maybe a lack of processors who want to take up that mantle.

It was good to hear from Jenny, who is always a strong advocate for the vegetable sector here in Wales, and there is a great opportunity to produce more veg in Wales. I can remember the days when you would go down to St Mellons, for example, and huge amounts of grade A land was turned over to vegetable production. But from the 1980s to the 1990s, there was a huge transit of that production out to Holland because they could do it so much cheaper under glass because of various subsidies and support that was given to the sector at that time. And so there is an opportunity there. The one thing I would be critical of in the Cabinet Secretary's response was that I did offer him the challenge—. He knocked our 75 per cent target, but he never came back. I did notice he had copious amounts, reams, of written notes there. He didn't come back and say what he thought was a manageable and achievable target that a Government might be able to adopt.

I'd like to thank Sam Kurtz for his kind words, in particular about bringing this report to the committee and hopefully developing some strategies that we can take on board. Of course, Sam highlighted the importance of the investment that the Welsh Government have made to date, and in particular when it comes to, obviously, the Pembrokeshire dairy, for example, but yet you still travel the M4 and you see huge amounts of milk travelling up the M4. If you look at any of the tankers that are travelling up there, it is for 'food product only' use, and those tankers are all going to processors in England to be processed, and very often coming back in carton form to Wales. So, there is a huge opportunity and I hope the next Government will take this report on board and ultimately develop a strategy accordingly.

From my point of view, I would just really like to emphasise the importance, as I see it, of the 'Food Harvest 2020' document that the Irish Government brought forward, which really did capture the primary produce from the farmers, the processors and the retailers in one document, because it is that joined-up approach that we need to make to make sure that the whole sector provides to the consumer, who will buy the product, ultimately. If there's one missing link in that chain, then the international market takes its place, and that is something we do not want to happen. We want to see more home-grown food produced here in Wales, processed here in Wales and added value.

I commend this report to the Senedd, and I hope that people will look at it as a blueprint for taking forward greater processing here in Wales.

The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the committee's report has been noted. 

It's time now for the second bus to come along.

We'll move to the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee report, 'Local Growth Fund'. I invite the Chair to present the report. Andrew R.T. Davies.

Hopefully it's not a bendy bus, it's a straight bus. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It's a great pleasure to move this report in my name on the order paper today. This is an unusual committee debate. Normally, we would have looked to hold the debate on the report after the Welsh Government had responded. However, with dissolution fast approaching and given the relatively tight timelines in which the fund has been developed, there was no time to hold this debate following the Welsh Government's response. So, I'm really looking forward to hearing the Cabinet Secretary's response to our report.

When we were gathering evidence for this inquiry, Professor Kevin Morgan told us that Wales was about to celebrate an unwelcome milestone: 100 years of relative economic decline. The professor referred to this as the 'anniversary from hell'. This is a jarring thought. This economic decline is the root of so many of the challenges we face. Presiding Officer, I know the Cabinet Secretary agrees with me that good-quality jobs are the best way to alleviate poverty. As we know, poverty leads to poor health and lower life expectancy, and many other ills in our society. 'Anniversary from hell' really underlines the Welsh Government's underperformance in this sector of the economy, and the negative impact not just on our pockets but also other aspects of people's lives across Wales.

Of course, the local growth fund is not going to turn our economy around on its own, especially as it's so much smaller than the funds that it has replaced, but it's what we need as the key tools to increase economic growth and productivity and tackle economic inequalities, particularly in our most deprived communities. However, we have some serious concerns about the fund structures and the plan for the delivery. This report makes seven recommendations, which, if acted upon, will help correct those problems and support the fund in playing its vital role in supporting the economy and social development in some of our most vulnerable communities.

It is important that we get the best value out of any public investment. However, this approach often leads to economic investment being focused on areas where the economy is already doing well. Deputy Llywydd, the committee believes that the local growth fund must be targeted to those areas where it is most needed to develop those economies and communities. I was pleased to see and hear that the Cabinet Secretary intends for the Welsh index of multiple deprivation and rurality to be considerations in the formula to allocate this to the regions. I look forward to hearing how she will ensure that the four regions spend their allocations where it is most needed.

Moving on to delivery of the fund, we are deeply concerned about the ability of the corporate joint committees to deliver the regional element of the fund. Last year, we undertook a health check on the four city and regional growth deals, another economic development project jointly managed by Welsh and UK Governments. There are four of these deals covering the corporate joint committees. We found woeful inequalities and inadequacies in delivery of these deals. While we found that the Swansea bay deal was ticking over, there were some serious questions to be asked about the delivery of the Cardiff deal, and particularly the north Wales deal. While I do not want to tar all the CJCs with the same brush, it is vital that the local growth fund does not meet the same fate and the worse performance of the growth deals.

Presiding Officer, there are also some areas we anticipate the Welsh Government has less control over, but we are also worried about. We are concerned about the UK Government's role in the fund's economic development part, which is devolved to the Welsh Government. I would like to see both Governments working together for Wales and the relationship bearing fruit. However, the committee believes that the Welsh Government should be primarily accountable to this Chamber, not the UK Government. We expect the memorandum of understanding that is currently being developed by the two Governments to reflect this. We are also very concerned about the capital-revenue split. We heard that it was hard to deliver good-quality capital projects within a three-year timeline. We also heard that the shift to the mainly capital fund will put many skilled jobs currently funded via the shared prosperity fund at risk, and we are concerned about the loss of expertise that would result from these job losses.

Last week, the spring forecast included increased revenue funding for the next Welsh Government to spend. The Industrial Communities Alliance has suggested it should be used to top up the revenue side of the local growth fund. Whilst naturally there will be a variety of calls for this funding, I would be interested to know if there has been any discussion with the Cabinet around using some of this money to this effect. Whilst we understand that the UK Government's role and the capital-revenue split are issues where the Welsh Government isn't the final decision maker, Welsh Ministers must push the UK Government harder on both these issues.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I look forward to hearing Members' contributions this afternoon, and I particularly look forward to hearing the Cabinet Secretary's response to this report.

Of course, as we always do, I'd like to thank the Chair for his work in chairing those meetings, fellow committee members and those who gave evidence, and of course the clerks for bringing this all together.

I think the first thing to say is that the evidence the committee received during this inquiry was highly critical of the local growth fund itself and the parameters for its delivery, and those criticisms were entirely fair. Many contributors told us that the programme we now see bears little resemblance to the ambitions that were originally discussed, and that this programme has been set up to fail. I think it's hard to disagree with that conclusion when you take into account the time frame for delivery, which is frankly laughable given the objectives of this fund. Now, it goes without saying—and the Chair referred to it in his contribution—that the issue that dominated the committee's discussions was the proposed capital-revenue split. The committee heard strong warnings that reversing that balance risks undermining the delivery capacity that has slowly been rebuilt over recent years. After more than a decade of austerity, many local authorities and partner organisations had already seen their economic development capacity significantly reduced. The shared prosperity fund allowed some of that capacity to return, because revenue funding enabled organisations, then, to recruit people with the skills needed to design and deliver those programmes.

The concern now is that that sharp shift toward capital is already triggering redundancies, and along with the jobs themselves, that experience, networks and institutional memory will also then disappear. That loss of capacity is particularly troubling because all economic development programmes, regardless of how they are designed nationally, are ultimately delivered locally. The people who understand their communities, their local economies and the barriers faced by businesses and workers are the people responsible for making these programmes function in practice. Without that local expertise, even well-funded programmes will struggle to deliver meaningful results. The committee therefore emphasised that retaining those skills and that knowledge must be a central priority as a new programme is implemented. Recommendation 3 is particularly important here, and must be carried out by Government. Funding programmes do not deliver outcomes on their own—people do. The bottom line is that we cannot afford to lose the knowledge, skills and institutional capacity needed to deliver gains on the ground.

There was also significant scepticism about whether you could actually get transformative capital projects and whether they could actually be delivered within that three-year time frame currently proposed within the programme, and, of course, again, the Chair referred to that in his opening. Major capital schemes—and I don't think I need to tell people in this Chamber—require time for planning, they require time for design, consultation, procurement and construction. There's a clear debate, by the way, to have on that process itself, but attempting to compress those processes into such a short period of time creates a significant risk that the programme, then, will either under-deliver or default to smaller projects that are easier to complete quickly but are less transformative in the long term.

That concern is then compounded by the fact that equivalent funding arrangements elsewhere in the UK operate over longer capital horizons. In England, combined authorities are working with a four-year time frame. By the way, there was no explanation as to why that had been offered to England and why there was a discrepancy between Wales and England. I think we need to get that clarity as soon as possible.

I will finish by saying that, ultimately, the central question being raised here is whether the local growth fund as currently designed is capable of delivering the kind of economic change that communities across Wales need. Now, I don't think anyone is expecting one fund to do anything in isolation, but what we see here is symptomatic of the kind of short-termism that has come to characterise regional economic development in Wales. Frankly, that style of thinking has been a blight on us and doesn't come anywhere near to meeting the scale of the challenges in front of us.

I think the challenge for this Welsh Government and the next Welsh Government is to demonstrate how the big concerns will be addressed, how the fund will be integrated with wider economic development efforts and how the capacity needed to deliver it will be protected. So, some clarity from the Cabinet Secretary on some of these points in her response would be very welcome.

I think one of the biggest concerns I have on this is the lack of any policy by the UK Government to target money on the areas with the least opportunity to attract capital money from the private sector without that incentive. We were very grateful to the Industrial Communities Alliance for pointing this out, and I think that that is something that is seriously lacking. It's easy enough to deliver growth in areas that are already thriving, such as Cardiff or Newport, because success builds success, but one of the things that we were looking at when we were discussing the growth programmes in the Cardiff capital fund and the other growth funds was the lack of attention to bringing up those communities that are the poorest in Wales, and there doesn't seem to be any strategy on that. For example, the Pride in Place funding, which was top-sliced from the money that was left from the local growth fund, is only going to be awarded to one area in a local authority, and it means all the other areas get stuffed. They get nothing out of this. And it feels like a very, very brutal way of doing things and not at all the collaborative approach that I think we've always taken in Wales.

I think that because it's so capital heavy, one of the things we might be able to do is improve our energy resilience with things like heat networks, because so much of the money's got to be spent on capital. We clearly still have a lot of work to do. We have a lot of renewable energy that we have produced, but we're sending it all back to the grid and then we have to pay for it at a cost of what the wholesale price of gas is. And that doesn't seem to me to be a resilient, sustainable way of doing things. We have to capture the heat that we're already generating, as with the steel reprocessing plant down the road, and put it back into the community for use by the community. That means we're going to need a lot more community-owned facilities that will obviously be targeted on those communities. But we're allowed to do that under the current regulations, and that might be one way of making those communities more resilient. Because at the moment, we know that far too many people are suffering to try and keep themselves warm during the winter months, and who knows what's going to happen next winter. I'm sure we're all concerned about that.

So, I think that there are always going to be opportunities here and we need to seize them, but at the end of the day, we have to bear in mind that this is half of what we used to get from the shared prosperity fund, and therefore we need to be very mindful that we spend it wisely.

I have to say—I will once again say—that you can spend very small sums of money very cost-effectively. So, a mere £70,000 from the shared prosperity fund was dedicated in Blaenau Gwent to a breastfeeding programme, and it got two thirds of all mothers breastfeeding within a very short amount of time. Seventy thousand pounds is nothing in terms of public spending; it's a huge amount in terms of individual households. But that's the sort of strategic thinking that we're going to need, now that we have less money, in order to try and target our most deprived communities to ensure that they're not just having to come into Cardiff and Newport to get work if they're in south-east Wales, but that we are spreading the wealth across all our communities.

Do you agree that we used to have that sort of funding under the European—

We did, and we also had—

[Inaudible.]—communities?

Yes, we did. And we also had the assisted areas funding. And I think the UK Government—and possibly the Welsh Government if it has the capacity—needs to start rethinking how we're going to spread the prosperity of our country across all our communities.

I would like to put on record my thanks—as Luke Fletcher has done, as another member of the committee—to the Chair, the clerking team and all those who gave evidence. And I think, in conclusion, and I'll quote from the report here, Llywydd:

'We are disappointed with the large reduction in funding received by Wales though the LGF compared to the previous economic development schemes as this means there will be less money to invest in, and support, our most vulnerable communities.'

And I think that says it all, really, as to the situation that we find ourselves in with the local growth fund. And I think Luke is absolutely right, the evidence that we had as a committee was hugely critical of this scheme. It's as if nothing has been learned through the SPF funding, which was a quantum more of funding than the LGF is. No lessons have been learned at all. That split between capital and revenue is already putting pressure on local authorities, losing that expertise. And that expertise is leaving Wales. It's not just moving around within Wales and going into the private sector, away from the public sector or wherever it might be, it's actually leaving Wales, and we are losing that expertise in delivering some of these legitimate and needed projects to transform areas that require real transformation, because of long-term levels of poverty and inequality. I think that's something that really is—. And I'd welcome the Cabinet Secretary's view on this, as to how, under this scheme, under the way that it's played out, she envisages those challenges being approached and those hurdles being overcome, given the evidence and the strength of the evidence that was received in this committee, which thinks that it can't be done. So, I'd welcome the Cabinet Secretary's view on that.

And to come to a point as well that's mentioned in the Chair's foreword in the report, and we discussed in committee in the private sessions—this idea of Treasury orthodoxy when it comes to spending a pound of the taxpayers' money. We see this in England, with the UK, with His Majesty's Treasury, and we see this in Wales as well. There's this anticipation and want and desire to spend a pound in an area where you're always going to get a quicker and a greater return on that investment, rather than what offers a greater socioeconomic impact, and I think that orthodoxy needs to be challenged. We see a whole host of investments always going into the south-east of England. We see a host of investments here in Wales always going into the Cardiff area. That's great for those areas, but for the constituents that I represent in those communities that come up in the Welsh poverty index, that really says nothing to them that they're feeling seen and needed, and their needs are being addressed under the current system. So, I think that's something that we all can do—push forward on that challenge to the Treasury orthodoxy as to how the value of that pound is spent and that return on it.

I think this committee has done a lot of good work over the five years. This is a really good piece, considering that we looked at the SPF funding model, when that came forward, and now we're looking at this. But it's as if it just sat on a shelf and collected dust, and that's something that I found really frustrating in my time here, this good work that is done by a committee, the time taken to collect evidence, to come forward with recommendations on a cross-party basis. And I know that this design has come from a UK Government, so they may not be reading what we come up with in our ETRA committee, but still, that good knowledge that was collected under the SPF inquiry that we did should've fed into what the future local growth fund looked like. But sadly, it hasn't, and that's why that conclusion that I opened with is so damning. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I'd like to reiterate what Samuel Kurtz has just said, and to thank the committee for this very important report. It'd be a real shame if it does just gather dust. Because it's incredible how you've delivered this in such a short time frame—and I congratulate the clerks of the committee for that too, to be able to turn this around—with very clear recommendations and concerns, which need to be more widely understood, in my view. Because, Dirprwy Lywydd, last month, YouGov ran a poll, which they say showed widespread public confusion when it came to the responsibilities of this place and of the Welsh Government. One question found that less than half of the public correctly identified the Welsh Government as being responsible for economic development. However, in this case, I don't think the 30 per cent who incorrectly answered 'Westminster' to this question were just simply misinformed, because it is complicated.

As this report, and many other issues, have shown, Westminster retains huge power over economic development, and we saw that alluded to in First Minister's questions yesterday. The committee report describes an unacceptable level of control that Westminster retains over the local growth fund. As a result of Westminster's control over the capital and revenue spending of the local growth fund, we are already seeing people being served with redundancy notices, the beginning of what has been warned will be hundreds of job losses. This is so that more money can be put into capital investment, even though multiple stakeholders warn that there simply isn't the time frame to plan and deliver capital investment projects. This is impacting ordinary people. This cannot be called 'economic development' when people are losing their jobs because of it, nor is it a result of decisions and responsibilities of this place and of the Welsh Government. It is economic chaos delivered by Westminster. No wonder many people living here don't think economic development is the Senedd's responsibility. It is clear that Westminster doesn't think it's the Senedd's responsibility either. If we are to see change, this is a story that needs to be communicated beyond this Siambr.

I thank the committee for the recommendations to the Welsh Government, and I agree with their bleak assessment that UK Government does not intend to change any of their decisions, regardless of what this place might tell them. This is a story that should therefore be conveyed as much as possible to the people of Wales, so that they understand more of what stands between them and prosperity.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the European structural investment funds that all of these Westminster projects are meant to replace identified two areas of the UK that they considered least developed, where the gross domestic product per head was less than 75 per cent of the EU average. One was Cornwall and the rest was the majority of Wales. As a result, their average funding per person per year in the UK was £31, but in Wales it was £123. For comparison with countries we believe we are equal to in the European Union, not one country, such as France, Germany, Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, had that level of deprivation. The majority of Wales was considered to be on this low level of development, not seen anywhere else across north-west Europe.

This is the level we are seeing here in Wales. The EU is still investing in the most underdeveloped areas still within the EU. Having left the EU, Wales is left with far, far less development funding overall, and that is a fact. That funding now has multiple purposes and limits, as defined by Westminster. Functionally, that means that our most deprived areas will be getting relatively more deprived and face more inequality year on year, compared to the most deprived areas of the European Union, which are still being funded by European structural funds. This is also an issue on which, if Westminster will not listen to Welsh Government's problems, we need to ensure that the people of Wales fully understand the position they have been put in, and who has put them in that position.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'll finish with this. I thank the committee for their report, and I hope that everyone who has read the report and everyone who has contributed to the report are also committed to sharing that insight, the insight it offers, as far as possible beyond this place, to best decide where Wales goes from now on. Diolch yn fawr.

And I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning, Rebecca Evans. 

Diolch. I welcome this opportunity to respond to the committee's report on the local growth fund, and I really want to thank the committee for its work and Members for their contributions on this today. I will, of course, be issuing a formal response to the committee's recommendations very shortly.

What I've heard today during the debate and also during the statement that I provided to the Senedd here two weeks ago wasn't actually a criticism of the Welsh Government's choices that we've made in this space. So, what I haven't heard is a criticism of the priority that we've put on addressing productivity and increasing productivity and also trying to address economic inequality. I think, actually, there's broad consensus that that is the right thing to do.

I also haven't seen criticism of the fact that we've looked at the funding formula, and we're putting the majority of that towards the Welsh index of multiple deprivation, whilst also recognising productivity issues and disparities across Wales and also rurality. Similarly, I haven't heard any complaints about the flexibilities that we've put in place to try and help local government manage the transition between the two funding schemes, or the fact that we've consulted widely. Actually, we were the only part of the UK that undertook a public consultation in the way that we did to understand the views of partners and of communities.

Whilst I absolutely share the concerns that colleagues have raised very powerfully this afternoon, through the report and also in my statement a couple of weeks ago, those decisions around the capital-revenue split, the lack of that longer-term vision and outlook for the funding, actually, those are concerns that, as a Welsh Government, we absolutely recognise and that we continue to press the UK Government on.

What I will say is that it's really welcome that the UK Government has honoured its commitment to restore the decision making over the EU successor funding to the Welsh Government, and with the oversight of this Senedd. That's really important and that will allow us to invest in those Welsh priorities and also, of course, to add value to other Welsh investment programmes, such as our free ports and our city and growth deals and so on, so that we can ensure that there is cohesion and that we can have greater impact from the spend as well. What we really want to do is avoid the fragmentation that was evident with the levelling-up funds, and the duplication and so on, including in that the shared prosperity fund.

So, turning to some of the specific issues in the report, I really recognise those concerns, as I say, about the change from a revenue-focused fund to a more capital-focused one. We are doing everything we can within our power to help local government and organisations affected. I've previously informed colleagues that I agreed to the WLGA's request for a transition year during 2026-27. That means the use of the existing shared prosperity fund structures and the allocation approach, so funding is available to every part of Wales. It also means that local government will design regional plans. They'll be making decisions on projects and they'll be able to retain key capacity and jobs that are aligned with the new fund. That, again, contrasts with the situation in England and Scotland, where there is an absolutely clean break from the shared prosperity fund, there's no transition arrangement in place, and many regions and local authorities actually will have no access to any funding through the local growth fund at all.

So, it's really important that we don't lose sight of the opportunities that the new fund will create for our economy, increasing productivity in areas that are falling behind. That’s an absolute golden thread of our investment plan. The fund's key investment objectives will enable support for capital investments, including in areas such as research, in innovation, in strategic business premises and sites, and also the enabling infrastructure for energy and transport. All of that will work alongside the revenue support available to increase demand-led skills and support for people who are currently economically inactive to help them into work.

So, from lessons learned and international best practice, a regional approach is really key to delivering the outcomes that we want to see through this fund. Corporate joint committees have been established to do exactly this, to underpin and strengthen regional collaboration. CJCs do strike the balance between the risk of over-centralisation by the Welsh Government and then also not learning the lessons of the fragmentation and duplication of what went before. Of course, CJCs are currently making really good progress against their economic development, their transport and their land-use planning functions, and we are going to continue to support them in developing their capability and their capacity there.

I'll conclude. I know I only have five minutes to respond to this debate, so I want to thank the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee for their local growth fund inquiry, and all partners who gave evidence to that. We are currently finalising the memorandum of understanding with the UK Government, and, as I promised to do, we will publish that once it's agreed. We look forward to continuing to work with partners across Wales to deliver a stronger, greener and fairer Wales with what is £0.5 billion of investment.

Andrew R.T. Davies to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and could I thank everyone who took part in the debate this afternoon? If I could just raise with the Cabinet Secretary that I think there is agreement on the goals that you've highlighted that this fund will deal with. No-one could dispute the fact that productivity needs to increase, and the benefits that that will bring to communities and the overall economy of Wales. But I think what the committee was aghast at was (a) the reduction in funding, which Sam Kurtz and other Members highlighted, but, secondly, this complete about-face on the split between capital and revenue. As someone who once chaired a small development group in the Vale of Glamorgan called Creative Rural Communities, as the Member for the Vale of Glamorgan will most probably be familiar with, back in the early 2000s, the importance of having staff to develop these projects from small beginnings into the finished goal—. It's really, really important for organisations to be able to draw on that expertise. Otherwise what will happen is, with the greatest respect to local authorities and other maybe larger organisations, they'll have their oven-ready projects and they will just grab all this funding, which does not necessarily have the local buy-in that we want to see with some of these projects. So, that is a real concern, and I think it has been shared across the Chamber today by everyone who has contributed to this.

Jenny touched on that it doesn't necessarily have to be many millions of pounds that you spend on projects. She highlighted the project in Blaenau Gwent, for example, which encouraged new mothers to breastfeed: £70,000 spent on that project, two thirds uptake. That is a result, that is, because we all know from breastfeeding the benefits that that brings to young children right the way through their adult life as well, with healthy outcomes, and that is something that really is a tangible benefit of a public pound spent in a community that has struggled for many years.

I’d like to thank Rhys ab Owen for contributing as well. It’s always good to see a committee report getting interest from someone who hasn't sat on the committee but, obviously, has an insight into these projects, and the importance that you highlighted about the deprivation that exists in Wales after the many tranches of money that have been spent and how the original concept of these funds, back in the day, identified, obviously, Wales and Cornwall, and the lamentable figures after a series of funding.

We can argue about Brexit, we can argue about pots of money, but I think one thing that is unarguable is that this huge amount of money over successive years has been spent and big numbers haven't been moved, and, sadly, Wales is still very much struggling with that deprivation and those real, chronic problems. And the point that Jenny made that Cardiff is, very often, able to look after itself—it's really important that we direct this money into areas that really do struggle to attract those development opportunities. And it's good to hear the Cabinet Secretary talking about the multiple deprivation index and rurality as key drivers of discerning where this money will go. Because you get one chance at this, very often, and, if you miss that, the generational change that we want to see here in Wales will not be achieved.

As a committee, we will look forward to hearing what the Cabinet Secretary says in her official response to us, but, as I said in my opening remarks, given the timeline and the implementation of this, we, obviously, wanted to bring this debate to the floor of the Chamber as a committee so that it could get a public hearing, and we hope very much that the recommendations that we have put forward will be taken on board by this Government and the next Government to make sure that this fund, whatever we might think of it, does achieve what the Cabinet Secretary has highlighted she hopes it will achieve over the lifetime, the three years, of its existence.

I'd also like to put on record my sincere thanks to the witnesses who came and provided the evidence. I can see the Deputy Presiding Officer looking at the red clock there, and I don’t want to keep people here beyond their tea. I thank the witnesses, the committee clerking team and everyone who contributed to this report, and I commend it to the Senedd.

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

The next item is Stage 4 of the British Sign Language (Wales) Bill. I call on Mark Isherwood to move the motion.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. It's an absolute privilege for me to stand before the Senedd today to move the Stage 4 motion for the British Sign Language (Wales) Bill. This really is a momentous occasion and one that I'm very proud to be part of.

This British Sign Language (Wales) Bill has been a long time in the making, shaped by persistence and steady progress over several years. The journey for me, as I mentioned last week, began in October 2018, when delegates and deaf community members at the north Wales Lend Me Your Ears conference came together to call for dedicated British Sign Language legislation in Wales. That momentum continued in February 2021, when the Senedd voted to note my proposal for a Bill aimed at promoting the use of BSL and strengthening access to education and public services through the language. That vote sent a clear message: there was strong cross-party support for this ambition.

During this Senedd term, in late 2022, Members once again endorsed the principle of a proposed BSL (Wales) Bill, reaffirming the earlier commitment. Then, after my being successful in the Member's Bill ballot, the Senedd voted in June 2024 to allow me to bring this legislation forward. I'm delighted, therefore, to now stand here today at the Bill's final stage and thank everyone who has contributed to this: to all the individuals and organisations who took part in the campaign and the consultation and the focus groups who helped shape the legislation; to the Equality and Social Justice Committee, the Finance Committee and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, together with their committee teams, for their valued approach to Stage 1 scrutiny; to the Equality and Social Justice Committee for their consideration of amendments at Stage 2; to both the Bill's clerking team and my own staff, who have worked tirelessly; to the Cabinet Secretary and Welsh Government officials for their support and work on the Bill; and to all other Members across the Chamber who have shown support for the Bill. This really has been cross-party working of the highest order.

British Sign Language is fundamental to communication and inclusion in everyday life. For many deaf people, it is not simply a means of communication, but their first language, the primary way they express themselves, connect with others and access the services they rely upon. BSL also plays a vital role in bringing deaf and hearing communities together, helping to remove barriers and foster greater understanding. And yet, too often, deaf people are still prevented from accessing essential public services because those services are not available in the language they use every day. This Bill, therefore, will put in place a framework to help ensure that this position changes. This is, without doubt, the most progressive BSL legislation in the UK, and, once implemented, will firmly place Wales as a leading nation in how BSL policy is designed and delivered for the benefit of the deaf community.

I'm sure that Members will be aware of these by now, but I will reiterate some of the key things this Bill does. In order to fulfil their duty to promote and facilitate BSL, Welsh Ministers must prepare and publish a BSL strategy. This will provide the national vision badly needed. Specified listed public bodies, including all local health boards and local authorities, must prepare and publish BSL plans, describing how they intend to promote and facilitate the use of BSL. This builds upon the national strategy and ensures that those local plans are delivered by the people who understand their local needs.

Most importantly, alongside these duties, the Bill makes it a requirement that the deaf community is involved in developing the national strategy and the BSL plans from the start, and throughout the process, not just consulted on them. This is a huge step forward, and one that is vital for the successful delivery of the Bill's aims. For the first time, Wales will have a statutory BSL adviser, a role now set out in law, supported by an assisting BSL panel. Another essential part of the Bill that will help ensure that the voices of the deaf community are heard and continue to be heard. 

Deputy Presiding Officer, Dirprwy Lywydd, as you've heard me say many times, this legislation is vital. The importance of the legislation is highlighted by the overwhelming support I've received from Members across the Chamber, from Government and from the wider community. It has been my honour to bring forward this Bill, and I ask Members to continue their support and vote for the Bill to be passed by this Senedd today.

Thank you all very much. [Applause.]

Members of the deaf community and the groups that represent them were watching from the gallery and online during our Stage 3 proceedings last week. This was facilitated, of course, by the provision of BSL interpreters. Some of them told me afterwards how powerful it was to see such commitment across the parties to the deaf BSL community, and to see how Members' understanding and recognition of BSL has developed and deepened during the scrutiny process, and the inequalities and the disadvantage that the community faces.

So, passing this Bill is the first step in the process of ensuring that that continues, and that the huge amount of work that needs to be done now starts. They're watching now, some of them are in the gallery, and I know that they're also watching the livestream in the Urdd Centre across the way. It was a privilege to celebrate with them today and to congratulate them on their hard work and perseverance, and their patience as well in campaigning tirelessly for their linguistic rights. 

Of course, we also want to pay tribute to Mark Isherwood for getting the job done. It has been an experience that I will never forget, working on this Bill, and it has been an important lesson. Collaborating with the deaf community on a cross-party basis with Mark and the Cabinet Secretary has really shown, I think, how we, through our Senedd, can be progressive and ambitious, by coming together for the benefit of the people whom we represent, particularly those who haven't had the attention that they should have had for far too long.

Plaid Cymru is therefore proud to support this Bill, and we will also be proud to continue to support the work that will follow on from it over the coming years, because expectations have been raised by this Bill and this Bill is a promise that must be kept.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Trefnydd and Chief Whip, Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. As Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, I'm very proud to have collaborated with Mark Isherwood to develop this Bill, helping shape proposals for a national BSL strategy and the appointment of a BSL adviser and assisting panel, measures that are intended to genuinely improve the lives of BSL signers in Wales. The Bill places clear responsibilities on listed public bodies to review, adapt and improve their services, so they actively contribute to achieving the Bill's aims to promote and facilitate the use of BSL.

In the later stages, I supported amendments to ensure we plan for the workforce needed to deliver the Bill's objectives, capture the data needed to monitor the use of BSL, and strengthen the involvement of BSL signers at every stage of implementation, and together, I am confident that these provisions lay strong foundations for more consistent recognition and meaningful use of BSL across Wales.

The Bill we have before us today reflects the constructive and collaborative approach that has been taken and expressed today and in all proceedings. Working together has strengthened the Bill and ensured it is both ambitious and workable, and in that respect, this Bill demonstrates the Senedd at its best, engaging constructively to improve legislation in the interests of people across Wales.

I'd like to end by expressing my sincere thanks to all those who have brought us to this important point in the Bill's passage. And Mark, we wouldn't be here today without your efforts and hard work over many years. I'd also like to thank both Mark's Senedd officials and my officials for your sustained commitment in supporting the development of this Bill throughout its passage. I'd also like to thank the Equality and Social Justice Committee for your detailed and constructive scrutiny, and also thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee and the Finance Committee for their scrutiny as well, but most importantly, the BSL signing community, representative organisations, public bodies, academics and other stakeholders who have engaged so openly and thoughtfully throughout this process. Your lived experience, expertise and challenge have been central to shaping the Bill before us today.

So, this is an exciting moment, one that allows us to turn ambition into action, commitment into change and legislation into lasting improvements for BSL signers across Wales. Diolch yn fawr.

And I call on Mark Isherwood to reply to the debate. Mark.

Well, again, thank you to everyone who's contributed. I've already addressed the positive, consensual, collaborative way we took this forward. After some initial hiccups that some of you may remember, I remember raising this in the Chamber repeatedly and not initially getting necessarily all the support that we ultimately achieved, and I'm very grateful that we were able to adopt that common position and move forward on that basis.

You referred to the Senedd team; I have to say there are some of their representatives upstairs, so, again, thank you to you in person. And there are many representatives, I believe, of the deaf community, both here and across the way, as we heard, in the Urdd. I and possibly others will be joining them shortly to celebrate, including, I understand, a coachload from north Wales brought down by COS, the Centre of Sign Sight Sound, for which I'm patron. And it was many of their members at that conference I referred to in 2018, alongside deaf academics, who set the ball rolling. So, it's very appropriate that they should be here as well. But I'm conscious also that some of them have to travel back to various parts of Wales tonight, having travelled here, I believe, from every corner of the nation. So, it's great that they're here to celebrate, subject to your passing this, and it'll be wonderful to meet them shortly. [Laughter.] So, I won't go on. Again, diolch yn fawr and I hope you will all see fit to support this when it comes to the vote. [Applause.]

In accordance with Standing Order 26.50C, a recorded vote must be taken on Stage 4 motions. So, I defer voting on this item until voting time. 

Item 14 is a debate on the family-friendly and inclusive Parliament review board report, and I call on Joyce Watson to move the motion.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm pleased to open this debate and move the motion to note 'A Senedd for all: Report of the Family-Friendly and Inclusive Parliament Review'. The Senedd is recognised internationally for women's representation, and we want to continue to lead the way in inclusivity and family-friendly working. The expansion of Members and the changes to our working practices create both opportunities and risks, making this a timely review.

My thanks go to my fellow board members, Jane Dodds, Peter Fox, Siân Gwenllian and Mike Hedges, for their experience, insight and cross-party collaboration that has served to strengthen this report. I also extend my gratitude to Dr Alison Parken, Dr Rachel Minto and Dr Leah Hibbs of Cardiff University, and Hannah Johnson, our expert advisor. Their analysis has been instrumental in producing what's already been described as a game-changer and an example of best practice.

The Senedd has strong foundations, a progressive ethos, and proven international credibility. We were the first legislature to achieve gender parity in 2003, and family-friendly working was embedded in our structures from the outset. However, the implementation of equalities relies too heavily on individual champions and informal norms. This review aims to embed equality into our institutional framework, mainstreaming it within scrutiny and policy making. Our vision is for a Senedd for all, recognising diversity as a democratic strength. I thank the many Members who contributed via interviews and survey responses. The response rate was significantly higher than any comparable exercise elsewhere in the UK, giving us robust evidence for our findings. The review focused on four key areas, beginning with the most urgent.

Personal safety. Personal safety is now the overriding concern for anyone seeking political office. Members experience relentless online abuse, even before standing for election, and this continues throughout their time in office. Every Member who participated in the review reported experiencing abuse directly, or knowing someone who had. The level of hostility is rising, particularly for women, whose abuse is often gendered. Some Members said it influenced their decision not to re-stand. This abuse affects not only Members, but their staff and also their families. Staff are often on the front line, dealing with hostile e-mails and social media activity. That's not what they signed up for, and it's affecting staff well-being, recruitment and retention.

Abuse also limits how and where Members work. Members know they face more hostility when speaking on equalities issues, and some are now restricting what they say. Others are reducing or ceasing in-person constituency surgeries due to security concerns. These pressures risk deterring future candidates and narrowing the diversity of people willing to stand. I'm proud to have pushed for the establishment of the Senedd's social media monitoring unit, supported 100 per cent by the women's caucus. That unit allows lower-level abusive behaviour short of criminal thresholds to be identified, flagged and addressed before it becomes corrosive. The board recommends the continuation of this monitoring beyond the pilot phase, especially in the run-up to this election.

We also want the Senedd Commission to report regularly on how abuse is being handled, providing Members with clarity on the support available to them. We recommend establishing a safe participation in politics taskforce to conduct an independent review of abuse and harassment of Members and their staff. This includes exploring an unacceptable behaviour of citizens policy to ensure consequences for those who harass or intimidate elected representatives and their staff. We recommend gathering feedback from Members standing down in 2026, this year, on whether abuse influenced their decision. Ensuring people feel safe and supported to stand for election directly strengthens democracy. A diverse membership leads to more inclusive decision making, and this is the second focus of the review.

The Senedd has a strong record in women's leadership. Since the third Assembly, we have consistently had a female Presiding Officer or Deputy Presiding Officer. However, gendered patterns persist, particularly in committee membership and chairing roles. There is no current mechanism to ensure diversity within committees, and without intervention there is a risk of slipping backwards. We recommend collecting data on Members' protected characteristics to measure progress and inform future actions. We also propose ensuring there are no single-sex committees and, as far as reasonably practicable, that committee membership reflects the overall gender balance of the Senedd. The next Senedd should consider how to address gender imbalance among committee Chairs. Following the election, we propose an equality impact assessment of the new electoral system and revised ways of working. We'll also begin collecting data on participation in Plenary debates to ensure equitable opportunity to speak. Training will be provided on the code of conduct and the dignity and respect policy, emphasising that robust debate can and must remain civil.

Family-friendly principles have long been embedded in our Standing Orders, but unpredictable Plenary end times and long hours continue to challenge Members with caring responsibilities. We recommend more predictable end times for debates, building on the successful introduction of proxy voting. We also propose developing a procedure for Members to leave Plenary in emergencies without their absence affecting legislative outcomes due to pairing difficulties. Hybrid participation has been particularly valued by Members balancing professional and personal commitments. We recommend safeguarding the ability to participate online and ensuring it has parity with in-person participation.

We welcome the Senedd Commission's introduction of a Members' hwb, a one-stop advice and support service, and recommend evaluating its impact, along with the revised determination on pay and allowances, to ensure they adequately support family-friendly working. The review identified inconsistent advice on maternity and paternity leave. We recommend developing an agreed policy on leave length, procedural arrangements and cover, involving close discussions between political groups, the Senedd Commission, Business Committee and remuneration board. There is a recommendation for provision of a locum cover for Members who are temporarily unavailable to be explored. We also believe that on-site childcare crèche provision is essential and overdue. We are the only UK Parliament without one. Childcare provision provides a clear signal of the type of institution that we want to be: accessible, inclusive and family-friendly. Options must be explored in the first year of the next term.

A more diverse Senedd leads to more equitable outcomes for the people of Wales. Since devolution, we've committed to promoting equality of opportunity, and we want to strengthen those founding principles. We recommend embedding equality considerations into Standing Orders and standing practice. At present, there is no requirement for an equalities committee. We propose establishing both a dedicated equality committee and a formal women's caucus in Standing Orders. Committees should scrutinise equality evidence systematically, supported by training, data and specialist expertise. When scrutinising Bills, committees should give equal weight to equality impacts as they currently do to financial implications. The Welsh Government should inform committees when legislative equality impact assessments are published. I have long advocated for the use of gender budgeting tools, such as gender beneficiary assessments. Regular training will help ensure those approaches are used consistently, including through mainstream reviews of the programme for government.

I look forward to hearing Members' remarks and the Llywydd's response to the four areas: equality mainstreaming, representation and participation, abuse towards Members, and working practices. Llywydd, this is the Senedd's first report of this kind, a gender-sensitive audit. It draws directly on Members' experience and the expert work of Cardiff University. The solutions we propose are cross-cutting and practical, spanning Standing Orders, committees' work, standards of conduct, electoral procedures and the support structures provided by the Senedd Commission. Effective implementation will depend heavily on the Commission's ongoing leadership. We therefore recommend retaining a Commissioner with responsibility for equality of opportunity, supported by a senior official dedicated to delivery. Above all, we recommend establishing an implementation board to oversee and drive progress. We must not allow this report to gather dust. If we want a truly inclusive Senedd for all, we must secure the institutional changes needed to carry on the work.

I was pleased to be able to serve on this cross-party board that oversaw this family-friendly and inclusive Parliament review. I'd just like to begin by thanking Joyce Watson for the constructive way in which she led this work, and also fellow Members for the collegiate way we approached the various areas.

Since the early days of devolution, the then Welsh Assembly and now Senedd Cymru has taken pride in being a Parliament that seeks to be accessible, representative and family-friendly. Over time, the Senedd has introduced a number of practices, whether that is proxy voting for parental leave, hybrid participation in proceedings, or practical support for Members with caring responsibilities. These achievements should be recognised.

But the purpose of this review was not simply to reflect on past progress. It was to ask how we make sure those principles are properly embedded in the way the institution works in the future. Institutions evolve. Membership changes. Expectations from the public change as well. And if good practice relies only on informal arrangements or individual champions, there is always a risk that progress can be lost over time. Many of the recommendations in this report are therefore about strengthening the structures and systems that support an inclusive Parliament, whether that's how we organise our business, how committees consider equality in their scrutiny work, or how the Senedd continues to support Members with caring responsibilities. 

The report also addresses that important issue we've already heard about that unfortunately affects politicians across all parties and all levels of government, and that is the increasing level of abuse and intimidation faced by many in public life. If we want people from a wide range of backgrounds to consider standing for election, they must feel that public service is something they can undertake safely and with dignity. The recommendations aimed at improving monitoring, support and protection for Members are therefore an important part of this work.

Dirprwy Lywydd, this is a substantial report, with many recommendations, following much debate. I was pleased to contribute to the work, and I support the overall aim of ensuring that the Senedd remains an accessible and welcoming place for people from all walks of life. However, there were a small number of recommendations that I expressed reservations about during the review. For example, the review recommends, as we've just heard, the creation of a new implementation board to oversee the delivery of these proposals. My own view was that the work we undertook was very much intended to be a task-and-finish review, and as such, the responsibility for taking forward the recommendations could naturally sit within the existing structures of the Senedd. That said, I understand the intention behind the proposal, which is to ensure the work continues to receive attention.

There are also recommendations that move into broader constitutional questions, for example the suggestion that the Welsh Government should seek additional legislative competence under the Government of Wales Act 2006. Members will understand that I approach questions about further constitutional powers with some caution, and that reflects the position of my group also.

And finally, on the question of hybrid participation in Senedd business, the report itself, in a footnote, reflects the view I expressed during the review: I support retaining the option of virtual participation when it is generally necessary, for example because of illness or caring responsibilities, but my view remains that the default position should be that Senedd business is conducted in person, which I believe reflects public expectations and recognises the value of personal interaction in parliamentary debate and scrutiny. That said, where virtual participation is necessary, it should absolutely be treated equally. None of those things detract from the overall value of the work that is being undertaken.

The Senedd is approaching a period of significant change, particularly as we move forward to the new expanded seventh Senedd, so it is appropriate at moments like this to step back and consider whether our structures and ways of working are fit for the future. This review provides a thoughtful evidence base to help inform that discussion. Ultimately, a strong democracy depends not only on the laws we pass, but on the culture of the institutions that represent the public. If people from across Welsh society can see that this Parliament is accessible, respectful and supportive of those who serve in it, then that strengthens our democracy as a whole. I thank everyone who contributed to the review, and I look forward to the debate on how we continue to develop a Senedd that works for Members, staff and, most importantly, the people of Wales. Diolch.

I wish to make three points in today's debate. The first is around the need for statutory mechanisms to ensure gender balance in future Senedds. Secondly, I want to talk about the extremely worrying increase in offensive comments and abuse of women online. And thirdly, I want to argue that the work of creating a Senedd that promotes equality in representation and participation across the protected characteristics needs to be a matter for the institution as a whole, not work that is driven only by some dedicated women and representative groups.

Evidence shows that parliaments that are gender balanced are more effective institutions in terms of democracy, as voices are equal around the table.

around the table. That in turn leads to appropriate attention to issues that affect women everywhere, as well as the issues that affect men or the population as a whole. From issues related to menstruation and menopause to unpaid carers—the vast majority of whom are women—to women's safety and violence against women.

My great concern is that the Seneddau of the future will not be close to being gender balanced. We have taken a backward step in this Senedd. So, voluntary methods don't work. It was a great disappointment to me that the commitment to create statutory quotas was not realised, as this is the only way to ensure equal representation across the parties in the Senedd.

I am pleased that recommendation 4 of the report before us today regarding the devolution of competence to enable legislation to support the diversity of electoral candidates, that that has been included in the report. This is a vital recommendation for the next Government. This is a core part of achieving the goal of an equal Senedd.

I am very proud that my party has ensured that half of our candidates are women, with women at the top of the lists in at least half of the constituencies in the May election. It is disappointing that this is not likely to be the case for other parties, and that we, as the Senedd, will have fallen back even further in terms of gender balance after the election.

I turn now to my second point, which is the entirely unacceptable increase in abuse and offensive comments made against women online. The Cardiff University report draws attention to this and the nightmarish level of online abuse levelled against women. It is vital that the pilot scheme currently in place, which monitors the social media accounts of many of us, continues and becomes a permanent part of the next Senedd. I do agree with what Joyce Watson just said, I believe that this monitoring system should be in place in the next period that we have, namely the electoral period. And it's important that the recommendations in the report around this area are implemented.

The current climate of endless personal attacks on female Members online is preventing women from putting their names forward as candidates. I've been a member of the Senedd for 10 years, and I have seen a shocking increase just over the past year in attacks; attacks on me, as a woman in politics, as an older woman in politics, and as a woman who speaks Welsh in my public life. The behaviour is shameful. Sometimes the comments do cross the criminal threshold, and that is where the pilot is so valuable, and the action that takes place afterwards in order to hold the criminals to account and thereby protect women everywhere.

I turn now to my last point, which is the need for the Senedd as an institution to lead the change that is required. We have been progressive in Wales, and that does need to be celebrated. Much of that has happened because of the individual efforts of many women over a long period. They have been supported by some male allies, yes. And a number of the women who have driven the change are with us today in the Chamber. Many are retiring this year—

Siân, you need to conclude, please.

—and we are very grateful to them and to the women who have been here before them.

I was at an event organised by Cardiff University recently discussing the report before us today, and the very clear message from Professor Sarah Childs and Professor Rosie Campbell, was this: the change must take place at a whole institutional level. Many women have had to use their political capital in order to move the agenda forward in the past. It's time for the work to rise to the whole institution level, and that is my message of encouragement to the Commission today.

It has been a genuine privilege to serve on this board that produced the report. I want to begin by thanking colleagues from across the Siambr who gave their time and the clerking team, particularly Martha Da Gama Howells, who really worked her socks off in order to get this to where it is in such a short period of time. But particular thanks must go to Joyce, who drove this, who absolutely persisted to make sure that this happened, and we are very grateful to you, Joyce, for bringing it to us today.

Across the Siambr, we know that this is what we do the best. We work across boundaries to ask the questions that matter, and the question at the heart of this report is simple and profound. It is: what kind of Parliament do we want Wales to have? We've heard that we have much to be proud of in the past, but pride cannot become complacency. Too much of what we have built rests on the shoulders of champions, which Siân has just referred to. Wales has both the opportunity and the responsibility to lead the world again, but to do that, equality must not be left to chance, not dependent on goodwill, but hard-wired and permanent. I want to speak about a few things that came through. Firstly, sadly, the experience of abuse in politics. Members that we heard from experienced online abuse, in-person abuse, threats, harassment and intimidation. But what I found most shocking was not the scale of it, it was how many colleagues have simply come to accept it. To describe it in their own words, 'It is just a cost of doing politics'. We must not accept that. Abuse should never be the price someone pays for choosing to serve their community.

For women, we know this abuse is more frequent, more sustained and more vicious, including threats of rape and attacks on our appearance. I have spoken publicly about the misogynistic abuse and threats I have personally received. This abuse is designed not just to harm, but to silence, to wear us down, to push us out of public life altogether. We know that women, young women, and people from ethnic minority backgrounds have looked at what elected representatives face and say, 'No, not for me'.

I also wanted to raise the issue of parental leave. At present, Members of the Senedd do not have formal parental leave policy. That means Members who become parents or whose partners give birth often have to rely on informal arrangements and goodwill to navigate what should be a clear and supportive process. In particular, I wish to speak about miscarriage leave, which, for many women, is a profound and deeply personal loss. To go through such a loss without any formal entitlement, no clear policy, no institutional support, that says something about us as a Senedd, and I find that deeply uncomfortable. I find that deeply uncomfortable because I myself have experienced four miscarriages, and I know the effect it can have. So, we must move forward on this.

Finally, I want to talk about how we get to free childcare. Plaid Cymru and our political parties want free childcare, but actually, we have to be the people we want to see. If we want people with young families to participate fully in our democracy, we must make it practically possible for them to do so. I welcome the work that the Senedd Commission has already begun in exploring options, but ultimately, what matters is delivery. Families need practical support, not just discussions about support.

Finally, on equality mainstreaming, too much relies on structures that are not formally guaranteed. So, groups such as the women's caucus, cross-party groups supporting women and committees have played an incredibly important role. But again, their existence should not depend solely on informal arrangements. We need a dedicated equality committee to be mandated in Standing Orders. We need the women's caucus to be mandated in Standing Orders. Equality scrutiny must never again be at risk of being absorbed into a broader portfolio and squeezed out. This is the second committee I have sat on looking at how we can create gender equality. The first one was the gender quota committee, and sadly we saw Welsh Labour not willing to go ahead with that. But this is something we absolutely have to see being being taken forward. Reports can receive warm words and then gather dust. The seventh Senedd gives us a genuine opportunity to make permanent what has, for too long, been precarious. Wales has shown the world how it can lead. The challenge now is to continue that work carefully, thoughtfully and together. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I just wanted to ask a question, really, around the issue of breastfeeding, because I'm surprised that in this report we're merely asking for a breastfeeding room to be provided, no dates applied. I suspect there will be one very powerful promoter of breastfeeding in the next Senedd, but we can't be certain of that. I just wondered, as we are so keen to involve the whole of our Welsh community in the Senedd, why we haven't got a breastfeeding-friendly sign here prominently displayed at the entrance to the Senedd, because it isn't just about staff—it's also about people who visit the Senedd with their children, without their children. So, I suppose I'm lacking in understanding as to why we haven't managed to do this either in the sixth Senedd, or, indeed, any of the other Senedds.

Of course, I welcome the report that's been put together and appreciate the work that's gone into it. I appreciate, actually, the level of candidness that a number of us were able to be when contributing to this report. I'll start with the social media element of this, because I think this is incredibly important. I've spoken a number of times around the types of things that people see on social media, which then leads them and influences people as to what they say to politicians—whether that's female politicians, or, in some cases, male politicians as well. They often come from anonymous accounts—more often than not, actually, probably the majority of the time. 

Always. 

Always, actually—yes, I think you're right, Sioned—come from anonymous accounts. I've got a particular couple of words that I would use for those types of people who don't put their name to the sorts of stuff they say, but I'll keep this as diplomatic as possible. I experienced my first pile-on really early into my time here in the Senedd back in 2021. I think having worked in hospitality before, you take things as they come, but it does have a profound effect on you.

I remember talking to somebody who was in politics at the time and what I was told by that person—I won't name them—was: 'Oh well, that's the way it is—grow a thicker skin'. That's a completely unbelievable stance to take when we want to talk about bringing vulnerable people into politics, when we want to talk about bringing women into politics. To turn around and say, 'I'll just grow a thicker skin—this is the way it's going to be', we're never going to reach our objectives of getting a Senedd that represents the type of society that we want to see with that sort of attitude.

So, I particularly welcome the recommendation around the monitoring of social media, and this is not trying to shut down scrutiny of politicians at all, because I think, actually, challenge on policy is really welcome. The real shame is—and I think I speak for a number of Members here—we have found ourselves in a position, because of that level of personal abuse that we have on social media, that we then don't engage in the policy discussions on social media. That's a negative impact on democracy. So, again, the recommendation on monitoring social media is really important.

I think as well trying to, in a wider sense, push social media companies to end anonymous accounts on their platforms is really important as well, because a lot of these people wouldn't say the types of things that they're saying to your face, let alone if they actually had to put their names to these things as well. So, just on social media, I think that's really important.

On the family life aspect, I take the point Peter said around public expectation around what this job means. That doesn't mean to say, though, that we should then be restricted to what we do within this place to make it more friendly and more welcoming to people with families getting involved. I also think the public expect this place to reflect the society that it seeks to represent.

The paternity issue—Jane, I think you were completely right about this—I recently went through that. I think the system was very informal and did rely on the ability to get a proxy. Heledd was my proxy and I will say—I'll put it on the record—she was a good proxy. I'd highly recommend her for anyone who comes later on. [Laughter.] But the difficulty I found, actually, in dealing with the sort of paternity policy that we have in the Senedd is there was no clear guidance. It was talking to Members' business support and being told, 'Oh, well, really it's up to you how long you take off.' Now, there are implications to that, and on one level, yes, flexibility is great, but on another level then there's pressure on some Members potentially not to take, actually, what they would be entitled to in another job because of the nature of this role. So, one thing I would really want to see when we discuss paternity and parental leave is actually having that clear guidance available to Members around what the length of time would be, our rights within that role as well, because we can't be in a situation where people feel pressured into not taking the full amount of time they would be entitled to if they were in another role.

On family life, and this place being family friendly, I was really lucky to be able to welcome my son Gruff into the Senedd last week. He had a lot of attention. A number of Members were more interested in talking to him and spending time with him than they were with me—which is completely fine, by the way; I don't blame you. He knows he's cute as well—that's also the problem. But I was glad he was able to come in and actually have food with me and my wife and her parents, because I wouldn't have seen him at all that week had that not happened. We start this job really early in the morning; we finish really, really late. If you've just had a child, you're missing out on those precious moments, whether that's from a mother's perspective or even a father's perspective. We talk a lot about the need for male role models within young children's lives. Well, I want to be that male role model, but I have to be present, and I have to have that ability to be able to see my son on a regular basis.

Breastfeeding, which Jenny raised—I was literally just talking to both Siân and Sioned about what the breastfeeding policy would be in this place. I would really welcome some clarity on that.

Then finally, very briefly, Dirprwy Lywydd, on business, the committee quota that was set out in the report is something I think we should explore more. I'm thinking that from the perspective of somebody who was on the Petitions Committee some time ago, where Carolyn was the Chair and the rest of us on the committee were all men. Now, again, the Petitions Committee in particular is there to listen to our constituents, is there to take up issues within the community. So, I think, actually, of all committees, the Petitions Committee should at the very least reflect the society that it seeks to engage with. On that note, Dirprwy Lywydd, I will end.

I'm very grateful to be able to speak in this debate. I want to also thank Joyce for her leadership in this, and the other members of the committee for all the work that they've done. I agree with all the recommendations, but I'll just pick out a few to talk about.

I think it's absolutely key that we do have on-site childcare provision, that we should have a creche here in the Senedd. I'd like to think we could go into the next Senedd with that commitment. I've been involved in lobbying for childcare provision on many occasions. In fact, the Cabinet Secretary and I, in an earlier stage of our political careers, lobbied very hard to have a creche at the new headquarters of South Glamorgan council, as it was at the time. We did have quite a bit of opposition at that time, and we had to keep on, but we got it, so that was successful.

Then I had an unsuccessful campaign to have a creche in Westminster, where there was unbelievable opposition. In all the debates, they were talking about the shooting ranges that were there, and we never got anywhere. But then John Bercow came in as the Speaker, and then there is a creche at Westminster now, in the Foreign Office, and that is progress. So, I think Joyce made the point that, here, in Wales, is the only Parliament now that does not have a childcare facility.

Julie, do you agree with me that there is a sense of frustration here? Because I was part of the Future Senedd Committee, and, on 6 March 2025, we wrote to the Senedd Commission saying that this had to be a priority and in place for 2026 onwards. Is it not a regret that we are not anywhere further on? Can we try and seek some, well, agreement here today that this has to be the next step? It’s not optional, it has to happen, and it is about time it happened.

Yes, I agree it has to happen. I think it’s absolutely crucial that it happens, and I’d like to think that we could move forward with that commitment. Because it is remarkable, really, that we've had 26 years of devolution, 26 years of working here from this building, we've had a new building built here, and we've never had a creche. So, it is remarkable, I think. So, I share your frustration and commitment.

But I also think a creche should be for Members, for staff, for people who visit, so that witnesses—. So, we can get a wide range of witnesses, people who would find it difficult to come unless they had somebody to care for their children. So, I think that's important to take into consideration. Also, I think it's important to take into consideration that a creche would not always be suitable for everybody, because many Members have to, for example, leave their children at home, quite a long way from the facilities here. So, I think we have to consider that as well, and see how we can help those families with childcare. So, I think a creche is a must and I think it'll be a huge disappointment if we don't get that, with all this work that's been done. And as somebody said, it is a visible sign of the sort of Senedd we want to have. I'm always thrilled when I see that play area up by the cafe. I think that's been fantastic progress, having that, and when you see the children playing there, well, you know what the Senedd is about—it's about those children and the future for them. So, I think that is great progress there.

The other quick point I want to make is that I think it's absolutely crucial that we continue hybrid working. I think that that is so important and that it should have equal status to being here in person. We all have experienced the difficulties of coping with childcare, but also care for elderly parents, and that, probably, has affected more of us, maybe, than childcare. But it's so important, the bonuses of being able to work hybridly to help with those sorts of situations. I just think that that has got to be taken into consideration as well. So, equality for hybrid working. Don't let's take a step back. What we are as a Senedd is how we operate as a whole, and as things operate now, and for certain bits of legislation, we do require people to be here unless there are really special circumstances, and I think that's fine, that's understandable, but I do not think we should take any steps backwards in terms of the hybrid working.

And then, finally—

Yes, finally, please, because your time is up.

Finally, I just think that, in terms of actual timing, we can look, as the report says, at the timings of sessions. We've been working until 8 o'clock several evenings recently, and I just think we've got to take all that into consideration. Diolch.

This is an important report, and I think it does ask a fundamental question of us as a Senedd, particularly as we look towards the future after the process that we've gone through in terms of Senedd reform: what kind of democratic institution do we want to be? And to answer that question, we must ask another series of questions: who can see themselves being here? Who feels that there is a place for them here? And what barriers are in their way? So, this report does consider these questions, I think, looking at how we should work as an institution in terms of our culture and our ways of working and at the facilities available to Members and staff. And I think that the message that comes through the report is clear: if we want the Senedd to be truly representative of Wales, we must make changes. And I welcome many of the recommendations in this report. It does note, as we've heard, that the Senedd has a strong record in terms of inclusion and representation, particularly in terms of women's representation. But it also warns, as we heard from Siân Gwenllian, that we can't take that for granted. So, we need to embed these inclusive practices in the structure of the institution itself, instead of relying, as Jane Dodds says, on informal practices alone.

I want to focus on two recommendations that stand out to me, namely the childcare provision and job sharing. The Senedd has to commit to the principle of providing childcare on site for Members, staff and members of the public. I started my professional career in 1994 at BBC Wales here in Cardiff, and, as a major national institution and a good employer,

a good employer, there was a crèche there in 1994, five years before we had devolution. It was incredible to realise, when I came here in 2021, perhaps to our main national institution, that we didn't have a crèche here. 

We're an institution that makes laws for the whole of Wales. We discuss equality policies, their impact on families, and caring responsibilities on a weekly basis in this Chamber. But the lack of a crèche sends a clear message that we do not want to support families here in the most basic way.

The second issue that requires urgent action is job sharing. The report does refer to the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Act 2024, which requires the Llywydd to propose the establishment of a committee to consider whether certain positions in the Senedd could be filled through job sharing. So, I'd like to ask what work has taken place in terms of preparing for this.

And then, I want to talk again about my personal experience: job sharing at Swansea University allowed me to return to work as the mother of two small children. I heard from my manager—both of us sharing the role were mothers—that the university benefited from the strengths, the personalities and the different experiences within that team as we undertook the tasks for that role. So, why shouldn't our democracy also benefit from this kind of positive flexibility, which would encourage people, and women, in particular, to be able to share their talents? The idea is not about reducing the work. It's about expanding who can do that work. 

The final point that I'd like to make, which is associated with that is that there are too many people who are disabled who see politics as something impossible for them. Not because of a lack of ability, but because there are structures here that are not planned with everyone in view. So, one thing I'd like to mention in finishing is talking about ensuring better access for disabled people to the Senedd.

The report notes that the committee discussed the possibility of calling for regular breaks in proceedings. They came to the majority view that the Llywydd and committee Chairs are in the best position to understand when those breaks in proceedings are needed. I think that that finding shows clearly why measures need to be embedded in a structural way rather than leaving them to chance, because would a Llywydd or committee Chairs in the future have the experience of a disability or of a health condition that make regular breaks essential? Would they have an understanding of that? As someone who has experience of chairing and attending meetings that include disabled people, I can tell you that the opinion of the majority would be very different from that of the committee, which, as far as I know, comprised people with no disabilities. So, I'd like to hear a specific response on that point. Thank you.

Somewhere in Wales today there is a woman thinking about standing for the Senedd after next. She has the ability, she has the ideas, and she's doing the maths on school drop-offs, on sitting times, on who will look after her children on a Tuesday night when the vote runs late, and she's deciding not to stand. Not because she lacks ambition, not because she lacks talent, because the institution she would serve in was not designed with her life in mind. That's what this report is about.

In 1998, the advisory group that shaped this place imagined a legislature that would be democratic, effective and inclusive, and for a time, as we heard, we delivered on that promise, the first Parliament in the world to achieve gender parity. We built hybrid working practices that other legislatures now study. We proved that a different, more collaborative kind of politics was possible.

But this report also tells us something uncomfortable, that the progress we are proud of is not secured, that what was won by intention can be lost by drift. The evidence is clear. Members who were primary carers for children reported delaying their candidacies, sometimes by years, because they could not see

they could not see how this role could fit alongside family life. The barriers they described were not in legislation, they were in the working week, in the unpredictability of parliamentary hours, in the absence of childcare, in accommodation allowances not covering stable family accommodation, in the quiet assumption that a member of this Senedd has no life beyond it. Those are not complaints about convenience; those are fundamental failures of design, and they determine, before a single ballot is cast, who is able to serve here and who is not, and this matters beyond the individuals affected. A Parliament whose working conditions narrow the pool of people who can serve is a Parliament that narrows the range of experience it can draw on. The quality of our scrutiny, our legislation, our democratic conversation, all of it depends on who is in this room. Now, we're about to expand this Senedd, new Members, new committees, new ways of working. The decisions we make in this period will set the pattern for decades. What we build now is what future Seneddau will inherit, not as a choice but as a fact of institutional life. This is either a risk or an opportunity, and the difference depends entirely on what we do now. If we treat inclusion as an aspiration, something we mention in reports and celebrate in speeches, it will erode gradually until one day we look around this Siambr and wonder why it doesn't look like the country it serves, and it seems to me there is a consensus here, there is a consensus on childcare. I speak as one commissioner to another, there's a consensus, I think, on the commission; let's make it happen. I'm in Brussels representing the Senedd on Monday, but maybe I can join remotely. If you move, Joyce, a formal decision that we will have a creche here at the Senedd and I will support it, because we have to do this. We have to make it possible for that woman that I talked about, or men that have caring responsibilities as well, the ones doing the maths tonight, to see a path into this Parliament and for us to make it possible for Wales to hear their voices.

Representation doesn't end at the ballot box; it continues in whether this institution allows people to serve once they arrive. We do not often get a chance to shape a Parliament at a formative moment. Let us not waste it.

The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice.

Diolch yn fawr. I just welcome the opportunity to briefly contribute to today's debate and I'd like to thank Joyce Watson, the cross-party board and the expert team who have worked at pace to produce a report. It sets out a clear pathway towards achieving our shared objective of a Senedd for all, and as this report underscores, devolution in Wales has from its inception been grounded in an unwavering commitment to equality and recognition that inclusion is fundamental to the strength and health of our democracy, and in recent years, reports on electoral reform have called for greater diversity and inclusion in our politics. 

This report identifies tangible actions which, if we implement them, will foster working practices and a culture designed to facilitate and enable participation rather than hinder and impede it, and I do think this report presents a compelling vision and it has been expressed today across those four broad areas. We work together towards the goal of realising that truly inclusive Senedd and it does remind us of the most pressing challenges facing our democracy and provides important recommendations to combat them.

Like many who have spoken today, I support the recommendation of the board to bring forward a requirement in Standing Orders for online abuse to be monitored. The commission's current pilot programme to monitor online abuse is a welcome foundation. We've heard today, and we've heard in our women's caucus, haven't we, particularly how women as candidates and elected representatives, and indeed their families, have been put in fear of their safety, and we cannot have true equality of opportunity to public life without emboldening our institutions to stand up to intimidation.

I do say that, as a Government, we benefit from the work of key stakeholders in lighting the path to a politics freed from fear.