National Assembly for Wales

I call the Assembly to order.

The first item this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs. The first question, Sian Gwenllian.

Diolch. Climate change is perhaps the biggest threat to our future generations, and the Welsh Government is committed to reducing net Welsh emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050. Local energy projects, and reducing distances between generation and consumption more generally, will have a critical part to play in achieving this.

During the last Assembly term, my predecessor, Alun Ffred Jones, worked tirelessly in order to secure the success of two community hydro schemes as they started the process of providing an opportunity for the public to buy shares in these projects. I’m pleased to be able to say that these projects have been exceptionally successful, attracting a number of people in those communities to purchase shares in those projects, and Ynni Ogwen and YnNi Padarn Peris are now proceeding well. Ynni Anafon in Abergwyngregyn is also a community hydro scheme that has been exceptionally successful. But, with the Ynni Ogwen project particualrly, it did take two years for this scheme to gain its water abstraction licence from Natural Resources Wales, which goes way beyond the four months in their statutory guidelines to process such applications.

In an evidence session to the Environment and Sustainability Committee in November of last year, it was stated that it was a problem of staff and resources in Natural Resources Wales that accounted for this problem. Has the Minister carried out any assessment of the resources needed by NRW in order to achieve its functions in full? If so, are you content that they have the necessary resources to achieve that, and, if not, will you commit to carrying out such an assessment and report back to the Assembly?

Thank you. I was very pleased that we are supporting Ynni Ogwen in Bethesda. It was the first pilot of its kind in the UK, so I think there’s probably a lot we can learn from it, with it obviously being the first, and I know that they are trialling a model of encouraging local use of energy from distributed generation. You’ll appreciate I’m very new in the portfolio. I’ve met with Natural Resources Wales. Clearly, they receive significant funding from us and it’s up to them to sort out and ensure that they’ve got the staff to cover all parts of the project that they need. But it’s something that I’ll certainly discuss with them at my next meeting, which I think is next week, actually. But I do think, with it being a pilot, there is a lot we can learn from Ynni Ogwen in Bethesda.

Cabinet Secretary, the climate strategy also sets targets for improving energy efficiency within our homes. Part of the approach to achieving this includes external cladding of some of those buildings being widely used, but also on pre-1919 stock, which are mainly solid block or solid wall buildings. The external cladding, whilst providing energy efficiency for those properties, may also actually limit the breathing of those properties, which causes difficulties. Will you commission research on the impact of the external cladding on those types of buildings, so that we can ensure that it doesn’t give us long-term problems, but actually does give us long-term benefits?

I think it’s very important that we know if it’s going to give us difficulties or benefits, so, if that research hasn’t been done previously, I’ll certainly look to having that carried out.

Minister, I’ve asked you previously about the community benefits of renewable energy schemes. I’ll ask you again because it is a very important issue for my constituents. When a solar farm was being planned at Llanvapley between Monmouth and Abergavenny in my area, it was opposed by local people. After it was passed, they subsequently found that they’d lost the opportunity to lobby for the community benefits that are normally associated with such schemes, and the company involved has been largely non-responsive to their inquiries. I appreciate there is a non-devolved aspect to this, but can you tell me in what ways the Welsh Government is looking to strengthen these procedures and guidelines so that companies can’t avoid providing valuable community benefits when schemes are built in communities?

Yes, I think it’s really important, if we are going to ensure that we have these community projects, that people understand the benefits of them—that it’s very real to them, and that they are able to take part in it. So, I’ll certainly look into it. I think I’ve already started to look into it. When you first raised it with me, I asked officials. As you say, there is a reserved part to this, but, again, I’ll be very happy to make representations to the relevant Minister in the UK Government.

Thank you. Clwyd West benefited from more than £20 million of investment over the last Government, with flood risk reduction schemes successfully delivered at Colwyn Bay, Kinmel Bay and Rhuthin. We’re assessing possible schemes at Abergele, Llansannan and Mochdre and funding feasibility work is being carried out in other areas across Clwyd West.

Thank you very much, Cabinet Secretary. I’m very grateful for the investment that was put by the previous Government into addressing flood risk issues in Clwyd West, and you will know that, on many occasions, I’ve welcomed that investment. I am concerned for those areas that you also listed, to say that they are currently under consideration, but I was disappointed not to hear any reference to the Old Colwyn promenade and flood defences, which of course do protect the very important, vital transport infrastructure of north Wales, particularly the A55 trunk road and the north Wales railway line. Can you give some assurances that you’re also considering the flood-risk management issues in that particular area, and what action are you taking to ensure that they’re going to be done in a timely manner, because they have been pelted by storms in recent years and that has severely undermined those defences?

No decisions have been made yet on funding for Old Colwyn. To take this forward, we need all partners to work together, so I think that’s something that you need to take on board too. I know my officials are working with Conwy County Borough Council, and it’s really important that we do bring everybody together to find an appropriate solution. So, as I say, if the Member can also assist in that way, that would be very helpful.

Cabinet Secretary, you’ll be aware that a number of parts of north-east Wales have been impacted by flash flooding after heavy and sustained rainfall in recent weeks. Just last week, I visited residents and business in Bagillt who’d been left devastated after flooding, and, worryingly, this is an area that’s been hit before in recent years. What discussions have you had with Flintshire County Council to take preventative steps in such flood-prone areas, what support is available for victims and will you consider visiting the areas?

Thank you, Hannah Blythyn, for that question. I know there was flash flooding in north-east Wales last week and I really do express my sympathy to those businesses and houses that did experience that flash flooding after the heavy rain last week. I know Bagillt was particularly affected, and my officials have been in discussions with Flintshire County Council and also the emergency services—we want to thank them because they did alleviate the immediate risk to some of the properties. I think there’s now going to be an investigation into how the flooding occurred following the heavy rain, and we need to understand what factors were involved so that we can take potential measures to reduce the risk of such flooding reoccurring.

Much of the funding invested in tackling the challenge of flooding comes from European sources, of course. Would you agree with me, therefore, Cabinet Secretary, that leaving the European Union would leave many of these communities even more exposed to the risk of flooding, particularly in areas such as Clwyd West?

Absolutely. I agree completely with Llyr Huws Gruffydd that to leave the European Union would certainly cut our funding significantly, within my portfolio particularly. I’ve asked officials to have a look at the impact, and it is absolutely significant. I absolutely agree with you.

I now call on the party spokespeople to ask questions of the Cabinet Secretary, and the first is the UKIP spokesperson, Neil Hamilton.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer.

Bydd Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet yn ymwybodol mai un o’r problemau mawr mewn ardaloedd gwledig ac yn fy rhanbarth helaeth a gwasgaredig i yng Nghanolbarth a Gorllewin Cymru yn arbennig yw’r cwestiwn dadleuol ynglŷn â chyflymder lawrlwytho band eang. Mae gennyf etholwyr sydd wedi ysgrifennu ataf gyda chyfraddau nodweddiadol o 1 Mbps, o gymharu â 15 Mbps sef cyfartaledd y DU. Rwy’n meddwl tybed a allai Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet grynhoi pa gamau y mae Llywodraeth Cymru yn eu cymryd ar hyn o bryd i wella cyflymder lawrlwytho band eang mewn ardaloedd gwledig.

This is a difficulty for certain parts of the rural areas, and I think it’s about improving the infrastructure for those areas. I will be working closely with my Cabinet colleagues and other Government colleagues to ensure that we get that high-speed broadband in rural areas as quickly as possible.

Forgive me for observing, Cabinet Secretary, that that was rather short on detail in that response. What we are dealing with here are long-term cases of promises that have not been kept by the companies involved. I have a constituent who’s written to me from Abergorlech, in the Carmarthen East and Dinefwr constituency, who was promised an upgrade to fibre broadband in 2015; it didn’t happen. He was then promised that it would be by June of this year; it hasn’t happened. He’s recently been told that he’ll have to wait now until at least the spring of next year before there’s any prospect of improvement. So, I wonder what practical action the Welsh Government can take to put pressure on the companies who are responsible for rolling out broadband in these areas?

I obviously can’t comment on that individual case. The Minister responsible for broadband has just heard your comments. If you’d like to write to her about that specific case, I’m sure that she can chase it up with the company.

One of the big problems here is that Openreach has effectively got a stranglehold on the infrastructure, and I suppose that this all goes back ultimately to the way British Telecom was privatised many years ago. [Interruption.]

Okay, let the Member finish his question.

I think the honourable Member should be gracious in accepting my mea culpa. But, of course, 30 years ago, we couldn’t predict the future with the certainty that Members have today about the future of the European Union. But, nevertheless, where there was a mistake all those years ago, perhaps we should now reconsider those options, and I wonder if the Welsh Government would take that on board as well.

Well, again, I’m sure that the Minister has heard you. I know, in my own constituency, there are other companies providing it, but, as I said, if you’d like to write to the Minister responsible, Julie James, I’m sure you’ll get the answer.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Minister, there’s another important team that’s been in Paris, prior to the football team, which we were congratulating and wishing well earlier on, and that’s the team led by the former Minister that went to the climate change negotiations in Paris prior to Christmas last year. In light of those discussions, does this Government, your Government, consider itself committed, if not legally, at least morally, to achieving the targets set in the Paris agreement?

Yes, absolutely.

Thank you for that confirmation. Of course, that agreement does set the course in taking carbon emissions to zero by the second half of this century and to keep the increase in carbon emissions at 1.5 per cent until that point. Now, during last week, we heard news that we’re about to pass the symbolic but important threshold of 400 parts per million carbon emissions, which shows that the world as a whole is a long way from achieving any target. The Environment (Wales) Act 2016, which your Government was responsible for in the previous Assembly, sets out a target to reduce carbon emissions by 2050. Do you still consider this target to be adequate in order to meet the ambitions of the Paris accord?

Currently, I do. As you say, the environment Act sets a target of at least 80 per cent reduction in emissions by 2050. I think it’s something that we need to watch very closely and I’m committed to doing that.

Thank you for that confirmation, but I do think that we need to keep these targets under review, because an 80 per cent reduction target may not be enough in fact to contribute to that overall Paris ambition. But one of the key ways in which we in Wales could contribute to our own targets and world targets is through better developed renewable energy. We’ve already heard a little about that from north Wales. Would it not be better, therefore, if we had control over energy projects under the Wales Bill without any reference to thresholds whatsoever? So, for example, we could give better support and confidence to exciting and fantastic ideas such as the Swansea bay barrage, and I declare an interest as a community shareholder in that project.

Yes, I think it would, and certainly you’ll be aware of the representations that the First Minister has made to the UK Government in relation to this, and we’ll await with interest what comes now from Westminster.

The Welsh Conservatives’ spokesperson, David Melding.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, I wish you well with your new portfolio. I look forward to shadowing you in this important area of public policy. I’m afraid I have to start on a sour note, unfortunately. I have noticed that air quality is not listed as one of your responsibilities on the official Welsh Government website—not listed specifically; you’ll argue that it’s there generically, of course—while, for instance, noise policy, which is very important, is there specifically. Does this indicate a lacklustre approach on air quality on the part of the Welsh Government?

I’m very disappointed that you’ve started on such a sour note. It is absolutely my responsibility and I can assure David Melding that improving air quality is absolutely a key objective for the Welsh Government.

I’m sure you’re as concerned as I am, Cabinet Secretary, about the growing scientific evidence that diesel particulates pose a very significant risk to public health. We’re used to talking about the risk of passive smoking, for instance, but these particulates probably carry a graver danger to a wide range of the population. What measures are planned to improve air quality in the light of this evidence?

Well this is part of the whole thing that I’m looking at in relation to air quality, and you’ll be aware that local authorities obviously have duties under the local air quality management regime, and I know in certain areas I’ve been lobbied by Assembly Members, very early in the portfolio, around particular areas in particular local authorities. What I’ve done is ask officials to monitor local authorities very carefully, to make sure they are fulfilling their duties to produce an air quality action plan, so that we can have a look at what specific measures each of them are doing, and obviously the scientific research that we’re getting now in relation to diesel will form part of that.

Cabinet Secretary, I’m glad to note that, but do you think, in a more practical sense, it’s time that in Wales, and in Britain generally, we face up to some of the practical consequences of, for instance, the school run? I think we’re of the same generation, and in my day it was only the ill or the mildly delinquent that were taken to school by private transport. This has a big effect, because it’s children who are going to school, it’s these diesel monsters that are driving lots of other kids there, and they’re then inhaling these dreadful pollutants. We need to do something about it, because it’s not normal for this mass of the school population to be driven to and from school.

I absolutely agree. I remember walking at least, I think, about a mile and a half each way, both to primary and high school. You’re right, we need to have a look at what we can do to encourage people not to use their vehicles, and to make sure that we have the cycle routes that are needed, and to encourage more walking, and that obviously fits in with a healthier lifestyle and well-being as well.

Diolch. I will be making a statement on my plans to address TB in cattle in the autumn. Any future measures will build on the existing eradication programme and take a science-based approach, tackling all sources of infection to continue the long-term downward trend in incidence of the disease.

Thank you for your answer. I was there last night to listen intently to your speech at the British Veterinary Association’s event. You spoke there about your wish to ensure that there is a comprehensive programme to tackle TB in cattle, and the impression, certainly, was that all options were very much on the table. Could you confirm to the Assembly this afternoon that you’re not ruling out the possibility of introducing an element of badger culling as part of that strategy?

Well, you know we’ve had a very comprehensive TB eradication programme in place since 2008. I am absolutely committed to delivering a science-led approach to the eradication of bovine TB. I want to see an eradication of bovine TB—I think that the statistics that were published last week show that we have seen an improving situation across Wales over the past six years. I’m sure you’ll appreciate I’m having a great deal of information and advice on this issue, and I will make a statement in the autumn.

The Cabinet Secretary will be aware that £3.7 million has been spent since 2011 vaccinating badgers in the intensive action area in my constituency, and clearly the vaccination policy has failed. Now, the latest scientific report shows an increase of 78 per cent in the number of cattle slaughtered in Pembrokeshire due to bovine TB. Given the increase in cattle slaughtered in my area, can the Cabinet Secretary tell us what discussions she intends to have with farmers in Pembrokeshire? And I would urge her to bring forward a statement before the autumn, because farmers want to know what the Welsh Government’s policy is on this issue.

Well, I think farmers are very aware of what our policy is on this issue. I’ve already met with farmers. [Interruption.] As I said, we’re very committed to delivering a science-led approach to the eradication of bovine TB. The statistics were out last week: they’ve shown an improving situation across Wales over the past six years. The number of new TB incidents has substantially declined since 2009. We’ve got the review of the strategy by the Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer, and I’m expecting draft proposals to have the strategy refreshed and a new strategy later this month, and I will make a statement in the autumn.

Thank you. Through the planning and building control systems, the Welsh Government seeks to ensure new developments are accessible to all members of society. To stress the importance of access for all, the Welsh Government has recently provided funding for training on this issue, which was attended by 160 built environment professionals.

Thank you, Minister. Natural Resources Wales has stated, regarding the tree felling on the seven-mile Cwmcarn forest scenic drive, which temporarily closed in November 2014, that this is a long-term operation that could take between three and four years to complete. Will the Cabinet Secretary reiterate the Welsh Government’s absolute, unequivocal determination that one of the natural wonders of the Welsh environment will be a priority for the Welsh Government, with priority put on ensuring that the drive will once again become available to the public?

The Welsh Government is very aware of the value of the Cwmcarn forest drive to the local communities and to visitors. Both Natural Resources Wales and Caerphilly County Borough Council have set up a working group to look at the long-term opportunities there, including how walking and cycling routes, and campsites, can be sustainably funded in future.

We all recognise the benefit of increasing access to the countryside for recreation and to improve the health and well-being of the public. However, groups such as the Countryside Alliance have warned that unrestricted access to the countryside could have an environmental impact on river habitats, damage lands and limit landowners’ ability to manage and protect their land. Minister, I’ve got a friend who lives just outside my region’s boundary, Dr Randhawa, and he’s maintaining all the paths that go through his land. The council never pay a penny towards it, but, always, he is having a problem with the local council and red tape. So, could you please, Cabinet Secretary, agree that any proposal to open access to the countryside must take into account the concern of those who live and work in, and manage the countryside in Wales?

I think it’s about getting a balance. It’s about people having access, it’s about the environment, it’s about animal health and welfare. You’ll be aware that, in the previous Government, we had a Green Paper about access. I will be looking at the recommendations and the consultation responses that we had in relation to that before making any further decisions.

Thank you. Cardiff’s local development plan will have a central role in shaping place and enhancing quality of life through the provision of well-designed, high-quality buildings and public space. Well-planned public transport, cycling and walking routes delivered through the LDP enable sustainable access to jobs, schools and shops.

Okay. I think the reality is that the plan forecasts huge increases in traffic, there is mass building on greenfield sites, and most people consider it to be an environmental disaster. The question to you is: how do you think that the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 could be used to improve the local environment in relation to the local development plan?

Well, obviously, Cardiff have brought forward their LDP. I know it is a very fine balance for local authorities to make arrangements for housing and services for a growing population, and protecting the points that you’ve just raised. I think the future generations Act is there, and we can very clearly see the goals, and it’s up to my officials to make sure that they monitor all the LDPs that are coming in. We’re still awaiting, I think, six across Wales, to make sure that they do fit in with the goals of the Act.

Cabinet Secretary, the LDP process obviously causes great controversy in many areas and is also the plank that is used to develop, stimulate and regenerate large areas as well. But, one of the biggest bones of contention in my own electoral region of South Wales Central is around the housing projections that councils use to arrive at their LDP allocations. Those projections come from the Welsh Government. In your initial view of these projections that are provided on behalf of the Welsh Government to the local authorities, what is your feeling about taking this process forward? Are you happy that those projections are robust, or do they need to be revisited and, ultimately, re-evaluated in the light of some of the representations that have been made by councils in my own electoral region of South Wales Central?

Well, the LDP is a matter for each individual local authority. I want them to have adopted LDPs in place and I think it’s six local authorities that haven’t. I’ve asked them to get on with it. If we don’t have those LDPs in place, as I know from my own constituency, you have these developers coming in with plans that really don’t fit in with what the local population wants or needs. So, I think it’s really important that the local development plan is in place. As I say, it’s not for me to set it out, or for any of my Cabinet colleagues; it’s for the local authority to do it themselves. What the LDP does is provide that policy framework to ensure that the local authority delivers the community infrastructure that’s required.

Yes. Common agriculture policy payments of £350 million each year play a vitally important role in maintaining the viability of Welsh farms and of realising the Welsh Government and the industry’s shared vision of a prosperous and resilient agricultural industry in Wales.

I’m sure the Minister will agree with me that subsidy has been an important element in farmers’ incomes throughout my entire lifetime, both before we went into the common market, as we then called it, and of course since, and that if the country votes tomorrow to leave, then public subsidies will continue at least at their present level because we pay in £2 to get only £1 back. We had a perfectly good system of subsidy based on deficiency payments before 1973, which supported farm incomes whilst having cheap food for the people.

I think the Member’s comments are all supposition.

Can I introduce you to some facts, Minister? Can I refer you to an article in the ‘Agricultural History Review’, entitled ‘Measuring Regional Variation in Farm Support: Wales and the UK, 1947-72’? The conclusion of this article was this: previous pre-EU farm subsidies penalised Wales when farm size was smaller on average than in the UK as a whole. The fact is that the Welsh farmer has more in common with farmers throughout the rest of the EU than he or she has with a bunch of right-wing privatising Tories who are only interested in self-aggrandisement and their own self-promotion. It is better for the Welsh farmer to stay in the EU. That is the conclusion from the president of the National Farmers Union today, here in this Assembly, and also the Farmers Union of Wales. I hope that we, in the last 24 hours, will work hard to provide the assurances that the farming community needs that we will look after their interests, but as part of a reformed European Union.

I absolutely agree with the Member. I was at the event with the NFU and I’ve met with both the NFU and the FUW, who have sent out a very positive message to their members that they should vote to remain in the EU tomorrow. We know that the single market is absolutely critical to our farming and food sectors and I think that the risks associated with the potential exit are significant. We really don’t know, and what we are hearing from some politicians, as I say, is just supposition and we know that 81 per cent of the profit of Welsh farming businesses is derived from the EU subsidy payments that they receive.

Cabinet Secretary, the previous Welsh Government’s decision to move to the 15 per cent modulation rate has made it much tougher for some Welsh farmers to compete in the marketplace against food producers from other countries. Given these circumstances, what is the Welsh Government doing specifically to ensure that farmers get the opportunity to directly access these funds under the rural development plan, to offset the loss of earnings under pillar 1?

Well, actually, you know, I’m just in the first month of the portfolio and I think they’re actually getting back more than the 15 per cent. We are in the process of setting up the small grants scheme and the farmers are very happy with what we’re doing in relation to that.

The Welsh Government rural communities rural development programme 2014-20 is supporting rural communities and the economy with a combination of Welsh Government and EU funding. Fifteen schemes have opened already and Glastir small grants will open on 27 June. We are continuing to work with stakeholders to refine and develop the programme.

Thank you. It was good to see the NFU here in the Senedd today outlining their vision for the industry. But, what the NFU, like farmers across Wales, are looking for is not simply warm words of support from Government, but action too. Now, there was a pledge made by the previous Minister that the new rural development plan could be transformational in terms of the rural economy and the agricultural industry. Two years in to the programme, having only a handful of projects approved is a long way from being transformational. Farmers in my constituency of Anglesey, and farmers across Wales, are still waiting. So, when is this transformation going to happen and will the Minister share her vision on the potential for the new RDP?

I think you’re absolutely right. We do need to see much more of a transformational change, and we need to do that in partnership with the farmers. Certainly, from my discussions with the FUW and NFU, they’re very up for this. I do think that they want to see some speed in relation to going forward. One of the things I have discussed with them is the strategic initiatives, and to have those strategic initiatives running right across the RDP to make sure we’re improving skills for instance. I also think we need to look at how we can help them with the sustainability and the resilience of their businesses, and to look at the business side of it, because I think farmers, certainly in my very early discussions with them, are perhaps not the best people to run a business. They haven’t that kind of business perspective, yet they want to work with us in relation to that. This is just some of the farmers I’ve spoken to early in the portfolio—I’m not saying all farmers at all. But this is the thing they’re saying to me that they want assistance with, and that’s where I think we can help, with strategic initiatives across the RDP.

Minister, I would endorse the comments of the original speaker on this about the speed that the money is being delivered out of the rural development plan into the various schemes. I’d be grateful if you could enlarge on some of your comments in the last answer to say: are you satisfied with the speed that is being developed behind the rural development plan to create that transformational agenda that you talk about? Because many of the sentiments people do support, but there is a huge logjam, I would suggest to you, in the system of processing applications to the RDP, and, above all, people actually accessing the money in the first place. So, what are your initial assessments, given you’ve now been in post several weeks?

Well, it only won approval in May of last year, so it’s only just over a year. We have opened 15 schemes: I opened a further scheme last week. We’ve got over £260 million of funding committed across all sectors. So, I think there is, as I say, immense potential for the sector. I want to really work on those strategic initiatives across. I suppose we can always do things more quickly, but I don’t want to see logjams and I want to see that money out there as quickly as possible, and I’ve pledged to do that.

Thank you. Improving local air quality is a key objective for the Welsh Government. We support local authorities in the implementation of their duties under the Environment Act 1995, which requires them to monitor air quality and implement action plans to improve it in areas affected by high levels of pollution.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. The A472 in Crumlin: according to Government data, the levels of nitrogen dioxide here are the highest recorded in the UK outside London. The levels are exceeded in England only by a similar monitor on Marylebone Road in central London, and according to Asthma UK Cymru, 314,000 people have asthma in Wales, including 59,000 children: almost one child in 10. A report from NHS Wales and the Welsh Government, published in 2015, said the percentage of patients registered with their GP for asthma and COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was greater than in England, and there had been a slight increase in recent years. What urgent action can the Welsh Government take to work with Caerphilly County Borough Council and other stakeholders to lift the scourge of air pollution?

Thank you. My officials have sought assurances from Caerphilly County Borough Council in relation to the A472 air quality management area near Crumlin that you mention, concerning what action they’re going to take to improve the local air quality. The council are planning a steering group meeting, which you’re probably aware of next month, and they’re going to get input from local groups and local residents, which I think is really important. They’re then going to have an air quality action plan developed. That will also include a list of traffic management options for the area to measure the air quality in the area. The council has given us an initial date of November for when this will be implemented, but I’ve asked officials to monitor that very carefully to make sure they do keep to that timeline.

The Port Talbot peripheral distributor road, opened to relieve local traffic demand on the M4, has been operational for about three years now. What data has the Welsh Government received from the local authority, or extracted from its own work during the junction 41 experiment, about changes to movements of traffic and air quality in particular? Can you tell me what permanent changes have been identified to air quality and are those influential in your final decision on what’s going to happen to junction 41?

I’m afraid I don’t have those data to hand, but I will be happy to write to the Member with that.

Following on from that question, obviously the air quality in Port Talbot, Cabinet Secretary, has been recognised to be one of the worst in Wales. In fact, a World Health Organization report recently published said that it was the worst in the UK for some particulates, and definitely one of the worst in the UK. I understand the issues we have. We have a heavy industrial area, we have a narrow coastal strip with the M4 driving through it, and they do impact on levels of pollution and particulates, but we need to do more to actually minimise any increase.

I understand the Welsh Government has actually commissioned work by the University of Birmingham and by King’s College London to look at the implications of air quality. Could you make a statement on the outcomes of that research and can you also ensure that the issues about the air quality in Port Talbot can be improved, because we are facing some of the challenges ahead of us?

Again, I’m sorry I don’t have the research information in front of me, but I will write to you.

Thank you. I will be making a statement next week on flood and coastal-risk management for the whole of Wales. Flood-risk management plans have recently been published by Rhondda Cynon Taf and Natural Resources Wales that set out the detailed approach to managing the flood risk in the Cynon Valley.

Thank you. The risk of flooding to properties in Abercynon, Aberaman, Cilfynydd, Cwmdu and Ynysboeth in my constituency has been reduced through Rhondda Cynon Taf’s multimillion-pound flood alleviation programme, funded by the council’s capital programme, Welsh Government money and European regional development funding. Do you agree with me that these schemes to protect homes and families from the devastation caused by flooding could be at risk if we weren’t in the EU?

Yes, you’re absolutely right. These locations have benefited from contributions from EU funding for flood-risk management schemes. They’ve supplemented our own funding too, and they’ve enabled us to increase the amount of properties that are protected in Wales from flooding.

Cabinet Secretary, the improvement and maintenance of culverts are key to effective flood defence, and if anyone in valley areas like Cynon Valley has seen how fast those water courses can move, it is truly terrifying. There’s a lot we can do in terms of maintaining culverts through the use of new technology and cameras. This is something that we must do, with great vigilance, and it does, of course, require extensive investment.

Yes, I absolutely agree. It’s something, as we look at what schemes we’ll be funding over the coming years, that we can have a look at—that specific issue. There’s always technology and research that shows us new ways of doing it, and it’s really important that we have that flexibility to be able to do that.

Thank you. The nature recovery plan for Wales sets out our objectives and actions to achieve our ambition to reverse the decline in biodiversity by 2020. This will contribute to the nation’s well-being and the sustainable management of our natural resources.

Cabinet Secretary, you’ll be aware that the Wildlife Trusts recently launched a species champions strategy. I and other Assembly Members are championing species in Wales. The water vole—[Interruption.]—is my particular species, but many others will be helping with the efforts. But would you agree with me, Cabinet Secretary, that we do need to protect our biodiversity and these species, including the water vole, on the Gwent levels, and one aspect of that is engagement with local people and local children? Schools are very much captivated by the water voles and it does lead to a greater appreciation of biodiversity and nature. So, I think there are many aspects of Welsh Government strategy that can be furthered through this scheme.

I was very pleased to see that last week. They offered me the hedgehog, but I decided that I would be champion for all of Wales’s biodiversity. [Interruption.] I thought perhaps it was a bit prickly. [Laughter.] But I absolutely do support the role of species champions. I think it’s a really good initiative, because it will highlight the importance of species, their habitat needs, and the absolutely essential part they play in healthy, functioning ecosystems.

I think this is part and parcel of a broader approach that we need to have in relation to the sustainable management of our resources, and you’re absolutely right about schools and young children and teenage children. I think you only have to look at the way that recycling—. I think that went into schools very early on, and now for those children, as they’ve grown up, it’s just part of their everyday lives. So, if we can start them young, I think that’s a very good idea, and the Minister for education is in the Chamber and is hearing this, so I’m sure she will take that on board, too.

As the species champion for the red squirrel in Wales, I’m delighted that one of the largest populations of red squirrels is in the Clocaenog forest in my constituency. You will be aware that that forestry is managed by a taxpayer-funded organisation, Natural Resources Wales. What work are you doing to ensure that, where there is publicly owned land, it does promote biodiversity and, in particular, the red squirrel population?

[Inaudible.]

I was just going to say that, in my day, that was called Tufty. I think you raise a very important point, and, certainly, I will be meeting very regularly with Natural Resources Wales on forestry. It’s hugely important to our country, so I’m very happy to take that forward.

Thank you. This was a serious water pollution incident caused by an unknown quantity of farm slurry entering the watercourse from a local farm, resulting in 380 dead fish. Natural Resources Wales is considering formal enforcement action following a review of the facts of the case and public interest factors.

I thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary, and, as you say, there was a large number of fish estimated to have been killed. But this is only one, or the latest, incident on that section of the water, and it isn’t the first time that such an incident has occurred. There was another incident of around 10,000 gallons of slurry spilled into a stream in the Towy valley in March 2015. I of course do welcome that Natural Resources Wales officers are investigating the source of the slurry and also that the pollution has now stopped, but my question to you is: what assessment has been made, or will be made, as to the impact on the long-term recovery of that stretch of water? And will you also be able to confirm what work is being done to reduce the likelihood of similar slurry spillages occurring in the future, and also to ensure that those who do damage our wonderful environment are actually held accountable for doing so?

Thank you. The nitrous oxide in fish, we know, will have a future impact on egg counts, but it is hoped that the river will recover naturally over time. I mentioned that Natural Resources Wales are working with the farmer to implement pollution prevention measures—to improve the infrastructure at the farm to reduce the likelihood of further pollution incidents. They have collected evidence in response to the incident, and, as I say, they are investigating and deciding what further action will be taken. I think it’s really important that we do work with the industry to develop a programme to ensure that everybody’s aware of their responsibilities. We also need to look to see if there’s anything that we need to do here, whether it be legislative or non-legislative, to assist, going forward.

Question 12, Andrew R.T. Davies. [Interruption.] Question 13, Jayne Bryant.

Thank you. Generally, rural areas are not impacted by significant levels of pollution from traffic, due to the smaller volumes of traffic in rural locations. A small number of rural towns have elevated levels of pollutants generated by traffic. Local authorities implement air-quality action plans to reduce pollution in these locations.

In areas in my constituency, such as Caerleon and Marshfield, they’ve seen an increase in the number of HGVs driving through their areas. These roads are often unsuitable for this sort of traffic, yet they’re often used as shortcuts. What assessment has the Minister made of the impact of such traffic on the levels of air pollution and noise pollution in these sorts of areas?

Well, obviously, the roads in question are the responsibility of the local authority. I know that officials have been talking to Newport City Council, who have recently commissioned a traffic and air quality assessment within Caerleon. What they want to do is identify traffic-related measures, which, if they could be implemented, would improve the air quality, and potentially noise also. I’ve asked officials to stay in close contact with them to take it forward.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

We now move to item 2, questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children. The first question this week is from Adam Price.

I thank the Member for his question. People and communities across Wales are clearly benefiting from UK membership of the European Union, through jobs that rely on free access to the single market and through guaranteed EU funding. Those jobs and the £500 million communities in Wales receive every year from the EU will be at risk if the UK were to leave the European Union.

The Minister will be aware that Wales received £2.4 billion from the structural funds in the current period, some quarter of the total for the United Kingdom, and more than all of the other devolved assemblies—London, Scotland and Northern Ireland—put together. Would the Secretary agree with me that this reflects one of the core values of the European project, namely, solidarity between the nations and regions of the European Community, to use its original name, and this compares extremely unfavourably with the attitude of UK Governments, be that Thatcher’s Government, which actually removed regional policy as one of its first actions in 1979, or the Blair Government, which rejected match funding for the Objective 1 programme until this Senedd rebelled by removing Alun Michael? Wouldn’t it be a self-destructive act of foolishness for this small European nation to put any faith in the mandarins of Whitehall or the masters at Westminster to look after the future of our communities?

I think the people of the UK and the people of Wales should be very clear tomorrow—the Welsh Government has been very clear in our view in terms of that being part of the EU is vital for Wales’s prosperity. Our assessment is that, if the UK votes to leave, Welsh communities will be worse off. Communities need business investment and a skilled workforce to thrive. So, let us not underestimate the power of the vote tomorrow to remain in to secure the investment and future of Wales—it is an important one.

Cabinet Secretary, many community regeneration projects within my constituency have been supported by EU funding, from Briton Ferry and Sandfields up to the Afan valley. They vary from supporting people moving back into work to building centres for community activities. These have been essential to strengthening those communities. However, many now face further challenges due to austerity from the UK Government, and the loss of EU funding will hit our most vulnerable communities even harder. Do you agree with me that the vote to remain tomorrow is a vote for helping our communities to take a more positive step forward?

Indeed. Communities across Wales are benefiting from millions of EU funds—over £500 million annually. The regeneration of many towns and communities across Wales is being supported—Pontypridd, Llanelli, Rhyl, just to name a few. The EU-backed Swansea innovation campus is expected to create £10 billion of economic impact in the south-west region in the next 10 years. All will have been put at risk unnecessarily if we leave tomorrow.

Question—. Mark Isherwood.

Diolch. First time I’ve been described as a question, but I’m very happy to be described by such an eloquent person as yourself.

The European Commission planned to allocate structural funds for the period of 2014-20 to Wales, including a 27 per cent cut, indicating a lack of knowledge of Wales. The UK Government allocated some of the funding from England to rebalance some of that shortfall, but west Wales and the Valleys still suffered a 16 per cent cut, indicating, or demonstrating, perhaps, that the Commission’s lack of knowledge shows that Wales would be better out of the UK, with the future funding for these types of projects determined by politicians accountable to the Welsh electorate on our island in London and Cardiff. How, therefore, do you respond to the statement by Labour MP John Mann—hardly an extreme right-winger—that, if you’re a Labour voter, you can proudly vote on Labour values to leave the European Union?

I can see clearly why you’re sitting so close to your colleagues in UKIP. Let me tell the Member—let me remind the Member of the constituency he represents in Ynys Môn. Let me just remind him that £10 million of EU funding for the skills and employment and employees project will help 500 businesses and 7,000 people across north Wales. Did he know that EU funds helped employees from Wylfa power station gain new skills and find new employment opportunities? The Member is putting all of that at risk and he should remember that when he goes to the ballot box.

I thank the Member for his question. The First Minister has announced our intention to bring forward legislation to remove the defence of ‘reasonable punishment’, which will confirm our long-standing commitment to children’s rights. Discussions will take place with the opposition and the proposed legislation will be subject to the legislative process, including consultation with parents and stakeholders.

Thank you for that response, Secretary. You will know, from the experience that we had in the last Assembly, when I believe the majority, across parties, wanted to remove this defence, that that wasn’t achievable in the way the Government went about it and the way in which legislation works here. Whilst I accept entirely that the Government has to—well, not has to, but that, in this context, it would be appropriate that the Government should—propose legislation for discussion, how can the Government build that cross-party consensus to ensure that any legislation is successful and that we can deliver on this commitment?

Of course, I think it’s really important that the Member raises the issue of engaging with stakeholders. I will be starting discussions with opposition parties in order for a pathway to be created in order for a successful Bill to be taken forward. It’s equally as important for the political groups to come together on this as best they can, but also parenting, and stakeholders using their knowledge and skills as well to help us in the process.

I welcome very much that the Government is going to move forward on this legislation on a cross-party basis and I’m sure that we’ll be able to get consensus to bring this in. Could the Cabinet Secretary tell us whether he believes there are any reservations in the draft Wales Bill that would affect the competence of the Welsh Government to remove the defence of reasonable punishment?

I thank Julie Morgan, a long-standing campaigner on this very issue, and I’m looking forward to working with her too. If competence is assessed on the basis of the amendments that will be made to the Government of Wales Act 2006 by the Wales Bill as currently drafted, the argument that provision about smacking children is outside competence because it amends the criminal law is likely to no longer be an issue. There are other issues relevant to competence, such as compatibility with the European convention on human rights, however, which will be unchanged. These are all complex issues in legal terms but we are working through them and working with partners to achieve the positive outcome the Member wishes.

Cabinet Secretary, do you accept that many parents who love their children use, sparingly, reasonable chastisement as a means to discipline their children, and that the excessive use of other forms of discipline can also be equally abusive to children when they are not used correctly? What action are you taking as a Government to ensure that positive parenting skills are something that are focused upon and expounded across the nation to give parents who use reasonable chastisement the opportunity to use other tools in the box? I know that there’s been some work on this in the past and I very much hope that you’ll be looking to expand that positive parenting programme to all parts of Wales in the future.

Let’s be very clear here: this isn’t about legislation to criminalise parents. What we want to do here is give people the opportunity to have positive parenting experiences. We will, as Government, provide a package of tools that will encourage parents to use Families First, Flying Start, the ‘Give it time’ campaign—there are many others—which we’re trying to build competency around to give parents confidence in the way that their families grow up. Aside from that, we will also introduce legislation on the defence of reasonable chastisement. It is a package of tools that we will come to the Chamber with, and not one or the other.

I call on the party spokespeople to ask questions of the Cabinet Secretary. First of all, the Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Bethan Jenkins.

Thank you and good luck in your portfolio, Minister. I think it’s important that we have an objective view at this particular stage as to the nature of your portfolio, especially with regard to the poverty agenda. There was a very damning report a year ago, and also a report in the last term, by the Communities, Equality and Local Government Committee, with regard to the lack of robust data in relation to some of your anti-poverty schemes. While nobody could argue with the nature and the thought processes behind those particular schemes, it’s very important for us to understand how you analyse those data so you can see, moving forward, how successful those projects are. Minister, can you tell us, after your few weeks in this position, what you plan do to in relation to data and how you will communicate that effectively to Assembly Members?

I thank the Member for her question and message of goodwill, and likewise to the Member who will be shadowing me. Poverty is now the responsibility of all Cabinet Secretaries and Ministers within Government, and we all take a collective role. I have specific issues around poverty with communities, and I will be working with my team in Government to resolve some of those problems. I will be making a statement shortly about the principles of this department and what we are trying to achieve. I do believe that tackling poverty is very challenging for any Government. In the 17 years that we have been in power here, there are things that we can mitigate and try to mitigate against, but we don’t hold all the levers in terms of the challenging tasks ahead. I’m trying to concentrate my portfolio now specifically on two areas: one economic regeneration, and one well-being. The well-being aspect of this is around tackling ACEs, adverse childhood experiences, because I believe that if we can fix communities at an early age—early intervention with young people—we have a much better opportunity long term. But I will come back to the Chamber with more detail, and I’m happy to share more detail with the Member over a private meeting if the Member would like to have that.

Thank you for that answer. Obviously, I’m not against other Ministers having poverty within their portfolios, but we must make sure that there is, ultimately, one Minister who will be responsible. We have had experiences in committee where we have asked various Ministers questions on poverty, and they have always potentially not answered those questions because it has not been within their particular brief.

My second question comes to the economic aspect of your answer. The previous Minister, Lesley Griffiths, said that she had been focusing Communities First more on getting people back into jobs. While, again, I believe that that’s noble, we need to see how that is measured and how those targets are then followed through to make sure that these schemes are being appropriated in the most effective way to get people in our Communities First communities back into work. Can you tell us how, potentially, you will refocus Communities First in relation to that particular agenda, moving forward, and how you will encourage other parties to take part in that conversation?

We have many anti-poverty programmes and skills programmes and I’m working with the Minister responsible for that. One of our commitments is for 100,000 new apprenticeships, working with the Communities First programme and Communities for Work. Communities for Work is being put at high risk because of the referendum tomorrow. If we leave the EU, what happens to that, in terms of the people who are on those programmes, and programmes for the future? I do have statistics for the programmes we held in the last Government, and I’d be happy to write to the Member and place them in the Library, Presiding Officer.

Thank you for that answer. The third question, and I’m sure you are very much aware of this—. I had a Bill on financial inclusion and education in the last Assembly term, and I worked closely with the former Minister and a group working on new ideas and a new strategy for financial inclusion and education. Can I ask you what is happening with that crucial work? I had a representative on that group. Will that representative continue to work with me and with you, as Minister? What do you intend to do in that regard because it is such an important agenda?

Financial inclusion and financial literacy is something that we are seeking to build into the curriculum programme. I will be working with the education Minister to see how we can advance that in the weeks to come. Perhaps the Member would also like to write to the education Minister in terms of how she may be able to help her bring that to the forefront in our schools and colleges across Wales.

The Welsh Conservatives’ spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch. Last December’s report by the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, ‘State of the Nation 2015: Social Mobility and Child Poverty in Great Britain’, chaired by Alan Milburn, a greatly respected politician, found that absolute child poverty in Wales—children living in Wales are more likely to live in persistent poverty, and the number of children in workless households in Wales were the highest in Great Britain. It made three particular recommendations to the Welsh Government. How do you respond, bearing in mind your response to the spokesperson for Plaid Cymru that you are the single point of contact on this issue for the Welsh Government, to recommendation 1, which was to take a more rigorous, evidence-based approach to poverty reduction? It states:

‘If the Welsh Government is to achieve the greatest impact from its policies and programmes, it needs to undertake a review to ensure that: there is clarity about what problem the policies are trying to address, what they will achieve and how they will achieve it…that policies are cost-effective and appropriately targeted to maximise impact…. In addition, the Welsh Government should pilot new policies and programmes to assess impact and value for money before they’re implemented across the country.’

I thank the Member for his question, but, look, you can’t keep your hands clean on this one, Mark. I said earlier on that tackling poverty in Wales was particularly difficult because we didn’t have all the levers. The UK Conservative Government starved Wales of £1.2 billion of funding, which has an impact on public services. So, while we will try and continue to work with our partners to deliver a better outcome for our families across Wales, I would also ask the Member to make representations to the UK Government to look for fair funding for Wales, so that we can pass that through to families here in Wales.

Of course, UK Government policy applies across the UK, but this report identified that Wales had the highest worklessness, the highest child poverty, and the lowest prosperity amongst the UK nations. That can only be because of the matters delivered at a devolved level in Wales over the last 17 years. So, how do you respond to recommendation 2?

‘Improve the quality of the workforce in schools…Ensuring that children have access to high-quality teachers in all subjects is fundamental to improving their life chances’.

They said,

‘The first step to achieving this is to make teaching in Wales more attractive to good-quality teachers…better mechanisms to encourage new students to undertake teacher training in Wales and newly-qualified teachers to work in Wales…improving teacher training in Wales…as would better identification, provision and assessment of teachers’ continuous development.’

That was their second recommendation. As the point of contact in the Welsh Government, I would be grateful if you could comment on that.

Of course, I recognise all the issues that are raised in that report, but I think the point you completely missed was the fact that a lot of these programmes require funding to do them. And we are extremely challenged in the way we are managing our budgets because of the challenge the UK Government has proposed on us. We are looking collectively at how we tackle poverty across the Cabinet Secretariat. We will continue to do that for the best interests of our children.

The budgetary environment set by the UK Government applies in England and Scotland too, but Wales is trailing in these areas. The third and final recommendation the commission set for Welsh Government was to involve business in its drive to reduce child poverty and increase social mobility. They said you should increase efforts to work with companies, including significant employers in Wales, to create a business compact to promote fairer access to high-quality employment, and said businesses should be encouraged to engage strategically with young people in schools, adhere to best practice on internships and apprenticeships; reform the selection process to eliminate unconscious bias; open up well-structured non-graduate routes to high-quality careers; monitor and evaluate performance on improving access; and sign up—something that you’ll agree with—to the living wage. Now, this was last December, after 16 and a half years of Labour Government, and after four and a half years of the last Labour Government. So, I’d be grateful if you could confirm how this Labour Government is going to do things differently to address these concerns.

I refer the Member to the tackling poverty strategy and the child poverty strategy, which we will be refreshing this year.

Llefarydd UKIP, Mark Reckless.

Diolch, Lywydd. On his visit to Cardiff City Stadium yesterday, the First Minister said that, following a ‘leave’ vote, the Welsh Government would develop its own separate relationship with the European Union. Does the Minister know what he meant, or how this will affect his portfolio?

Maybe the Member would like to refer that to the First Minister, as it is what he said and not what I said. But I do have a view on this; the First Minister has been very clear on the importance of being a member of the EU, and of Wales being a member of the EU. The Member—I know he’s not traditionally a Welsh resident, or with Welsh interests—but what we do have here, and what the First Minister is very keen on, is making sure that he represents Welsh people well, and that’s by being part of the EU.

I am a Welsh resident. I’m slightly concerned with the Minister not being aware about what the First Minister plans in this field. He’s waxed lyrical about European Union funds and community regeneration, but it seems that he and his Government seem to be going more down a separatist route through this joint working with Plaid Cymru. I just wonder, would he not be better deployed working with the Westminster Government to ensure that, as well as continuing to have all this money flow to Wales, we, in addition, get our share of the £10 billion independent dividend due?

I find the Member’s comments not surprising given the party that he now resides in. The fact is that working with another party—with Westminster—is something that we do on a regular basis. It’s not new to a devolved administration to do that, but it’s also not impossible to work with our friends across Europe either, and that’s what the Member should think about carefully tomorrow.

And on the projects that the Minister speaks of—community regeneration and beyond— where we’re told how wonderful this European money is, it often comes with strings and restrictions. I just wonder, are there any of those projects where the Minister believes that were the Welsh Government to be unfettered in its spending of those funds, it could do a better job?

The Member only recently appeared in Wales, pre-election, and he’s probably not too familiar with many of the areas that we all represent in this Chamber. But, let me just pick up one area of Monmouthshire, which I believe is in his region, where there are 305 enterprises assisted and 430 enterprises created, with 865 jobs in Monmouth alone, thanks to the EU funding that you and your colleagues are putting at risk.

I thank Steffan Lewis for his question. I haven’t heard the ‘social security’ term used for quite some time, actually, but I thank him for his question. Working with a wide range of stakeholders, we continue to discuss and assess the significant impact of the UK Government’s welfare reforms in Wales. The Welsh Government has, on many occasions, made representations with UK Ministers, raising issues of concern when it is evident that vulnerable people will be further disadvantaged.

I thank him for that answer. The Welsh Government, incrementally, is becoming responsible for more and more elements of social protection, if I can use another retro term, from council tax support to the discretionary payment fund and the Work Programme. Despite that, though, citizens in this country are still subject to regressive and punitive welfare policies from Whitehall. As he has mentioned this afternoon on numerous occasions, he is denied many of the levers in this area. As this area of policy is such a vital pillar of Welsh public policy, will the Cabinet Secretary commit to publishing a distinct programme outlining the foundations of a Welsh welfare state, which would include not only the direction of travel for policy with the current devolution settlement, but also a vision for welfare in Wales with a further transfer of social protection powers here?

That is a really interesting question that the Member raises and a very complex one in terms of the relationship currently between the UK Government and ourselves and what we are able to mitigate. I think that what the First Minister has said is that we are content to take certain aspects of powers, provided that we get fair funding to deal with that. I think that that’s an important factor that we have to work out in advance.

I am attracted by the Member’s proposal in terms of the offer and what Wales can do. I’ll give some more thought to whether we can put something together to help people to understand what Wales’s responsibilities are and how we can help people.

Minister, you’ll have seen that the United Nations have recently published a damning report on the impact of the UK Government’s austerity measures on child poverty in the UK. Indeed, the Child Poverty Action Group described it as reading as an

‘Indictment of the government’s failure to prioritise children in its decisions on social security.’

Do you share my concerns about that? Will you raise those concerns with your opposite number in Westminster? But, furthermore, do you also share my concerns that if we vote to leave the EU tomorrow, the impact on our economy will be such that children are likely to bear even more the brunt of UK austerity policies?

Indeed, and the Member is right to raise that very issue. This Government legislated last year around the well-being of future generations and making sure young people were at the heart of our decision making as we move forward, planning for the long term. I think what will happen—and the EU referendum has a big take on this—is that, as the amount of funding is reduced, it will have an impact on our economic well-being and it will have an effect on families and predominantly children. It’s something we should all be very careful about.

Recent research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies found that universal credit does a lot to help make work pay for many of those who currently face the most severe disincentives. They went on to say that the number of people facing very weak incentives to enter work will fall by two-thirds. Does the Cabinet Secretary agree with the institute when it says:

‘universal credit should make the system easier to understand, ease transitions into and out of work, and largely get rid of the most extreme disincentives to work or to earn more created by the current system’?

What really concerns me is the UK’s dismissal of people; the fact is they change policies very easily, which has a massive impact on communities and individuals, and you will have all seen it. I expect even the Member has casework around personal independence payments—people who aren’t able to receive funding because of the unnecessary processes that have been placed by the UK Government. I think Steffan Lewis’s initial question about social security and the welfare state, about how we deal with that, should be given some much longer, further consideration by the UK Government before they tinker with it.

Cabinet Secretary, you might well be aware of a recent report from Sheffield Hallam University Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research. They highlighted the disproportionate impact on welfare benefit cuts on the people of Wales compared to the UK as a whole—I think that’s the point that’s already been made—and this is even more pronounced in the Welsh Valleys. It notes that the proposed change to the local housing allowance will exacerbate these inequalities by impacting most on the already most deprived areas, where the reference point for setting the LHA rate will be the bottom 30 per cent of private sector rents, in an area where private sector rents are already extremely low. Will the Cabinet Secretary outline what discussions the Welsh Government is having to ensure that those in receipt of local housing allowances in the most deprived areas in Wales are not disproportionately disadvantaged by the basis of the calculation of the average rent that will determine the LHA?

I thank the Member for her question. It’s something that my officials alerted me to as soon as I became Cabinet Secretary. The Department for Work and Pensions is responsible for the local housing allowance, which is a non-devolved matter as the Member knows. But this is again a reflection of what I said earlier; the fact is that the UK Government are making alterations to the welfare state, which have an impact on devolved services. So, this doesn’t stop the pressure in the system—it just moves the pressure. The unfortunate part of this is that people are involved in this whole process. The Welsh Government did raise concerns with the UK Ministers at the time regarding these changes, and we continue to raise the issue of impact assessments with the UK Government.

I thank the Member for Newport West for her question. I will shortly have held discussions with all of the police and crime commissioners for Wales to identify opportunities to work together. I am determined to tackle anti-social behaviour and will work with the commissioners to do this.

Thank you. A visible uniformed presence within our communities reassures and plays a vital role in tackling anti-social behaviour. With cuts to policing from the Westminster Government, police community support officers are a way to support our police and serve our communities. The 101 PCSOs that the Welsh Government provides for Gwent do make an important difference and are a significant contribution to policing in the area. Will the Cabinet Secretary confirm that he will work with the police and crime commissioners to ensure that continues, and that tackling anti-social behaviour is a priority?

Of course, the Member is right to raise this. The Welsh Labour manifesto commitment of 500 PCSOs is something that was very popular on the doorstep when we went to the electorate the term before. Continuing with the 101 PCSOs in Gwent that the Member makes reference to, I agree that that funding will continue to make a crucial difference. We have to consider how the implementation of PCSOs is taken with police and crime commissioners; it is a matter operationally for them. But it’s something where I look forward to working on joint policies together, and how we can both tackle police and crime commissioners’ priorities and the Welsh Government priorities together.

Police figures, unfortunately, reveal that Wind Street in Swansea with its well-known night-time economy has the highest rate of crime of any street in Wales. Regeneration plans are forthcoming and being developed and considered for the adjacent Castle Square area. When you have your forthcoming discussions with the police and crime commissioners, can you please include an item on the importance of police input into urban design so that regeneration actually combats opportunities for anti-social behaviour?

I’m very grateful for the Member’s question. I would ask the Member to reflect on the statistics that she has because I have had some recent briefing on Wind Street in particular. There is a project there that is in partnership with the police and crime commissioner Alun Michael and the local health board and ambulance service about how they manage the night-time economy. It has had some fantastic results in reducing the incidence of crime and alcohol abuse in that particular area. I think it’s called the Help Point. I’ll just refer the Member to that, and maybe it’s something that she would like to look at because, actually, it is a great example of what we can do in communities where there are pressures of the night-time economy, Wind Street being one of them. But I think it was moving from being one of the most unsafe places to being to one of the safest in the UK. So, I would ask the Member that maybe the statistics she has may now be updated.

Thank you. Presiding Officer, I understand you’ve given permission for questions 5 and 7 to be grouped today. Tackling poverty is the responsibility of every Welsh Cabinet Secretary and Minister, enabling a truly cross-governmental approach focused on addressing the root causes of poverty. The priorities in my portfolio will be giving children the best start in life and supporting those furthest from the job market into sustainable employment.

Thank you for that. The ‘Improving Life Chances’ report by the Centre for Social Justice urged the UK Government to take into account the five main pathways to poverty—family breakdown, worklessness, drug and alcohol addiction, serious personal debt and educational failure—subsequent to which the UK Government launched its life chances strategy. This starts with the fundamental belief that people in poverty are not liabilities to be managed, that each person is an asset to be realised and that human potential is to be nurtured. If you agree with that, and I hope you do, will you look at the evidence and seek information on whether and how you might introduce a Welsh-made life chances for Wales strategy?

Working with Public Health Wales, which is in the remit of Rebecca Evans, we may even have a better strategy here, and I invite the Member to have a look at the adverse childhood experiences programme that they are already developing. I mentioned earlier on about my department and how we are setting the narrative for influencing community change and resilience. One of those challenges will be about delivering on the ACE programme and making sure the issues the Member raises around domestic violence, alcohol abuse and drug misuse, parental separation and others—. How can we intervene at that point early on in a lifetime to support families as they grow up? I’m familiar with the life chances programme, but I actually think we’ve got a better product made in Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, the first 1,000 days are vital for language development and so for reading and general education and development, and there are statistics that show that children who live in persistent poverty are twice as likely to score below average for language acquisition at age five than their better off peers. Issues identified in terms of dealing with this include investing in quality in the early years education workforce, supporting parents better and, indeed, in general terms, leadership. What will Welsh Government do in terms of tackling poverty by tackling these issues around early years development and language acquisition particularly?

A very topical question from the Member—I actually met with speech and language therapists yesterday who raised the very same issue with me. The Welsh Government is currently mapping the various policy initiatives across education, health and social services to inform the development of a cohesive approach focused on educational provision of speech, language and communication support. I know that the therapists yesterday were very specific on the life chances of an individual. If they don’t get this early on, it has an impact on their life and opportunities later on. I welcome the question from the Member and I will keep the Member informed.

The history of the Welsh Government’s strategy on tackling poverty appears to me anyway to be one of setting long-term aspirations in order to end poverty but without setting short-term specific targets with the appropriate resources to achieve them. Very often, the aspirations are either postponed or completely dropped once the Government realises that they’re not attainable. Because today’s circumstances are very different to those of a decade ago, isn’t it now high time to rethink and focus on projects and policies that tackle poverty in reality and in a measurable way?

Yes.

I thank the Member for Cynon Valley for her question. We know Flying Start improves outcomes for children and families in some of our most disadvantaged communities in Rhondda Cynon Taf. This year, we have committed over £6.8 million, enabling the local authority to support an estimated 3,270 children and their families.

Thank you. Flying Start has had a transformational impact on the lives of tens of thousands of children across Wales, including in my constituency of Cynon Valley, during the last Assembly term. However, I know concerns have been raised about the geographical basis upon which support is allocated. How is the Welsh Government working with local authorities to ensure that help reaches those children who really need it the most?

I think the Member raises a question that I’m familiar with from other parts of targeted services. I know your colleague Mike Hedges used to allude to that around Communities First, again, about boundaries, but there are always some that are in and some that are out. Flying Start is an excellent programme, but it’s targeted using income data provided by the Department for Work and Pensions and HM Revenue and Customs, and the data allow local authorities to focus on the geographical area with the highest proportion of children under four years of age living in income-benefit households as an indicator of poverty. It is something that I’ve asked my team to look at—the whole strategy about our poverty intervention around communities, so Communities First, Families First, Flying Start: what do they do and how can we get into those communities best? So, your question isn’t lost on me; it is something that we are looking at, but, at the moment, it is statistically based and there will be some young people who miss out on this. It’s something that I’m very interested in in trying to resolve those issues.

Minister, obviously, the Government has a commitment around childcare—to have a universal childcare policy of up to 30 hours—and it’s something that we do welcome and it’s similar to what we had in our own manifesto. Has an impact assessment been made—I appreciate it’s early days for the Government—over the ability to commission that provision and that there is no risk of jeopardising existing provision, such as in Flying Start areas, such as Cynon Valley and other areas in my electoral region? There is an issue around capacity, obviously, to deliver that universal commitment, and we don’t want to be jeopardising existing schemes if that capacity needs to grow in the first instance.

I thank the Member for raising one of our groundbreaking commitments in terms of childcare. I can assure the Member that it was nothing like the Conservative childcare offer; it was a very specific one that Welsh Labour delivered on. I am working with my team and Cabinet colleagues on the best way to deliver this programme. Capacity: the Member is right—capacity is an issue about how we deliver that, but it’s something that, working with the private sector and the public sector to deliver, will be of benefit to families, but, more importantly, it will be of benefit to children.

I thank the Member for his question. In my portfolio, we are aligning key programmes to support those living in low-income households across Wales, including Caerphilly. Communities First, Flying Start, Families First and the Supporting People programme are working towards the common goals of a more prosperous and equal Wales.

Thank you. Last week, in response to a question from my colleague, the Member for Cynon Valley, Vikki Howells, the Cabinet Secretary commended the work of the Trussell Trust and the volunteers who carry out that work across Wales. Many Members in this Chamber will be aware of the work of the Wales chair for the Trussell Trust and, indeed, the chair for Northern Ireland as well, Tony Graham, who happens to be a constituent of mine. He’s talked about the Trussell Trust’s More Than Food programme that takes the work they do beyond food banks to providing services such as debt advice, cooking and budgetary skills courses. Will the Minister praise the work that the Trussell Trust does but also welcome these additional services that provide vital help to individuals in our communities that have been affected particularly by the UK Government’s benefit sanctions, and recognise that this work is vital in making up for those problems?

Indeed, and, like the member, I’d like to place on record my thanks to the members of the Trussell Trust, who work across the UK, and particularly in Wales, for the good work that they do, and the Trussell Trust plus effect, which is not just about food banks but it’s the other bits that they do as well—the financial advice and support. The Welsh Government advocate services, working together to support those in need, is reflected in our financial inclusion strategy. Collaboration between food banks and quality-assured advice services can offer people help through a period of crisis, and Trussell Trust do it very well.

Food poverty remains a problem for many households in Caerphilly and throughout Wales, Cabinet Secretary. Last winter, more than 2 million of the most vulnerable people benefited from help with their fuel bills from £310 million of assistance through the UK’s Government’s Warm Home Discount Scheme. Will the Cabinet Secretary join me in welcoming news that changes to the scheme mean that an additional 70,000 struggling families, disabled customers and other vulnerable people will be eligible to apply this winter for help to heat their homes in Wales?

For a moment I thought I saw some crocodile tears from the Member in regard to his question. It does worry me that there is a sense of irony that comes from those benches, of washing their hands of the impact that his Government in the UK is having on our constituents here in Wales—the ones that he claims to represent in Caerphilly are the very ones that are members, as Hefin David—. It is really important that we work together to get the most benefit for our communities, but I would ask the Member to reflect on his questions and maybe ask his colleagues in the UK for a fair funding stream for here in Wales.

I thank the Member for her question. My priorities for communities and children are well-being and economic prosperity, achieving those outcomes both for individuals and for communities.

Well-being is a very important part of your portfolio, Minister, and as I’m sure you’re aware, the annual NSPCC report, ‘How Safe are our Children?’, highlights a 26 per cent increase in the number of recorded sexual offences against children under 16 in Wales over the last 12 months—figures that have doubled over the last decade. Will you join me in welcoming this report, and will you consider acting upon the recommendation made by the NSPCC to develop a comprehensive child sexual abuse plan, and to improve provision of support services, so that the needs of children who’ve been sexually abused, and their families’ needs, can be met?

I thank the Member for her important question. I am due to meet the NSPCC in the next couple of weeks, and I’m sure that will be on the agenda. I will be working with my colleague from social services, the Minister for Social Services and Public Health, in our joint objective to tackle these issues specifically around children. I mentioned earlier on that my department’s focus, and that of many of my colleagues, will be addressing the incidence of adverse childhood experiences and reducing their impact on children’s life chances as we move forward. The well-being and economic prosperity of those people for the future is an important part of this Government’s agenda.

I thank the Member for her question. Presiding Officer, I understand you’ve also grouped 10 and 15, and agreed for those to be grouped today. Welsh Government have been working with the National Adoption Service to further develop and strengthen the strategic direction of adoption services in Wales. We want to ensure that adoptive families have access to timely, appropriate adoption services regardless of where they live in Wales.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response, and I congratulate the Government on the progress with the National Adoption Service. I have been approached by adoptive parents in Wales who are concerned about their status in possible contested adoption proceedings. Would the Cabinet Secretary confirm that the Welsh Government will be seeking to make amendments to clause 9 of the Children and Social Work Bill as it goes through the UK parliamentary process, to ensure that Welsh prospective adoptive parents are included in the definition of ‘relative’, because, if you fail to do this, this means the court won’t be taking into account the relationship between the child and its prospective adoptive parents in cases of contested adoption?

I’m aware of the Member’s concerns. My officials are considering the issues raised by clause 9 of the Children and Social Work Bill, and are in contact with Westminster to ensure the amendments made are in the best interests of Welsh children waiting to be adopted and their prospective adoptive parents. We are committed, as the Member raises, to adoption as an important option for those looked-after children who are not able to be cared for by their birth family. We are recognising the challenging, but rewarding, role that adoptive parents play in providing permanent, loving homes for these children, and it’s something that I will continue to keep an eye on as the Bill goes forward.

Earlier this year, the Children, Young People and Education Committee raised concerns about the lack of post-adoption support and the significant and very serious impact this could potentially have on children and families. They also are concerned about the regional variations in post-adoption support across Wales and call on the Welsh Government to instigate a review of services. Will the Cabinet Secretary update the Assembly in this regard, please?

I thank the Member for his question. Since the National Adoption Service was established in November 2014, the average length of time between a child being looked after and being placed for adoption has continued to reduce. The final 2015-16 quarter performance figure of 15.2 months is the lowest it’s been since 2002. Significant improvements have been made in the provision of life journey materials as of 31 March 2016, with 49 per cent of children receiving the materials by the time of their second adoption review and no more than three months after their first review, compared with 24 per cent the year before. There is still an awful lot of work to be done, but I will be looking to continue with an advisory group in order to influence Government and make the best decisions for young people finding themselves in this position.

Minister, I’m pleased that Julie Morgan has raised this question; it is an important and a sensitive area. Adoption is a rewarding, but also a challenging thing for anyone to do. Peer support is clearly a vital element of the support services and the National Adoption Service. How are you strengthening the networks to ensure that adopters have access to the support that they need?

That’s a really important question—to make sure that we’re able to have the capacity to support parents who wish to take on board the loving characters in terms of the adoption services. I’ve asked my team to come up with a programme for supporting the provision, and, again, working with other Ministers across this department, on how we can ensure that we’ve got the right provisions in the right place, including services around mental health issues as well, making sure that we can provide support for individuals?

I thank the Member for his question. Forty-two million, five hundred and seventy-eight thousand has been allocated for the delivery of the Families First programme during 2016-17, which includes £3 million, ring-fenced for funding the delivery of services for families affected by disabilities.

Thank you. The team around the family is one of the five main elements of the Families First programme. A constituent came to see me to share her concern that this service in Anglesey was to cease from March 2017. She was high in her praise for the support that she received from the team locally because of the mental health problems suffered by her daughter and the impact that had on the family, and she said quite clearly that she couldn’t have coped without that assistance. What intention does the Minister have to review the future of the team around the family and ensure that it is continued for the future for the sake of my constituent and many like her after March of next year?

Well, I’m not familiar with that instruction from any Minister or from my department in terms of that ending in 2017. There was certainly a financial, one-year proposal for the scheme, but we are reconsidering that as we move forward. So, your constituent, perhaps, isn’t accurate about the fact that it’s going to close. We haven’t said that.

I thank the Member for his question. All children in care should have the same life chances as other children. This is a key priority for me, and I will reconvene the improving outcomes for children strategic group to continue its work and advise on how best we deliver a national approach for looked-after children.

Can I commend his general statement: that our expectations for looked-after children should be similar, if not exactly the same, as for the rest of the population? I’ve been in this Assembly now a little over 17 years, and I’ve heard repeatedly Ministers say we’re on the cusp of a breakthrough for looked-after children. It’s never quite arrived. It’s all our responsibility—those who scrutinise these policies as much as the Ministers’. But, really, Wales could lead the way in the UK, and indeed in Europe, in getting this vital area of public policy right.

I agree with the Member. I am determined to work with him so that we can provide the reassurances he seeks.

I thank the Member for her question. We provide guidance to local authorities on assessing housing need and to enable access to accessible homes and on the design of new social housing.

Thank you. I recently met with my inspirational constituent, Mia Thorne, aged just nine, who is an ambassador for Caudwell Children Wales. During our discussion, Mia highlighted concerns about inconsistencies in building regulations, for example regarding door width so that wheelchair users can navigate around their own home. How does the Welsh Government engage with disabled people to make sure that housing is fit for their needs?

That’s a very important question about listening and learning from individuals and their experiences, and as a Minister, I’m very keen to enhance that opportunity. Listening to the views of people with disabilities is important, and I welcome the points you raise through Mia Thorne today. We are also keen to work closely with other organisations to make representations as and when they require. Part M of the building regulations provides for all new housing to have accessible approaches to the main entrance, usable toilet facilities at the entrance level, and suitable door and corridor width to make them accessible for a range of disabilities. I think what we need to do is continue to learn about the experiences that people have on a day-to-day basis, which will influence Government policy long term.

I thank the Member for her question. The Welsh Government has not instructed social landlords to introduce new or additional service charges for their tenants. We have asked social landlords to separate rents and service charges where a renting pool system was applied. This is to increase openness and transparency for their tenants.

I was invited and attended a meeting in North Cornelly—thank you for your answer, Cabinet Secretary—however they were concerned that, within their rent, the service charges such as grass cutting and litter picking were included in their rent. They’d recently received from Valleys to Coast the introduced service charges for picking up litter. This has caused much dismay for these constituents, particularly as the neighbour next door may have purchased their house and wasn’t being charged likewise. So, Cabinet Secretary, charges such as these should not be introduced, particularly as they are levied against the poorest in society.

Well, as I said earlier, this wasn’t on the basis of introducing new charges; it was a breakdown of the charge that they were already receiving. So, your constituents could be very clear on what they were paying for or not. The process of them being now charged for grass cutting—. They were being charged for grass cutting before, but they probably didn’t know about it. It was bundled in as one charge, but now they are more aware. If the Member has specific issues she wishes to raise with me, I’m more than happy to take them up in my department.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on the agenda is the motion proposing the titles and remits of committees. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion—Paul Davies.

Formally.

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

The next item is item 4—the motion to elect Members to a committee. I again call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion.

Formally.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? If not, the motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The next item, therefore, is the Plaid Cymru debate on health and social services, and I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to move the motion.

Presiding Officer, thank you for the opportunity to open this debate on a motion tabled in the name of Simon Thomas. This is a debate calling on the Assembly to note the demographic challenges facing the NHS in Wales and calling on the Welsh Government to respond now to those challenges, including moving towards integrating health and social care, as well as taking urgent action with a series of steps to increase the number of staff, including GPs, who will be available in the health service in Wales in ensuing years. I know that ‘crisis’ isn’t a word that the Government likes to hear, and I know that the Minister is very reticent in accepting the word ‘crisis’. It’s not a word that should be used lightly—I would agree with that. But there will be a critical situation within the NHS that will surely develop and deepen unless very definite steps and strategic planning are carried out for the future.

The population forecast for Wales suggests that the percentage of our population over 65 will increase substantially over the next 20 years. By 2037, the number of those over 65 years of age is expected to be 47 per cent of the population, as compared to 30 per cent now. The percentage over 85 will more than double to 10 per cent of the adult population. If the current rates of illness and demand for social care in the population remain similar but within a new demographic pattern of an older population, then it is clear that that will lead to an increase in demand for health and social care services—additional services and different services in future. People will live longer, with more chronic conditions that will need to be managed and monitored outside hospitals and this will lead to a need for far more services within primary health care, including more GPs to provide specialist care, more area and community nurses and social care to keep people who have these conditions living independently. We will also need to integrate: we cannot waste time and, crucially, waste money on fighting bureaucratic battles as to who pays for care, or have lengthy meetings in partnership boards that lead to a few local pilot schemes and little else.

But let’s not be entirely negative. During the ensuing period where there will be increased demand for services, there will also be technological advances—technology treatments, health apps for mobile phones, for example. There will be developments of this kind that will provide opportunities to deliver health and care services in ways that promote independent living at a lower cost and hopefully with better outcomes. You can also consider things such as the increase in capacity among the older population in volunteering, to care for children and other members of the family, as well as an increase in the contribution to cultural, economic and social life in Wales.

Mae’r heriau’n fawr. Ceir rhai cyfleoedd hefyd, fel rwyf wedi crybwyll, ond gadewch i mi sôn am rai pethau y mae angen iddynt ddigwydd—nifer fach o gamau, ond rhai arwyddocaol sydd angen eu dilyn. Ni fyddwch yn synnu clywed llefarydd iechyd Plaid Cymru yn dechrau gyda recriwtio, hyfforddi a chadw staff. Mae arnom angen mwy o feddygon teulu, nyrsys cymunedol a gweithwyr iechyd proffesiynol eraill. Yn anffodus, ceir llai o feddygon teulu yn awr nag yn 2013, ac mae’r ystadegau’n dangos gostyngiad yn niferoedd nyrsys ardal, er ein bod yn ymwybodol y gallai fod rhai cwestiynau ystadegol ynglŷn â hyn, sy’n adlewyrchu, rwy’n meddwl, yr angen am fwy o dryloywder a gwell data.

Ar feddygon teulu, yn benodol, mae nifer y meddygon teulu yng Nghymru wedi bod yn gostwng yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf—mae’r nifer bellach wedi disgyn o dan 2000. Ond yr hyn sy’n frawychus a dweud y gwir yw bod tua chwarter y meddygon teulu sydd gennym yn dweud eu bod yn bwriadu ymddeol yn ystod y 10 mlynedd nesaf. Mae galwadau ar feddygon teulu yn codi, mae lefelau straen yn gwaethygu, nid yw ein lleoedd hyfforddi yn cael eu llenwi—maent yno, ond nid ydynt yn cael eu llenwi—ac mae’n waeth yn rhai o’r ardaloedd mwyaf difreintiedig a gwledig. Mae Plaid Cymru wedi amlinellu nifer o bolisïau i geisio denu a chadw meddygon presennol: talu dyled myfyrwyr meddygon sy’n cytuno i gwblhau hyfforddiant a threulio eu gyrfaoedd cynnar mewn ardaloedd neu arbenigeddau penodol; cyflogi meddygon teulu ar gyflogau mwy uniongyrchol i lenwi lleoedd gwag mewn ardaloedd gwledig a ffiniol i feddygon nad ydynt eisiau’r drafferth o redeg eu busnesau eu hunain. Ond mae’n rhaid i ni hefyd gael mwy o bobl ifanc i astudio meddygaeth ac i fod eisiau dod yn feddygon teulu. Nid wyf yn gwybod faint ohonoch a welodd astudiaeth 2014 Prifysgol Nottingham, a oedd yn gwbl syfrdanol: nid oedd gan 50 y cant o’r holl golegau addysg bellach a dosbarthiadau chwech neb, dim un person, yn gwneud cais i fynd i ysgol feddygol dros gyfnod o dair blynedd—dim un person. Roedd yna lawer ohonynt ag un neu ddau o ymgeiswyr yn unig, ac nid yw’n syndod fod dosbarthiad hyn, unwaith eto, yn adlewyrchu patrymau amddifadedd. Mae’r rhain yn faterion y mae’n rhaid i ni fynd i’r afael â hwy. Mae’n rhaid i ni annog ein pobl ifanc dalentog i feddwl am feddygaeth, a phan fyddant wedi dechrau ar eu hastudiaethau meddygol neu, yn well byth, cyn iddynt ddechrau ar eu hastudiaethau meddygol, i feddwl am fod yn feddyg teulu. Mae’n rhaid i ni sicrhau bod meddygon sydd newydd eu hyfforddi yng Nghymru yn dod i gysylltiad â gofal sylfaenol yn eu cyfnod cychwynnol ar ôl cymhwyso. Nid yw’n digwydd ddigon yng Nghymru, ond mae’n digwydd mewn mannau eraill. Heb feddygon teulu, nid oes gennym obaith o newid ein gwasanaeth iechyd i fod yn un sy’n gallu gofalu am boblogaeth hŷn a’u cadw’n heini. Rwyf wedi canolbwyntio ar feddygon teulu, bydd cyd-Aelodau eraill yn canolbwyntio ar elfennau eraill o’r gweithlu gofal sylfaenol sydd, wrth gwrs, yr un mor bwysig.

Yn ail, fel cam sydd angen ei gymryd, rwyf am sôn fod y gyfran o’r gyllideb sy’n mynd tuag at ofal sylfaenol yn gostwng pan ddylai fod yn cynyddu. Mae’r ffigurau diweddaraf yn dangos bod 7.4 y cant o gyllid y GIG yn mynd tuag at ofal sylfaenol. Mae hynny wedi gostwng o bron i 9 y cant oddeutu degawd yn ôl. Yn Lloegr, tua 10 y cant yw’r lefel; lefel Cymru yn hanesyddol yw tua 11 y cant. Felly, gwyddom ein bod eisiau cael mwy allan o’n sector gofal sylfaenol, ond yn gyfrannol rydym yn rhoi llai i mewn. Dangosodd Coleg Brenhinol yr Ymarferwyr Cyffredinol yma yn y Senedd ddoe fod 90 y cant o gyswllt â chleifion yn digwydd ar lefel gofal sylfaenol—90 y cant o’r cyswllt, 7.4 y cant o’r cyllid. Ac oes, wrth gwrs bod costau uwch mewn gofal eilaidd a bod gofal eilaidd yn fwy agored i chwyddiant costau, ond rwy’n credu’n wirioneddol fod y sefyllfa bresennol yn anghynaliadwy.

Yn drydydd, mae angen i ni fod yn llawer gwell am arloesi a mabwysiadu technolegau newydd, megis apiau, telefeddygaeth, a GIG di-bapur. Mae’r GIG yn rhy aml ymhell y tu ôl i’r mwyafrif o wasanaethau a diwydiannau eraill. Ni all fod yn iawn fod ysbytai yn dal i gyflogi pobl i wthio troliau o waith papur o gwmpas.

Yn bedwerydd, mae arnom angen system iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol fwy integredig, un sy’n briodol ar gyfer anghenion poblogaeth wledig a gwasgaredig, nid anghenion rheolwyr GIG sy’n cael eu hel o gwmpas i osod modelau gofal trefol mewn ardaloedd lle nad yw hynny’n addas. Rhaid i hyn hefyd gynnwys mynediad at wasanaethau arbenigol, megis adrannau damweiniau ac achosion brys, yn agos at ble mae pobl yn byw, a gwasanaeth ambiwlans sy’n treulio’i amser yn ymateb i alwadau brys, yn hytrach na chiwio mewn ysbytai neu drosglwyddo cleifion ar deithiau hir oddi cartref. Bydd fy nghyd-Aelodau’n ymhelaethu ar lawer o’r pwyntiau hynny y prynhawn yma.

Gan droi at y gwelliannau, byddwn yn ymatal ar welliant 1. Nid ydym yn hollol siŵr beth y mae’r Ceidwadwyr yn ei olygu wrth yr asesiadau gwirfoddol hyn a beth bynnag, deallwn fod fersiynau o’r asesiadau hyn yn digwydd beth bynnag. Ond nid oes amheuaeth y cawn glywed mwy gan y Ceidwadwyr. Byddwn yn cefnogi’r gwelliannau eraill. Mae angen cynllun newydd arnom ar gyfer gwasanaethau mewn cymunedau gwledig; dylid adolygu Comisiynydd Pobl Hŷn Cymru, wrth gwrs, i wneud y swydd yn fwy effeithiol, a dylai hynny ddigwydd yn rheolaidd; a gall ysbytai cymuned, wrth gwrs, chwarae rhan hanfodol yn llyfnhau’r cyfnod pontio yn ôl i’r gymuned i lawer o bobl, er bod sut y mae UKIP yn bwriadu staffio eu gwasanaeth iechyd ar ôl gadael yr UE, pan fo cymaint o weithwyr mudol yn chwarae rhan hanfodol yn ein gwasanaeth presennol, yn rhywbeth i fyfyrio yn ei gylch y prynhawn yma. Rwy’n edrych ymlaen at eich—[Torri ar draws.] Rwy’n dirwyn i ben. Rwy’n edrych ymlaen at eich cyfraniadau; fe gewch gyfle mewn eiliad i wneud eich pwyntiau mae’n siŵr. Rwy’n edrych ymlaen at gyfraniadau’r holl Aelodau y prynhawn yma. Mae hon yn un o’r dadleuon pwysicaf sy’n ein hwynebu yng Nghymru ac yn un o’n heriau mwyaf.

Thank you. Before we go on, could you all check your mobile phones, please? If you’ve got a mobile phone on, can you please switch it off? It is affecting the broadcasting and the sound in the Chamber. Thank you very much.

I have selected the four amendments to the motion, and I call on Suzy Davies to move amendments 1, 2 and 3, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Suzy.

Diolch, Ddirprwy Lywydd. I move our amendments to this very broad, but very useful, debate.

The Plaid leader’s war cry in the election was that her party has nothing in common with the Tories and wouldn’t work with us. Yet, only last week, they called for an arm’s-length body for economic development—a long-standing Welsh Conservative policy—and here we are again, drawing attention to common cause, reflecting what might be a little bit uncomfortable for Leanne Wood, but which is a source of hope, I think, for voters: that opposition parties can work together to challenge the stale old status quo. We are supporting this motion, and we are supporting amendment 4.

There is no material difference between Plaid’s NHS medical care homes and our plans for the innovative use of community hospitals, backed by a development fund. Some of those buildings will, of course, be beyond accommodating new ways of providing localised treatment in care, and the argument remains then for sustainable multi-purpose replacements. However, more modern facilities, like Gellinudd, Cimla and Maesgwyn in my own region, were closed, with the inevitable loss of beds, to help justify the under-use of the private finance initiative hospital in Baglan and to avoid the institutionalisation of patients. Well, now, too many elderly, frail patients are becoming institutionalised in expensive acute beds as step-down care is rare, and homecare packages are delayed. Sometimes that care at home is not meeting needs, with re-admissions due to failures in support. So, of course we’re in agreement on point 2(a) of the motion. A cross-party commission on the long-term sustainable provision of care in Wales, as called for by the Welsh Conservatives, would help gather the evidence and identify whether the changes that Plaid proposes would work or not. Such a commission would gather the evidence to underpin legislation to require health and social care providers to work collaboratively, delivering a more organic integration of both systems rather than a massive structural tsunami. Under our proposals, Wales would have a £10 million care innovation fund to promote that joint working at all levels, including convalescence and re-ablement, and which responds to the challenges of geography.

It’s all good, isn’t it, that the Welsh Conservative and Plaid manifestos committed—both of us—to the introduction of specialism in the rural delivery of medicine? I wonder whether you’ve raised that rather inconvenient common ground by agreeing that mobile units delivering cancer treatment would be a useful contribution to equalising access to treatments in rural and deprived areas, or are you going to disagree with us just to distance yourself from us? Myself, I think that supporting our second amendment would be a very encouraging sign to the voters of Wales that our equal number of votes in this Chamber are being used to hold this Labour Government to account on its failure when it comes to equalities in access to health services.

So, let’s not forget our first amendment. The stay-at-home assessments would help prevent crises that need high-end health and social care intervention by helping citizens plan ahead—that’s the difference with what’s happening primarily now—for ways to maximise their chances of independent living when age-related medical conditions and events, physical or mental, might make living at home more difficult, in the way that they want to do. It costs a fraction of the £21 million that our NHS is currently spending on keeping people in acute beds for 27 days on average as a result of delayed transfers of care. Of course, it will help some avoid the need to move into residential care in the first place—on which, the big society is still alive and well on these benches when it comes to personal care. Welsh Conservatives see the advantages of including mutuals and co-ops in the provision of first-class care—something else that Plaid and other Tories have, embarrassingly, in common.

We also recognise Plaid’s ambition for increasing the number of GPs, and the wider need for more training places in Wales to improve the capacity of the NHS where it’s needed, including the areas that you’ve identified. We’ll continue to argue for more specialist nurses, nurse prescribers and nurse consultants in the Welsh NHS, too. Do you agree with us on that, or is that too Tory for you as well?

Finally, the motion acknowledges that older people need health services more than most. The older people’s commissioner will be championing an increasing number of people in the next two decades and needs to be more powerful in terms of powerful interventions. It’s just one of the reasons why Welsh Conservatives believe that the role of the older people’s commissioner should be reviewed, and the commissioner made accountable to this Assembly—a critical friend of Government, but accountable to the people of Wales. I’d be curious to know whether on the basis of that you’ll be prepared to support this amendment, or whether you will show yourselves to be different from the Tories, to be an uncritical friend of Labour, whose anti-Tory war cry drowns out Wales’s call for constructive collaborative opposition to challenge and scrutinise Government. Thanks.

Thank you. I call on Caroline Jones to move amendment 4, tabled in her name.

Diolch, Lywydd. I would also like to thank Plaid Cymru for bringing forward this very important debate on health and social care. My amendment seeks to add to the debate while not detracting from the overall motion. I believe passionately that cottage or community hospitals are a part of the solution to reducing the burden on our emergency departments, reducing delayed transfers of care and reducing the distances people have to travel to receive care. I urge you to support the UKIP amendment.

Moving to the Welsh Conservative amendments, UKIP will be supporting amendments 2 and 3. There is a clear need to address access to health services in rural Wales. Perhaps the Welsh Conservatives will support our calls to re-establish cottage hospitals. We also support the Welsh Conservatives’ call to review the older people’s commissioner role. As others have said, Sarah Rochira does an amazing job, but her role and remit need strengthening and expanding. UKIP also agree with the Welsh Conservatives that the commissioner should be accountable to the Assembly, not the Welsh Government.

With regard to the Welsh Conservatives’ first amendment, we shall be abstaining. We are not convinced that these stay-at-home assessments can achieve the desired outcome that we all share, which is promoting independent living and supporting people to stay in their own homes for as long as is possible.

Llywydd, our NHS is the victim of its own success. Thanks to advances in clinical care, we are living longer. The number of people aged 65 and over is projected to increase 44 per cent by 2039. Unfortunately, as many of us know only too well, with increasing age comes increasing health issues. This fact alone highlights the need for closer integration between health and social care. Far too many older people are experiencing delayed transfers of care and remaining in hospital for longer than needed.

Figures from April 2016 show a total of 495 delayed transfers of care: over half of those resulted in delays of three weeks or more; over 20 people were waiting for 26 weeks or more. It should be of huge concern to us all that so many people are staying weeks longer in hospital than necessary. These unnecessary delays cost our NHS millions of pounds a year, but the cost to the individual is immeasurable. According to Age Cymru, the main facts responsible for delayed transfers of care include a lack of appropriate facilities for re-enablement and recuperation, long delays in arranging services to support people in their own homes, and the barriers that exist between health and social services.

It is worth noting that the majority of NHS leaders said that shortfalls in local authority spending had impacted on their services. I accept there is no one simple fix. There’s no magic pill and there’s certainly no right answer in solving the problem of delayed transfers of care. However, there are some simple fixes that will go a long way in trying to eliminate delayed transfers. Greater integration between health and social care will help. Many NHS trusts in England have reduced delayed transfers by working with local authorities to keep a care-home placement open for 48 hours.

Traditionally, once a person is admitted to hospital, their care placement is ended and a new placement has to be secured once the patient is ready to be discharged. This does take time. This simple change has greatly reduced unnecessary delays. Greater funding for social care will also help. As I mentioned earlier, the NHS Confederation believes that shortfalls in local authority spending have impacted on NHS services. Our social services teams are overstretched and, if we are to have any chance of meeting the challenges of an ageing population, we need to invest in social care.

Finally, greater use of community hospitals will help. Many older people require an extended stay in hospital for observations and social-care needs. Traditionally, we used cottage hospitals for convalescence. Let’s re-establish these cottage hospitals in order to take the burden off our local, busy, hospital wards.

Llywydd, I urge Members to support our amendment and to support the Plaid Cymru motion. Diolch yn fawr.

It’s a pleasure to participate in this important debate this afternoon and I’m pleased to hear the Conservatives alluding to Plaid Cymru very frequently in their speech this afternoon.

As we’ve already heard from Rhun, there are a number of challenges facing the health service, and very often they are at their most intense in the rural and most deprived areas. It’s quite obvious, and has been for some time, that we need an integrated health and social care system in Wales. We can’t spend time and money battling about who should pay for what and who should do what whilst the person and the family requiring that service are forgotten in the midst of the bureaucratic system.

As a family, we had direct experience of the arguments that arise too often as care plans are established for individuals. We were trying to get my father home at the end of his life. It took quite a bit of energy to move things on, to get agreement about who paid for which element of the care, and many people would have given up. That would have been contrary to my father’s wishes, and he was the patient. It would also have meant significantly higher costs for the health service because, of course, keeping a patient in a hospital bed is much more expensive than looking after them at home. After my father was at last discharged from the hospital, we had a peerless service, with the health service, the voluntary sector, social services and ourselves as a family working together. The problem was before that, namely getting to the point where that collaboration was possible. So, it’s high time that we seriously set about integrating the services in a real way, on the ground, rather than in partnership boards and talking shops.

There are good examples of good practice available—planned services that are patient-centric. There’s one excellent scheme working at the Alltwen Hospital in Gwynedd and it would be good to learn from that experience there and in other places, and, more importantly, to take action on what works well. As the Government looks again at how local government will be reconfigured in future, here’s an excellent opportunity to address this seriously and an excellent opportunity to restructure in a way that truly improves how we provide and deliver services to our people, and that should be at the root of any reorganisation. We are all living longer, which is excellent news, but very often we are living longer whilst facing chronic conditions that need to be controlled and managed outside of hospital, and this, as Rhun has already said, means more services in the primary care sector, including more GPs, more community nurses and coordinated social services.

I mentioned at the outset the challenges facing rural areas, and Rhun has said that we mustn’t use the word ‘crisis’ too lightly. But I am going to use it about the circumstances that exist in some of the areas. There is a real crisis in some areas because of the lack of general practitioners. In Dwyfor, for example, almost half the GPs are about to retire. Plaid Cymru have outlined a number of policies to attract and retain GPs. We do need a long-term plan in order to train doctors, including GPs, in Wales. We need a national solution to expand the provision in Cardiff and Swansea and to create a new medical school in north Wales as part of a pan-Wales plan.

Doctors stay on to work where they have trained—there’s a great deal of evidence to back that statement. The idea of having a north Wales medical school is fast attracting support. I believe that we can create a model of a unique medical school with a focus on rural medicine. Wales can be in the vanguard on this, innovating with the use of new technology and creating new models of rural medical provision. Thank you for allowing me to participate, and I hope that everybody will support the motion.

Adapting services for an increasingly ageing population, particularly in deprived communities, is one of the key challenges for our public services. Our population is steadily growing, but is also steadily ageing. Recent statistics from the NHS Confederation show that, across the UK, the population of over-65s will rise to nearly 18 million in 20 years’ time, with the population of over-85s doubling during the same period to nearly 4 million. And, as has already been highlighted by the spokesperson for health for Plaid Cymru, in Wales, we estimate that figure to be over 1 million over-65s. It’s going to be a major element of our figures.

Now, these wider population changes will undoubtedly have a significant effect on our health and social care services, with more and more people needing extra help at a time when our public spending resources are being reduced by the UK Government on a continual basis. For secondary care in Wales, the average age of a hospital patient is 80 years old, with 10 per cent of hospital patients aged over 90. Now, added to this, the average hospital stay in Wales is seven days. We can see the impact this is having on our secondary care services. These figures give us a clear measure of the potential impact on our services. Increased demand inevitably means longer waiting times for appointments and potential delays of transfer of care, while an ageing population invariably means an increase in the number of patients with long-term conditions requiring continual attention, alongside multimorbidities. Two thirds of our population aged 65 and over have at least one chronic condition, while one third have multiple chronic conditions, all of which inevitably require more and more complex treatments and longer consultation processes. This increased pressure on our increasingly limited resources requires us to make strategic, sustainable and innovative decisions around workforce planning.

The flow of patients through the secondary care setting is crucial in order to provide high-quality care packages as fast as possible, but the role of community-based care must not be underestimated. We have often spoken in this Chamber of the need to get back to our communities and provide services that are as local to people as possible, enabling them to remain in familiar environments with social support from family and friends and making full use of the community services provided.

In discussing transfers to community-based care, we cannot neglect the warnings of the British Medical Association and the Royal College of General Practitioners around GP recruitment. We know that, in Wales, we have a challenge to recruit GPs, not just in rural areas, but also in many deprived urban areas, and these challenges are widely documented and must be tackled if we are to effect a whole-system change. We must recruit new GPs, not only to fill the vacant spaces, but also to take over from older colleagues, 23 per cent of whom are over 50, as has been highlighted already. They are ageing faster than we are training new replacements, with only 107 out of the 125 GP training places filled last year. We must do more to incentivise our young trainee medical professionals to follow a GP pathway and provide them with the training and skills that they need to address these issues. We must increase the number of places available from the current 136. That must be dealt with with the deanery and we must look for training places in GP practices to accommodate them as well.

We must also avoid focusing solely on GP provision, as we seek to provide a holistic model of community care such as we’ve seen recently in Prestatyn. We must look to our community dentists and pharmacists and our district nurses and physiotherapists to provide excellent care where GPs are not needed. In this, we must follow the principles of prudent healthcare to make full use of all their colleagues and ensure that they do what only they can do. We therefore also need to address the training of these professions practically: in-practice and district nurses and advanced practice nurses and other practice nurses. We can perhaps link and encourage alternative pathways of training for these professions.

I welcome the Welsh Government’s primary care workforce plan, which will support creating greater service delivery in practices across the sector and I look forward to its successful delivery. These are clearly targeted at addressing some of these concerns. But we must also look at our public health services, as the older population must be supported in their communities to live full and happy lives. We know that loneliness and isolation pose serious health risks, as do tobacco and excessive alcohol consumption. We must support campaigns that tackle social isolation and promote befriending groups across our communities. We must further encourage our population to make healthy life choices, providing the social, cultural and sporting environments that they need to lead active and sustainable lives, thereby reducing the likelihood of developing medical conditions and ending up in our hospital services.

Finally, we must remember that the challenges of an ageing population are not unique to health and social care services. We must take a more rounded approach to our decision making, encompassing housing and education and particularly lifelong learning and improved literacy and numeracy skills, encouraging collaborative working across our public services. We must further look to the future, ensuring that the principles that are enshrined in our Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 underpin our actions in all portfolio areas to help our ageing population.

I’m very pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. Perhaps I’ve mentioned before that I’m a GP, but if I haven’t mentioned that enough, I repeat it this afternoon. But the fact that people are living longer is a matter of praise for the health service, if anything. We are used to hearing people criticising the staff and the health service, but, at least, when there’s evidence and it’s a clear fact that we’re all living longer, it should be a matter of praise for the health service, for the NHS.

Of course, the surgery, as a rule, is usually the first place that people turn to when they’re in need—the first port of call. What we’re increasingly finding is that that service in the surgery is under terrific pressure. We know the figures: 90 per cent of our patients are seen in primary care—we used to say on 10 per cent of the budget, but, as we’ve heard already, that percentage of the budget has gone down to 7.45 per cent. There is a requirement, therefore, on GPs and their staff to do more with fewer resources. Following on from what the Royal College of General Practitioners and the BMA have been saying over the last few months, there is a need to divert and change the budget back to what it used to be, which was about 11 per cent of the NHS budget, because, in essence, the number of appointments that we have with our patients is on the increase. Those appointments are more intense and more complex, because of the nature of the illnesses, as we’ve heard from David Rees. Older people have more than one chronic condition, and it is a significant challenge to deal with all of them in 10 minutes. At the end of the day, what we’re concerned about as GPs is that we want to improve the quality of that discussion between the GP or the nurse and the patient. We only have 10 minutes, and that’s on a good day, because, on average, we see between 50 and 80 patients every day. What we want to see is an improvement in the quality of those 10 minutes that we have. That’s why we need more funding and resources: in order to employ more GPs in the first place, but also more nurses, more physiotherapists and so forth, and also social workers in our practices, and, I would say, on every ward in our hospitals. That’s where the collaboration with social services comes in, and is so important.

We don’t need expensive reorganisation. We want social workers working with us in surgeries, arranging social services for our patients, but also on the wards—to have one social worker there who can arrange how that patient is going to be discharged at an early stage with all the arrangements in place. That’s why there’s a need to employ more workers at grass-roots level. That’s why we need a greater part of that budget coming to primary care. We need to increase it from 7.45 per cent back to where it was, around 11 per cent, because 90 per cent of the patients are seen in primary care, and we want the resources to offer an improved service. Those resources include employing more GPs. As David has already said, there are some things that only a GP can do. We need more of them. But we have make the work, the job, more attractive to our young doctors who are now in our hospitals. They need to be better influenced than they are at the moment to become GPs. All those plans that we have already to attract doctors back to general practice—we have to improve them, and it must be made easier to attract our most able GPs back to general practice, particularly in our most rural communities and most deprived communities.

So, there are many challenges, as we’ve heard, but we need to address those challenges. Ultimately, our health service relies on general practice that is also fresh and energised and that can solve the majority of problems in our communities. If we were to divert just a small percentage more of our patients to hospitals, then our hospitals would be under even greater strain than they are at the moment. By investing more money in primary care, we could prevent many people from having to go to A&E departments or from being on waiting lists in the first place, because we have the resources and the ability to arrange things for our patients in the community, but we have to have more assistance. I would be pleased to hear from the Minister if he would be willing to meet with the leaders of GPs in Wales in order to discuss the way forward. Thank you.

I am pleased to return to what I hope will be a positive debate on the health service. Over the past weeks, I, like many other people, have been dealing with constituents who are greatly concerned about the fact that there is increasing pressure on the local surgeries, that they have to wait for 10 days or a fortnight for an appointment with a GP, and that the services in the local hospital have been reduced. It’s important that we here acknowledge that this arises directly from the decisions of the Welsh Government.

Whether good or bad, decisions that we have made over the years are responsible for this, and not immigrants from outside as has been suggested in debates over the past weeks. You are much more likely to be treated by somebody from outside Wales and outside the United Kingdom as part of the workforce that is needed from outside the United Kingdom than lying in a hospital bed side by side with an immigrant. That’s what we’re discussing here.

I believe that the Plaid Cymru debate acknowledges two things: that we did actually take the wrong turning, as it were, as regards the recruitment and retention of GPs in Wales. Another false move, if you like, is the way we treated some of our community hospitals, and the failure, particularly in rural areas, to recognise that we needed community hospitals, perhaps in a new guise—not like the old cottage hospitals—but that we needed some kind of institution in the rural areas to sustain the network of local hospitals that people appreciate but also enrich public health.

One example of this was the undoubted success, in my view, of the bargain that was struck between Plaid Cymru and the former Labour Government to establish an intermediate care fund. At the time, the Government didn’t believe that there was a need for such a fund, to provide for integration between health services and social services. By now, that fund is acknowledged as something which has been a success and has led to a number of people being able to stay in their homes, and been the means of integration between health and social services. So, I believe that we missed an opportunity to build on our community hospitals.

There are opportunities to improve. The mid Wales joint partnership was established recently by the former health Minister, and is beginning to bear fruit. It’s starting to bring new ideas to the fore to see what hospital and primary care services can do in rural areas. Examples have been portrayed during meetings of that joint partnership of places beyond Wales—Scandinavia and North America—but we don’t need to go any further than Yorkshire to see what can be done with community hospitals in Wales. In Pontefract, a brand new community hospital was established with 42 beds in order to reduce the pressure on the acute wards. That new hospital that’s only just opened, just under a year ago, has already saved money and enables patients to return from tertiary hospital treatment more successfully. So, these are the examples of what community hospitals in my constituency, such as in Blaenau Ffestiniog and in Tenby, could do in the future.

Looking at Tenby specifically, this is another example of a hospital that lost its minor injuries unit, unfortunately, as it was closed for safety reasons—we’ve heard of this a number of times—but it has returned in pilot form last Easter and it was a sweeping success, and the local GPs also wish to see this being established.

So, in rural areas—for example, 60 per cent of the population in Ceredigion and 53 per cent of the population in Carmarthen East and Dinefwr are further than 15 minutes away from their GP—we need to seriously consider how we can establish a network of community hospitals.

During this debate we are looking to reconsider the way our community hospitals and GPs can deliver services, particularly in rural areas. Perhaps we should set aside some of the debates and arguments from the past and look forward to a more affirmative and positive attitude from this new Government.

I’m slightly diffident in rising to speak on the topic of the integration of health and social care, given the immense contribution that my predecessor as Assembly Member for Neath, Gwenda Thomas, has made in this particular policy area in Wales, and in particular with regard to the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 itself. So, I’ll take this opportunity to pay tribute to her for her political legacy in this place, which will surely benefit hundreds of thousands of people in Wales.

Like many Members, I’m sure, access to a GP is something that came up routinely on the doorstep during the election campaign we’ve just fought, and it still does. One issue it seems to me important for us to recognise, as Dai Lloyd already has, is that the increasing numbers of older people that our NHS and care services need to provide for is the result of improved healthcare provision over the years. And, in that sense, it’s a result of success. I am always mindful of the language that we use when we speak about the needs of older patients in describing the challenges facing health and social care. We would all agree that it is unequivocally a good thing and a thing to be celebrated that we have a generation of older people living longer whose needs we’re able to cater for.

But the operational challenges of addressing this need are another matter, and we do need more GPs in order to meet the needs of our population, and this is, and must be, a priority for the Government. But, actually, the overriding aim must be a primary care service that provides the right sort of care, whether that’s provided by a GP or another health professional perhaps better equipped to do that. The development of multidisciplinary practices with pharmacists, practice nurses and other professionals working alongside GPs offers the potential to provide the type of care required by the patient whilst also enabling the GP to focus on patients who have a particular clinical need to see a general practitioner. I’d refer to the excellent model of innovation in the Amman Tawe practice in my constituency, which also extends into the Carmarthen East and Dinefwr constituency of Adam Price. It seems to me that a strong practice ethos and parity of esteem between practitioners is vital to the success of that model, and the prize is not only care that better meets the needs of the population, but perhaps it also makes it easier to attract GPs to those practices. I stress that this isn’t to deny the fact that we need to recruit more GPs. We clearly do, and we need to continue to help those practices that are finding it hard, for whatever reason, to fill those vacancies.

One of the key issues, it seems to me, is that the reconfiguration of those practices is one part of the equation. But the other vital part is the role and in particular the expectations of the patient. It may be understandable for a patient who has been, over the years, used to seeing a GP to feel that seeing another healthcare professional doesn’t do the same or indeed a better job. Many of us will have examples of concerns raised over triage arrangements in particular. So, it seems to me vital that ways are found to engage local communities genuinely and deeply as partners in improving health and care provision. There is a relationship of trust at the heart of the doctor-patient relationship that is not straightforward to replicate. But, equally, successful multidisciplinary arrangements seem to me to depend on a good level of health literacy in the general population. There is an element of physical and mental self-awareness and an understanding of risk that perhaps isn’t where it needs to be in order for some of these practises to work in the best way. So, the work that Public Health Wales and others do in striving to improve health literacy is crucial.

I want to say something about the relationship between public transport and primary care services. The work done by the Government’s bus advisory group acknowledges the importance of aligning routes to key trip generators like health centres. We should also explore the potential for primary care centres themselves to partner with volunteer-based regulated community transport providers to make it easier for patients to access appointments. Indeed, we should also look at how primary care practices can be supported generally to work more closely with the voluntary sector as equal partners, which Sian Gwenllian alluded to in her contribution. A community level focus on this is important. Getting this right will support the integration of health and social care at a primary care level as well as at a secondary level, and care planning needs to focus on the holistic needs of the patient, taking into account the role of social services in the community and indeed the role and, in fact, needs of carers themselves. As many speakers have mentioned, there are excellent examples of this across Wales, and the intermediate care fund exists to support that way of working. But we must ensure that in this, as with other areas that I’ve mentioned, best practice is identified and universalised.

The Welsh Government policy on community health services and health budget cuts described by the Wales Audit Office as ‘unprecedented in UK history’ increased pressure on our general hospitals. The 2016 Welsh Conservative manifesto included proposals to drive greater integration between health, social services and communities. We also said we’d create a community hospital development fund and re-establish minor injury units to repair the damage caused by Labour’s community bed cuts and minor injury unit closures. In March 2010, the Labour health Minister then said, ‘I’m not aware of any threats to community hospitals across Wales.’ In reality, I’d established CHANT Cymru—Community Hospitals Acting Nationally Together—which successfully campaigned for suspension of Labour’s plans to close community hospitals in 2007. However, when Labour returned to single-party power in Cardiff in 2011, they again pushed ahead with their community hospital and bed closure programme.

North Wales Community Health Council wrote to the then health Minister expressing concerns about the robustness of the information provided by Betsi Cadwaladr university health board, which they had used to inform their closure decisions for community hospitals in Flint, Llangollen, Blaenau Ffestiniog and Prestatyn. Dozens of community beds were lost, despite bed occupancy levels of 95 per cent and above. The GP who set up the north Wales pilot enhanced care at home scheme with the health board said that this will bring a service that is currently frequently gridlocked further to its knees, and that a central part of the proposed shake up of health services—providing more care in people’s homes—won’t fill the gap left by shutting community hospitals.

The Labour Government ignored the Flint referendum in which 99.3 per cent voted in favour of returning in-patient beds to Flint and then ignored the Blaenau Ffestiniog referendum when an overwhelming majority voted in favour of returning beds there. When I had visited Holywell hospital, staff told me that extra investment in our local community hospitals such as Holywell and NHS community beds in Flint would take pressure off our general hospitals, help tackle the A&E crisis and enable the health board to use its resources more efficiently.

As the head of the NHS in England said not so long ago, smaller community hospitals should play a bigger role, particularly in the care of older patients. At a British Medical Association Cymru briefing in the Assembly in June 2014, the chair of the North Wales Local Medical Committee warned that general practice in north Wales is in crisis, that several practices had been unable to fill vacancies and that many GPs were seriously considering retirement. Early this year, GPs in north Wales wrote to this First Minister accusing him of being out of touch with the reality of the challenges facing them.

The Royal College of GPs states that general practice in Wales provides, as we’ve heard, 90 per cent of NHS consultations, but only 7.8 per cent of the budget. They say prolonged underinvestment means that funding for general practice has been decreasing compared to the overall Welsh NHS, yet we face the significant challenges of an ageing and growing population. As they say, consultations are becoming longer and more complicated as we deal with an increasing number of patients with multiple chronic conditions. As they stated in an Assembly meeting yesterday, nearly four in 10 patients in Wales find it difficult to make a convenient GP appointment—up 4 per cent in two years; 84 per cent of GPs in Wales worry that they miss something serious with a patient due to pressures; and more than 52 per cent of GPs face significant recruitment issues, with Wales needing to employ more than 400 more GPs.

Given the GP shortage, we heard that models such as the multi-disciplinary practice introduced in Prestatyn are needed. However, we also heard that this was based on an overseas model, which had a higher ratio of GPs to other disciplines; that we will lose the holistic view and continuity provided by GPs, damaging the well-being of patients; and that the health board is not stepping in until crisis or disaster. We heard that, in Manchester, 100 per cent of junior doctors will spend time in general practice, compared with just 13 per cent in Wales, and that every junior doctor in Wales should be exposed to general practice. We heard that north Wales needs to focus, once again, on recruiting GPs from Manchester and Liverpool universities; that support is needed for struggling practices and individual GPs suffering burnout; and that NHS community beds add to the breadth of things GPs can do, assisting both primary and secondary sectors.

So, let us hope that this reshuffled Labour Government starts listening, at last, and delivering the solutions that the professionals know that we need.

I call the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’m grateful to Plaid Cymru for bringing forward this debate and for the generally constructive manner in which Members across parties have engaged. In Wales, we recognise that more than a quarter of our population are over 50, and this is due to rise by more than a third in the next 20 years. Inevitably, our ageing population will increase demand and put extra pressure on the health and social care system. In 2015-16, over half of all adult hospital admissions were for patients over 65. That accounted for over 70 per cent of the total bed days in our health service.

Hospital stays should, of course, be kept to a minimum, but here it’s appropriate to comment on some of the points made about delayed transfers. We have an improving picture here in Wales, in direct contrast to England, which has record highs—the highest figure since records began. What I’m pleased to see here in Wales is that health boards and local authorities recognise their shared challenge in this area, and it’s fair to say that hasn’t always been the case. There is room for optimism, as well as room for rigour and more challenge for improvement. We recognise that we need to ensure that older people are able to maintain their independence and focus efforts on returning people to their home with appropriate care and support.

So, the Welsh Government wants to make sure that health and social services work together to improve outcomes and the well-being of older people. In March 2014 we published our integrated framework for older people with complex needs. Now, that focused on ensuring the development and delivery of integrated care and support services for older people, particularly the frail elderly.

The intermediate care fund, mentioned several times in the Chamber today, has been a key driver for integration. The fund was established, as has been mentioned, in a previous budget agreement, to improve care and support services, in particular for older people, through partnership working with health, social services, housing and the third and independent sectors. This year, £60 million of funding has been provided, and we’ve continued with the fund and its existence, and this should continue to fund initiatives that will help older people to maintain their independence, avoid unnecessary hospital admission and prevent delayed discharges. There are successful examples up and down the country.

Members will be aware of the transformational Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, which was commenced in April this year, and I was pleased to hear recognition of the legacy of the previous Member for Neath in delivering that piece of legislation. A key principle within this new legal framework is a requirement for integrated and sustainable care and support services. Now, though I’m sure everyone has read the regulations under Part 9 of the Act, they’ve established statutory regional partnership boards. These will drive the delivery of efficient and effective integrated services. They will not be bureaucratic talking shops. They will be a key part of making partnership real and delivering change on the ground.

Supporting statutory guidance sets out that these regional partnership boards must—not ‘will’ or ‘may’, but ‘must’—prioritise the integration of services in a number of areas. That includes a continued focus on older people with complex needs and long-term conditions, including dementia.

The second part of the motion deals with GP numbers and, as part of the compact to move Wales forward agreed with Plaid Cymru, this Government is focusing on increasing the numbers of GPs and primary health care workers across Wales. A key commitment includes delivering actions to help train, recruit and retain GPs, including in rural areas. We do now have more GPs than ever before, employed in different ways, but, in Wales, we are also filling more of our training places than England or Scotland. But we know that this is still a challenge, and they don’t fill all of our places. It’s a challenge to be taken on and dealt with, and not ignored. So, we will continue to listen to workforce representatives and other parties, as we do take this work forward.

I can also confirm, given the direct question, that I’ve already met with the Royal College of GPs and the BMA’s GP committee, and I look forward to a constructive working relationship with them. They, in fact, were very supportive of the measures the Government wants to take. Their key challenge for us is to deliver on the plan that they agree with.

So, we will continue to address workload concerns and support the development of new models of care. We also need to ensure that we recruit, train and retain other primary care professionals who can support GPs. Good examples are clinical pharmacists, nurses and therapists, for example physiotherapists, who are doing a great deal of work to make sure that people have their needs dealt with appropriately, within community settings and avoiding the need for people to go onto orthopaedic waiting lists. The challenge is how consistently we share that good practice, and I continue to want to drive that improvement throughout the whole system.

The role of the GP is, of course, critical, and the leadership role within those new clusters of arrangements, but there is broader recognition that their role has to evolve so that they can be used to the best effect to focus on patients with the most complex needs—as a number of people have said today and on other occasions, to do only what a GP can only do, to provide that leadership to the practice and also within cluster activity. I’m particularly pleased to see the broadly positive welcome that clusters have had, both from the BMA and from the Royal College of GPs, and we will take that learning forward over this next year and more.

I do expect services to shift into primary care and for resources to be shifted with them. We do recognise that the recruitment of GPs is a challenge, and it’s a challenge not limited to Wales. A plan to address this issue will be developed within the first 100 days of this Government to deliver on the commitment given by the First Minister. This work, of course, is complemented by a £40 million national primary care fund. In the last year this resulted in improvements in many parts of Wales, including an increase in the number of GP appointments later in the day.

I should now turn to the amendments. We won’t support the first amendment. The Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act introduced a care and support assessment process for all people, including older people. That assessment is person-centred and focuses on the personal outcomes that they want to achieve. The core of this process is a conversation with the individual to agree solutions to help them retain or to regain their independence. Understanding what is important to the individual citizen and agreeing how to achieve that outcome in a much more consistent way is a real challenge for health and social care services, or, to put it another way, how to work with and not simply to deliver to an individual.

We also won’t support amendment 2. The Mid Wales Healthcare Collaborative is already taking action to improve access to primary care services, including the recruitment and retention of GPs. It’s already developed a range of innovative solutions, which will have a wider learning opportunity for other rural areas. The Welsh Government is supporting the move of care close to home, through initiatives such as a virtual ward scheme, and, indeed, work on the emergency medical retrieval and transfer service to make sure that people can be transferred to the most appropriate setting. I’d also mention here the scheme on Ynys Môn that I’ve mentioned previously in the past—the enhanced care scheme that is delivered between GPs, social services, advanced nurse practitioners and Ysbyty Gwynedd. The improvements that I’ve seen being directly delivered in that part of Wales—there’s learning there for the rest of the country.

We’ll also oppose amendment 3. We’re considering the review by Mike Shooter on the role of the children’s commissioner. That has lessons for us on the role of all commissioners, including the older persons’ commissioner.

And finally, we will also oppose amendment 4. Several outdated community hospitals have been replaced by modern primary care resource centres. We recognise the challenge that we face. We know that we cannot provide the same model of care and improve outcomes for our population for the changing demographics that we face. There will be, with this Government, a greater focus on integration, with care closer to home to both prevent and to treat. Our ambition is clear: to meet the changing needs of people across Wales, to deliver different services but better services with better care and better outcomes. I look forward to working with people in and outside the Chamber to do exactly that.

Thank you very much. I call on Rhun ap Iorwerth to reply to the debate. Rhun.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I thank everybody who’s taken part in this debate this afternoon? I agree with the Minister that it has been a debate that has constructive on the whole. I’m not sure why Suzy Davies, on behalf of the Conservatives, feels so prickly today. Certainly, there’s nothing from me that places barriers for collaboration with other parties for agreeing on areas where there is a way of pushing the agenda forward for the health service, because it’s the health and well-being of our people here in Wales that’s important here, not party politics.

On the amendment specifically, there was a call for us to change our minds and support it. I didn’t hear anything that persuaded me specifically, in what Suzy Davies said, to change my mind, but I hope that the fact that we support other Conservative amendments shows that we’re very willing to co-operate where that is appropriate, and says something to us. I think the fact that we support UKIP’s amendment means that, certainly, we are willing to look at important issues here, namely, as I say, the well-being of the Welsh population.

So, may I thank everybody who’s taken part constructively, even though, at times, perhaps, a little edgy, in the debate? Sian Gwenllian—thank you for outlining the pressure on providing services in rural areas. Sian, as so many of us, can speak from personal experience. All of us have an experience that drives the need to improve in the areas that we’re discussing this afternoon. May I endorse what Sian Gwenllian said with regard to a medical college in Bangor? I know that is something that is not going to be delivered overnight. I know that there are a number of challenges between us and providing a medical school in Bangor, but I think the point that Sian Gwenllian made in terms of the need for that prospective college to be innovative is an important one. We’re not trying to recreate models from other places in Bangor, but we want to be innovative.

David Rees—as so often in debates on a number of issues—talked about innovation. I know innovation in education is something that’s important for the Member for Aberavon. One issue that wasn’t mentioned today was possibly the need to consider STEM subjects in schools in the context of the need to persuade more young people to study medicine.

I’m grateful to Dai Lloyd for emphasising the point that I made about the need for balancing the expenditure between the money going to hospitals within the NHS and the money that goes to primary care. There has been a clear decline in the percentage that goes into primary care in recent years and, as I said, this is not sustainable.

Trof at sylwadau’r Gweinidog yn fyr. Ar integreiddio, rwy’n meddwl ein bod yn awyddus i weld camau gweithredu cyffredinol ar draws Cymru. Cyflwynodd Plaid Cymru ein hargymhellion ar gyfer integreiddio yn yr etholiad yn ddiweddar, ac roeddent yn argymhellion a oedd yn destun trafod ac roedd llawer o bobl yn cytuno â hwy; roedd eraill yn anghytuno â hwy. Ond rwy’n credu mai’r hyn sy’n rhaid i ni symud tuag ato yw sefyllfa lle mae gennym argymhellion penodol a all arwain at integreiddio go iawn yng Nghymru. Ac ar integreiddio, rwy’n credu bod angen i ni gofio’r angen i integreiddio gofal sylfaenol ac eilaidd yn ogystal, nid iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol yn unig. Felly, nodaf yr enghreifftiau o integreiddio a grybwyllwyd gennych. Nodaf yr enghreifftiau hefyd o’r ymdrechion i fynd i’r afael ag oedi wrth drosglwyddo gofal; nodaf eich uchelgeisiau ynglŷn â recriwtio meddygon teulu, ac rydym yn falch ein bod wedi gallu gwneud recriwtio meddygon teulu yn un o’r meysydd allweddol yn ein cytundeb ar ôl yr etholiad. Ond fel y dywedodd Jeremy Miles, mae angen i ni edrych ar arferion gorau ac ar ôl eu nodi—boed ym maes gofal sylfaenol yn Ynys Môn, neu rywle arall—mae angen gweld sut y gellir cyffredinoli hynny wedyn ledled Cymru a gwneud yn siŵr fod arferion gorau yn cael eu hailadrodd ar draws Cymru.

Rwy’n meddwl bod angen i ni symud i gyfnod newydd o frys i fynd i’r afael â’r materion rydym yn eu trafod y prynhawn yma. Rwy’n credu ei bod yn amlwg o’r ddadl y prynhawn yma fod y materion hyn yn rhai sy’n cael eu rhannu ar hyd a lled y wlad ac maent yn faterion sy’n peri pryder i ni i gyd, pa blaid bynnag rydym yn ei chynrychioli yma yn y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol. Ym Mhlaid Cymru, byddwn yn gweithio’n adeiladol gyda’r Llywodraeth i chwilio am ffyrdd newydd ymlaen, ond byddwn yn rhoi pwysau diarbed ar y Llywodraeth i gynnig yr ymdeimlad newydd o frys sydd ei angen arnom, boed er mwyn datblygu gofal sylfaenol neu integreiddio iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol, ac er mwyn mynd i’r afael â her enfawr y newid yn y boblogaeth sy’n mynd i’n hwynebu yn y blynyddoedd i ddod.

Yn olaf, rwy’n falch iawn o glywed bod y Gweinidog yn disgwyl y symudir adnoddau yn ystod y blynyddoedd i ddod tuag at ofal sylfaenol. Rwy’n credu bod hyn yn hanfodol os ydym am oresgyn yr heriau sy’n ein hwynebu. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Okay. There’s been an objection, therefore we’ll defer voting under this item until voting time.

Yr eitem nesaf ar ein hagenda yw dadl y Ceidwadwyr Cymreig ar lywodraeth leol. Galwaf ar Janet Finch-Saunders i gynnig y cynnig.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and may I take this opportunity to congratulate you on your new role?

I’m very proud and pleased to lead the Welsh Conservatives’ opposition group debate on public service delivery, and in doing so to thank my Assembly group leader, Andrew R.T. Davies AM, for his confidence in reappointing me as the shadow spokesperson for local government. I would also like to congratulate Mark Drakeford AM on his appointment as the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, and I do look forward to shadowing you in a constructive manner as we work together, where we can, to face many of the difficulties and uncertainties now facing local government in Wales.

During the last term of this Assembly, the lack of continuity for ministerial responsibility has left those charged with the delivery of so many of our vital services confused, undervalued and facing much uncertainty. In 2013, and at a cost to the taxpayer of £130,000, we saw the Williams commission report published, advising 62 recommendations, all deemed necessary in order to take future public service delivery in Wales forward. Many of those recommendations now have largely been ignored.

This was a much wider remit than local government, and included many of those charged with the delivery of all of our public services in Wales. It did not single out local government as being the only area in need of urgent reform. As Members, we genuinely believed that this work would be a catalyst for real change, and an improved delivery programme for all of our public services in Wales. The integration of health and social care was considered to be of critical importance, yet look how little progress we’ve seen.

The Welsh Government, having failed at the collaboration agenda, simply took it upon themselves to start a programme of change and reorganisation for local government in Wales, like never seen before—riding roughshod over many, to include the communities who so often rely on these vital services and, at the same time, and in the harshest fashion, alienating our elected members, our front-line workers, our senior officers and, again, our communities. The commission specifically called for local authorities to merge into larger units, by merging existing local authorities, and specified by not the re-drawing of boundaries. Again, ignored. Voluntary mergers were considered as the way forward, and reorganisation options to be decided and implemented urgently, to be agreed by key stakeholders and the Welsh Government by no later than Easter 2014. Didn’t happen.

The commissioners called for the Government to support and incentivise early adopters who wanted to see such an initiative, by beginning a voluntary process of merger with completion by 2017-18. Yet, the Minister at the time conjured up his own new boundaries, to include a map of only eight or nine authorities, and chose instead to reject, out of hand, costed proposals that came in from six local authorities, by the required date, and with the correct criteria—Conwy and Denbighshire, my own authority, included. A wasted opportunity to say the least. And here we are today, still a lack of vision, no direction, and much uncertainty.

Cabinet Secretary, I urge you to get to grips with this situation as an immediate priority. Work with our officers, consult with our communities, work with the WLGA, and most importantly, talk to the Members here. We all have a direct interest in how well our own local authorities perform and are able to deal with the challenges presented. In May 2017, our voters will go to the polls for the local government elections. The year 2012, sadly, saw a 38 per cent turnout, a drop of 4 per cent, with 99 uncontested seats at county council level, and a staggering 3,600—that’s 45 per cent—uncontested seats at town and community level. Twelve to 15 per cent are still left vacant.

As part of my working with you going forward, I would certainly like you to address the issue of our community councils and their workings. This is, of course, the first level of democratic governance in Wales, affecting our citizens, and, yes, it does come with a chargeable precept. Across Wales there are many who feel disenfranchised at this level, often due to a lack of clarity around who does what, and many completely unaware of the functions and governance associated. Often, by some, seen as a closed shop and some not publishing agendas or minutes, and not having a website, despite having had the funding to do this.

Others before you have promised much needed reform and review, without any success. There is now much uncertainty with our town clerks and community councillors, about community-backed council boundaries, as a result of a very low-key boundary review, that sees many of our current seats slashed, but, again, there appears to be nothing definite. Some do not even know how many seats they will be contesting. Some clarity is now required. Now is the time to invigorate our electorate, at all levels of democracy, by re-engaging with them, working with them, and giving them a reason to be confident in a local government system that works efficiently, effectively and with due diligence.

Cabinet Secretary, you are aware of our call on these benches regarding community rights. Community rights by their very nature are another opportunity for big government to engage, empower and energise our communities. Over the past five years we’ve seen so many lost opportunities as community halls, local pubs and libraries have been lost, all in the name of cutting cost, with little regard for the immense value that these facilities provide for our own communities. The Localism Act 2011, implemented over the border, has freed up so many of our communities, devolving power from on high to the very communities they serve. I urge you to bring a fresh pair of eyes to the table and to work to ensure that we do adopt more articles within this Act. The previous top-down approach of the Welsh Government to community engagement through the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 and the ‘Principles for working with communities’ document, issued to public sector organisations, has sadly been coupled with a reluctance to introduce the localism agenda, contrasting starkly with England and Scotland, where communities enjoy rights through this Act and the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015.

Welsh Conservatives want those rights to be implemented here in Wales. The people of Wales want those rights, too. We all know of hard-working community champions in our own constituencies, willing to take on these local assets, working with others to stop the loss of them. Seventy-eight per cent of respondents actually responded to the Welsh Government’s consultation on protecting community assets readily supporting a right-to-bid initiative, willing to hold out their hand to work with the Welsh Government and their own local authorities in order to protect such assets, but there has been very little recognition of this, and virtually nothing taken forward. Again, I urge you, Minister: work with us, work with our communities. It only takes a little help, support and some guidance to see our rural communities in particular provided with brilliant opportunities like never before. Gwent is now piloting the funding of a community asset transfer officer. I welcome this initiative and ask again for you to work to ensure that all local authorities in Wales document and list every single one of our valuable community assets, allowing for future posterity and the possibility of safeguarding rather than sacrificing these important facilities.

Now, the failed collaboration agenda I’ve referred to earlier was another wasted opportunity, and I do ask you to go back to the drawing board to see where shared services can and will work. In England, £462 million has been saved through shared service agreements across local authorities. A KPMG report here in Wales identified £151 million of back-room savings that can be achieved without any merger process. Now is the time to nurture growth and confidence within our authorities, allowing them to be brave, taking bold steps to deliver other models of delivery, and empowering them to work with neighbouring authorities if the demand calls. Give them the support, give them the guidance and give them the hope that their efforts will not be in vain.

Furthermore, the National Audit Office estimates that the public service transformation agenda in England will have potentially delivered a net annual benefit of savings between £4.2 billion and £7.9 billion by around 2018-19. This is not chicken feed. In Scotland too, shared service delivery is working. The Ayrshire Roads Alliance between East and South Ayrshire councils is expected to save £8 million over the next few years. The idea of shared services and joint-working agreements was put in place in Wales 10 years ago in the Beecham review. However, the Communities, Equality and Local Government Committee’s inquiry into the progress of local government collaboration following the Simpson report identified the strong need for the collaboration agenda to be pushed further, for more clarity, more direction and more leadership from this Welsh Government, placing an emphasis on the very need to take action in the face of a difficult financial future for local government. Regrettably, the select recommendations of the Williams commission and subsequent map of the previous Minister were driven forward unilaterally and unsuccessfully.

With regard to the amendments tabled to the debate, we do of course recognise the Sunderland report, although I have to say it is a very outdated report. We continue to endorse many of its top-line principles, such as promoting public understanding of local government, and initiatives such as active citizenship to boost engagement with the local government process. However, Welsh Conservatives remain opposed to implementing STV as the preferred voting system. We will, therefore, not be voting in support of amendment 2, which calls for this.

We are at the start of the fifth Assembly term. The local government part of your Cabinet responsibility has the second largest budget and is responsible for much of the well-being of our society. Whilst you are new to this role, I do believe that your own local government previous experience will bode well for you to make a difference. Work with your Assembly Members, engage meaningfully with the WLGA, speak to colleagues and backbenchers here and, most of all, work with local authorities. Together, let us all work towards a model of local government that is affordable, sustainable and effective. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. I have selected the two amendments to the motion. I call on Sian Gwenllian to move amendments 1 and 2, tabled in the name of Simon Thomas. Sian.

Thank you. I wish, on behalf of Plaid Cymru, to move our amendments on the reform of local government in Wales. There’s a great deal to be said about the subject, but today I will focus on two specific aspects that were included as part of Plaid Cymru policy during the Assembly election in May. That is, first of all, the need for Welsh Government to act to implement single transferrable votes for future local government elections, and, secondly, the need for any reform in the future to include regional authorities in order to give a strategic direction to local authorities and to share best practice across the various authorities.

Like any other nation, Wales requires regional leadership to give strategic direction that reflects a set of priorities throughout Wales, together with strong local government to secure local accountability and co-ordination at community level. We want to do this in a gradual way, using the current structures to create new leadership at the regional and community levels. Also, as we alluded to in the debate we held in the Chamber earlier, we wish to see much more purposeful and sensible integration between health and social services. One obvious advantage of doing that is to create accountability in the health sector as well as improving the provision for our people.

Plaid Cymru is of the view that we need to create comprehensive regional authorities out of the local authorities that already exist. We need to forget about the map and consult on how this new regional vision would look and what exactly the duties would be on that level.

Our amendments to this debate today focus on the need to introduce a new electoral system, namely a single transferrable vote, STV, in order to secure equitable representation for each political point of view.

The Sunderland report was published in 2002. Yes, that’s quite some time ago, but it was a very thorough report and it concluded that the single transferrable vote is the most appropriate to meet the diverse needs of local people from the point of view of a local electoral system. And, that was after the commission tested seven other electoral systems.

In my view, the introduction of STV into local government elections in Scotland is one of the most positive developments in the age of devolution. In Scotland, the local elections are much more lively and interesting. Many more people are competing for the seats there and local government itself, following on from that, is intertwining itself much more closely to the desires of the population.

The Government here have had an opportunity to implement the recommendations of the Sunderland report in the past. And, as a nation, if we truly believe that every citizen is equal, then we should also believe, and therefore ensure, that every vote is equal. As far as I can see, there is no good reason for not introducing STV for local government elections in Wales. Therefore, we ask you to support the amendments. Thank you.

I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate today. Public services, and the delivery of public services, are a vital plank of support for many people the length and breadth of Wales, and local government obviously plays a vital role in delivering those public services. I did mean my comments to the First Minister in the first weeks of this Government, when I said to him that we do wish the Government well in its mission—and the Cabinet Secretaries in their mission—to deliver on the aspirations that they have had in their manifesto, because, if Government does fail, then the services that each and every Cabinet Secretary is charged with delivering have failed for the people who need those services to support them in their everyday lives. It is our job, as an opposition, obviously, to hold the Government to account, and to make sure that we do put forward an alternative as well, because it easy to carp from the sidelines, but you need to say what exactly you will do if you are serious about, obviously, one day being in Government.

From these benches, in these early weeks and months of this Assembly, we will certainly be engaging and looking to engage positively with the new Cabinet Secretary around the agenda for local government, because so much energy and so much time was spent in this Assembly in the last session dealing with—as the lead speaker, Janet Finch-Saunders, spoke—maps and lines on maps that actually didn’t mean very much to the very communities that were going to have either a service or a facility withdrawn, and ultimately carried little or no support. It really does come to something when a Conservative leader goes to the annual WLGA meeting and gets more cheers than the Labour Minister did in Swansea—bearing in mind that, I think, 16 of the 22 leaders of local authorities in Wales are Labour leaders. But that was at the height, obviously, of the previous Minister’s map about local government reorganisation. I do hope that the Minister—the Cabinet Secretary, sorry—sticks to the comments that he has made public so far, in that he does want to have that conversation, and he does want to work collaboratively with those at the coalface in local government, rather than going into those meetings over the next weeks and months and actually dictating to them what will happen, because I have yet to find someone who actually does want to destroy local government.

There are many ideas out there about which model we should look at—the combined model that Plaid Cymru have talked about, the county model that others hark to, and, ultimately, the 1974 model that, obviously, the previous Government was supporting. But what is quite clear is that, with the cost pressures that are coming through in the delivery of the service, with the ever-increasing demand on the services that local government has to deliver, the status quo is not an option. What we need to do, as the primary legislature here in Wales with responsibility for local government, is find a solution to getting a sustainable map for local government delivered here in Wales.

It is a fact that, every 20 years or so, previous Governments have come—of all shapes and colours—and redesigned local government in Wales. That cannot be a good model for governance, it cannot be a good model for delivery, and, ultimately, it cannot be a good model for those who work within the service, and those who vitally depend on those services to provide their everyday assistance. I think that what is really important today in this debate is that the Minister does use the opportunity to respond in these early weeks as to how he will take the discussions forward. Importantly, with the elections next May, is it the Government’s intention that, if there was to be a consensus about reorganisation, the mandates that politicians will be seeking from the electorate will be full mandates—i.e. will they serve the full five-year term of local government? Because they will be putting manifestos to the electorate in a little over nine or 10 months’ time, which the electorate will be voting on. So, I do hope that the Minister—the Cabinet Secretary, sorry—will give that clarity over this surety that candidates and incumbents will require when they are having those debates and having those discussions over what local government will look like over the next five years, and, indeed, as I said earlier, about the discussions that he intends to lead with local authorities, and give that genuine commitment that it will be a discussion rather than a lecture, as his predecessor, regrettably, started these discussions in the fourth Assembly.

I do want to just touch on as well, importantly, turnout at local government elections. Regrettably, that was down in 2012 by some 4 or 5 per cent, and many seats, in fact, as Janet Finch-Saunders touched on, went uncontested. It is vital that there is an awareness around the vital role that local councillors and candidates, indeed, can perform in the run-up to the election, and post the election, in supporting villages, towns and communities in any part of Wales. So, I look forward to the Minister’s response and I do hope he uses this debate as an opportunity to flesh out some of the ideas he might be having.

I’m glad the Conservatives have finally recognised the importance of local government. For those who’ve been here for the last five years, we’ve heard them attempt to take money out of local government and give it to health, the equivalent of buying a car, not maintaining it, but spending money on repairs. Spending on sports facilities, environmental health and elderly care helps keep people from needing hospital care.

Local government provides a huge variety and a wide range of services. There’s a booklet called the A to Z of environmental services—for those who haven’t seen it, it’s not a thin booklet, and that’s just one area of local government. Local authority services affect everybody and everyone every day: roads, pavements, refuse collection, litter removal, education and social services daily affect the lives of the people living in an area. Social services departments in Wales are under more financial pressure than any other service area in the public sector, and I include the health service in that. We know that the population is ageing and that people are living longer, often with substantial care needs that have to be provided outside of hospitals. The reason why local government is cutting back on other services is because social services’ need is so great and has to be met.

Can I just quote the Cardiff University Centre for Local and Regional Government Research? It undertook the first comprehensive analysis of the impact of size on the performance of local authorities. The team developed a groundbreaking model that used inspection scores, national performance indicators, public confidence and a value for money index. The results showed local authorities have no ideal size. Larger councils have lower central administrative overheads, but size effects varied between services. Subsequent research found reorganisation-produced larger councils can disrupt performances. We also know that the largest local authority in Europe—Birmingham—has had serious problems with its social services department. So, big is not always better.

They tested the impact of population size and controlled for difference in socio-economic context, including deprivation and diversity of service needs. The result of this analysis showed that population size had little impact on CPA scores, but it did affect about half of the measures of service inspection and a majority of the measures of consumer satisfaction. It also impacted on measures of value for money. But the relationship between size and performance is complex. In some cases, larger authorities performed better, in others, smaller councils performed better, and, in others, medium-sized authorities achieved the best results. In fact, if you look at the Welsh performance indicators across local authorities, it’s actually the medium-sized authorities that do best in terms of getting the most greens.

We know that size is not proportional to performance. Everybody doesn’t look and say, ‘If every council could be like Cardiff and Rhondda Cynon Taf, then we’d have a wonderful set of local authorities in Wales’. Local authorities have lost control of a large number of service areas that they had when I was first elected a councillor in 1989. They’ve lost institutes of higher education and the polytechnics, further education colleges, direct control of schools, a majority on police committees, Cardiff Airport, and, in many council areas, housing. Does anyone actually think these changes have been for the better regarding service delivery?

On turnout, this is a problem across all elections in Wales, including, unfortunately, the Assembly election. Comparisons between council and Assembly elections are difficult, because in areas that traditionally have the highest Assembly turnout, many seats at council level go uncontested. We do know that council election turnout is substantially above the European election turnout, and, when held separately, the police commission elections. An obvious solution to getting higher turnout for local elections would be to give local authorities more control and have less Welsh Government direction. The single transferrable vote, also known as ‘Guess how many seats you’re going to win?’, creating large wards in rural areas, moving local government away from voters—I can think of no better way of reducing turnout in local government elections than introducing STV. I note you don’t ask to have a referendum on it, because I think that people know what the result would be. We had a referendum on changing the voting system, and that was overwhelmingly against making a change. So, obviously we don’t want to have another one—let’s impose it from above.

I urge the Welsh Government to consider the following: give local authorities the power of general competence, something local governments have asked for for as long as I can remember, provide less central control over services—let local decisions be made—promote joint working for education and social services, but on the same footprint. Every Minister who takes over a different portfolio creates their own little footprint for each service; we need to have services covering the same area. Look to local authorities to work together on regional planning for housing and economic development. We have a development plan for each local authority, and we all know, don’t we, that changes that are made in Swansea will have an effect in Neath Port Talbot and Carmarthenshire and the same the other way. So we need to have some sort of regional policy so we all know where we are. We should look to maximise the number of services under direct local government control. I actually believe in local government and I think it really is important that we let local authorities make decisions on behalf of their local people and then, if the people don’t like it, they can kick them out.

Wales’s radical political tradition of empowered local communities has come to be represented in modern times by our local authorities, by elected representatives, who, in some cases, experience so little buy-in from residents they serve that they can sometimes hang onto civic influence for decades. And they can hang onto ideologies for decades too: public services can only effectively be delivered by the public sector, short-term contracts with the third sector are okay as long as councils hold the purse strings and they can be ditched if they’re not liked, and, in some cases, you can’t even mention the private sector. The dominating, monolithic structures of local authorities even today no longer function as a model of community empowerment. Local government reform needs to be more than about mergers; it’s about a new balance between local authorities, society and the citizen.

Now of course we need the public sector to be a central part of the way that our communities are served, but we have to move on from this culture of, ‘Oh, that’s the council’s job’ or ‘Oh, the council won’t let you do that.’ This is not just about localism that’s characterised by the kind of asset transfer we’ve been talking about—obviously that’s part of it. It’s about recognising that local authorities can’t do it all. This is about recognising the potential of co-production. Local authorities are home to committed officers and employees, to expertise, to a range of professional skills, strategic thinkers as well, but, by dumping so many challenges on the steps of county hall, we overlook what we as citizens, individually and collectively, other organisations and other bodies can do to meet the demands of our communities. The increasing demands and shrinking budgets identified by Mike Hedges mean that we all lose out when non-statutory services are threatened by the pressure for councils to meet their statutory obligations first. Public dissatisfaction with ‘the council’ grows, disconnection between service providers and service users grows. The vocabulary we use for this just reinforces that. What on earth happened to ‘people’? Just take adult social services: a fifth of us are already over 65 and it’ll be well over a quarter by 2033. In Conwy, a quarter of the population are already pensioners. The state may have a range of public health messages to help us keep fit and healthy for longer, but it requires personal responsibility to take on those messages and make them work for us and our families and our communities.

Local authorities will come under tremendous pressure to provide support and care through the traditional adult care routes, let alone fulfil their other social services obligations. So, do we really leave it all to them? Labour has lost its fervour for the localism that underpinned the co-operative model of economic development long ago, putting its faith instead in state centralisation. Rather than leading the way in the UK, the co-operative economy in Wales is smaller per head of population than it is in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Even the plans for the not-for-profit body to run our railways have the inky fingerprints of Government all over them.

Dr Dan Boucher is right when he says that the current challenge to public service delivery

‘is not helped by Labour’s failure to embrace the opportunity of injecting a greater measure of mutuality into the organisation of our public services through the development of public service mutuals.’

While England has enjoyed the development of 106 public service mutuals in the last five years, providing over £1 billion-worth of public services, the same period has not witnessed the creation of any public service mutual in Wales. That’s quite strange as the Labour Government’s 2009 social enterprise action plan specifically said that public bodies should consider whether any aspect of their roles could be better carried out by social enterprises. In 2014, its Welsh Co-operative and Mutuals Commission supported the extension of mutuals in the economy and public services. Indeed, the commission said that mutuals were superior to state provision when it came to housing, Mike Hedges, and highlighted opportunities in a number of areas, including social care and health. However, this March, on the eve of the Assembly election, the Welsh Government action plan on alternative delivery models for public service delivery stated plainly:

‘We advocate co-operative and mutual models of delivery and other alternative delivery models only as an alternative to ceasing or privatising services, as a least worst option’.

Now, I think Robert Owen would be ashamed that a Welsh Government has signalled so clearly that its sympathies remain squarely with state centralisation.

Welsh Conservatives believe that one of the keys to success in securing policies is in speaking to our culture. We will continue, ourselves, to promote co-production, including mutuals, where appropriate, not because mutuals are the least worst option, but because they are the best option, both for the specific services in question and also because of the way they resonate with our own culture and national identity.

Local government in Wales is suffering from a lack of community engagement. This lack of engagement has led to voter apathy and poor voter turnout in successive local elections. At the last local election in 2012, average voter turnout was under 39 per cent—a fall of 4 per cent from the previous election in 2008. According to the national survey for Wales, 88 per cent of people had not contacted their councillors in the last 12 months. More worryingly, 59 per cent of respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that they could influence a decision affecting their local area. This apathy towards local government is in marked contrast to public campaigns and demonstrations when local authority assets are threatened with closures.

The Welsh Government had a chance of addressing this problem when the UK Government passed the Localism Act 2011. It is disappointing, therefore, that the Welsh Government has failed to implement the community rights agenda in Wales. Community rights are about empowering communities, so that they have a bigger say in the issues that matter to them. By a series of measures, the Localism Act set out to achieve a substantial shift of power to local people. Two of these measures were the community right to challenge and the community right to bid.

First, the community right to challenge, Minister. Local authorities in Wales facing budgetary constraints may attempt to relieve the pressure by letting go of assets such as leisure centres. Without a community right to challenge, allowing communities to take over the running of services, these assets could be lost permanently. The best councils in Wales are constantly on the lookout for new and better ways to design and deliver local services. Many recognise the potential of social enterprises and community groups to provide high-quality services at good value. They should work together to deliver these services.

Secondly, the community right to bid. Every community is a home to buildings or amenities that play a vital role in local life. These include community centres, libraries, swimming pools, village shops, markets and pubs. The closure of these assets can present a local loss to the community. Community groups often need more time to organise a bid and to raise money than the private enterprise that may be bidding against them. The community right to bid provides a six-week opportunity for communities to express an interest in buying an asset. If they do so, a further four-and-a-half-month window of opportunity is open to allow communities the time to raise funds to buy the asset. To assist community groups, we need a list of assets of community value nominated by the local communities themselves. However, councils in Wales do not have to keep a register of assets of community value and they are not obliged to undertake community asset transfers. I believe these rights enjoyed in England should be extended to Wales to enhance the existing community asset transfer and the community facilities and activity programmes.

Deputy Presiding Officer, allowing communities to challenge these local authorities over services they provide or buildings they own will greatly enhance community involvement and engagement. I hope the Cabinet Secretary will embrace the community rights agenda and implement the Localism Act in full in Wales.

And finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, there’s one area that I regularly get a problem with in my office. When people come to get in touch with the council, there’s always a local telephone call. In Newport, it’s 656656 for a call centre. Normally, no less than 10 minutes somebody has to wait and listen to music and then, half of the time, you never get in touch with the right person you have to speak to. I’d like to find out how much money the local council are making from people waiting on the telephone when they ring the councils. I think the councils should realise that poor people ring about their problems—not for the cost of staying to put their problems to the councils. I think this is an area where connectivity between the people and the councils is also lacking in Wales. Thank you.

It’s been an interesting discussion so far, and it’s been good to hear so many people speak and have passionate views on this subject. Here in the UKIP group, we certainly recognise that local government has a major role to play in people’s everyday lives. So, it is important that, if we are going to have yet another major local government shake-up, which, as was pointed out earlier by R.T. Davies, we seem to have every 20 years, pretty punctually, then we need to make sure this time that we do get it right and, also, that we do not systematically take services further and further away from the people they are supposed to serve.

We do support some reorganisation of local government in Wales, but the massive reduction to nine councils proposed by the previous Minister—we believe that that was too big a reduction and would represent a major degradation in council services. In general, we support bottom-up reorganisation, rather than a top-down model, the kind of model that Leighton Andrews wanted to impose on the Welsh councils. We note with dismay that, when Vale of Glamorgan Council did come to a voluntary agreement with their neighbouring authority of Bridgend, the ambitions of those councils were rather casually rejected by the relevant Minister, who has, perhaps thankfully, now departed, although, of course, I’m sure he did good things here as well.

What people in the Vale do not want is to be submerged by Cardiff council and then swamped by huge housing developments on their green fields. This is a problem we already have facing us on the outskirts of Cardiff, as the new Plaid regional Member has repeatedly, and rightly, alluded to. We certainly don’t want that problem extended to the Vale of Glamorgan as well by a forced merger with Cardiff. I can tell you that Cardiff’s Labour-run authority would love to get its hands on those lovely fields in the Vale of Glamorgan.

Similarly, Rhondda Cynon Taf council should not be railroaded into a forced merger with Merthyr. RCT is already one of the biggest councils in Wales in terms of its population, and it’s quite capable, we believe, of standing on its own two feet.

Now, referring to other points that were made during the debate, Janet mentioned the number of uncontested seats, which is an obvious cause for concern. We believe that if you have these forced mergers, leading to super councils, they will be too large. This will lead to increasing lack of interest from the electorate in these elections, and you’ll probably have a lower turnout as a result. The Localism Act is interesting; that’s an interesting point. We tend to agree that we need to think about adopting more articles from that Act here in Wales, and there may be a debate here soon on a portion of that Act.

We also have the issue of the term of the next council, raised by R.T. Davies. I remember, in 1993, we had elections; they took place regardless of a local government reorganisation that was imminent at that time. We had county council elections in 1993; two years later, we had to have the unitary authority elections—really, a considerable waste of expense. In these times of local authority cuts, we need to make sure that we avoid that kind of duplication and that kind of waste of money this time around.

Oscar Asghar raised the issue of the call centres. I heard murmurs from that side that these council numbers cost nothing for the consumer to pay for when he’s ringing up, but I think the problem is, essentially, one of inaccessibility, because it takes a long time for people to get hold of the council. They are put through to a call centre. They’re not on a direct line to any council switchboard—. Well, it is essentially a switchboard. Sometimes also, these call centres serve more than one council; so, you might find that you ring a call centre enquiring about services in Cardiff and you’re speaking to someone in a call centre in Wrexham who knows nothing about what you’re talking about. So, we need to look at that, and we need to look at whether we need to have some statutory provision that we have to have locally-manned call centres, at least, so you don’t have people ringing up these lines and finding that they’re talking to people who have no local knowledge.

On the question of the Plaid Cymru amendment regarding voting reform, this is a very important issue. We believe that to encourage a higher turnout in the elections in Wales we do need to support the introduction of the single transferable vote in Welsh council elections. [Interruption.] Indeed, that may be the case, but we certainly do support that, and we are willing to collaborate with whoever else supports it. So, Sian, if you want to have a chat, then by all means do so, but of course it would mean collaborating with us here in UKIP, which may be an awful prospect for you. Thank you.

We have to recognise that Wales has yet to suffer from the extent of the cuts that have been experienced in England. In England, council budgets were cut by 10 per cent in cash terms in the last five years whereas in Wales overall they went up by 2.5 per cent. That is because schools and social services were ring-fenced, avoiding the cuts that occurred in other services, but obviously there have been huge challenges in trying to deliver the other services that weren’t ring-fenced. It isn’t going to get any easier. It can’t be sustainable in the long term, because of the shrinking budgets coming from the Tory UK Government.

By 2020 the Welsh budget will be nearly £1.5 billion lower in real terms than it was in 2010. So, fundamental reform of how public services are delivered and organised across Wales has to be addressed and addressed now. The salami-slicing and the withdrawal of non-essential activities has already been done. The low-hanging fruit have been eliminated. So, continuing to do less is unlikely to meet anything other than public dismay. Local authorities are going to have to do things differently.

The Welsh Government has set out a range of ideas in the draft local government Bill to improve openness, transparency and public accountability of local government. That is long overdue. In the last five years we had no less than three councils where the chief executive and some senior officers were writing their own remuneration plans, and the elected members were found wanting absolutely in their failure to prevent such a massive level of maladministration. It took the intervention of the Wales Audit Office to expose these governance failings.

Such scandals undermine staff and the public’s confidence and trust in public services, and we need to let in some light if we’re going to attract more people who want to serve in local government. I think that public service boards and their obligations under the future generations Act provide a breath of fresh air and necessary collaboration if they’re going to meet their obligations. In addition to that, the bitter referendum contest that we have all suffered over the last few months has thrown up some challenging issues, which will not go away whatever the result is tomorrow. People have got used to clicking their preferences online rather than getting their jackets off and helping solve problems. Is it really the case that it’s always somebody else’s responsibility? To blame whichever level of government is not hard to do, but instead we need to get people to reflect on what they can do to help resolve problems.

I can agree with Suzy Davies that the status quo is not an option. Some of the things that local authorities can do to grasp the nettle of doing things differently were illustrated in the smarter energy for Wales report, which set out the opportunities that are available to local authorities to harness our natural resources for the well-being of local communities. Sadly, few local authorities at any level have seized the opportunity and the money. Indeed, in many areas, local authorities actively block community-led energy schemes, rather than embracing these initiatives to enhance the well-being and income of their populations.

Suzy Davies recognises there has to be co-production, and that requires us to trust people but also to expect that they will play their part, rather than simply demand. It is not local authorities who throw litter, it is people; it’s not local authorities that churn up the roads and create potholes, it’s vehicles, particularly heavy goods vehicles, which are reluctant to pay the cost in their licences that should reflect the damage they do. It is no use Mohammad Asghar simply decrying the loss of services; we have to think what we’re going to do about it. It is undoubtedly the case that poorer neighbourhoods have lower reserves to fall back on when changes are proposed. For example, Rhydypennau library in Cyncoed, which is a relatively well-off area, threatened with closure, has not just been kept open, the local community has massively enhanced the service, with a huge range of concerts, fundraisers and readings, ably supported by the exemplary librarian, who goes the extra mile to deliver for the public. As it’s Public Service Day tomorrow, I think we should recognise that.

I think virtual mergers and voluntary mergers have to be the way forward, to make people from different organisations feel comfortable with each other, and I wait with interest, for example, to hear about the increased collaboration between health and local authorities in Powys, to find out whether that might be a forward model for other local authorities as well.

First of all, I’d like to welcome the Cabinet Secretary to his post and welcome very much his approach and his commitment in the co-production process, moving forward. Yes, I think, in terms of reinforcing the points that have just been made, there is no shadow of a doubt that Wales has not borne the brunt of the cuts that local authorities have borne in England. We’ve mentioned already the 10 per cent slashing of local authorities’ budgets and the fact that one of the Conservative Members opposite has tried to talk about the love of mutuals; I think mutuals have an absolute place in Wales, but what I would say is that, in England, the reality is that it’s for-profit private companies that are taking over the running of public services and not at all doing a good job in some parts.

The Welsh budget has been slashed by £1.5 billion, so there is a need to look at this with fresh eyes and move forward in a way that is constructive. I welcome very much the Cabinet Secretary’s approach in already meeting with council leaders and local authorities so very early on in his post. Yes, it’s going to be an interesting way forward, but I know very much that we have the approach, the willingness, the co-production process in place that will deliver for the people of Wales.

Thank you very much. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Ddirprwy Lywydd. Can I begin by thanking the Conservative group at the Assembly for using their time this afternoon to bring forward this debate? I’ve listened very carefully to each contribution, and I’m very glad to have this opportunity to discuss the future of local government in Wales and to set out some of my own early thinking.

My starting point, Dirprwy Lywydd, is this: that good local government plays a vitally important part in the lives of almost every citizen in Wales, from the earliest years of nursery education and the foundation phase to the social care provided to our oldest and most vulnerable. As Mike Hedges suggested, each one of us has a direct interest in the way in which our rubbish is collected, our streets kept clean, how our roads are maintained and our children are educated, and each one of those services is provided by our local authorities.

Now, Dirprwy Lywydd, I am fortunate that, partly as a result of the very close attention provided by my predecessors, I take on this portfolio at a time when, despite the very real challenges, local government in Wales has been improving. Most previous local government Ministers will have inherited a position where more than one council in Wales has been in need of intervention for its education or social services, or for its own corporate governance. Today, no council in Wales is in that position, and I am very keen to reflect that pattern of improvement in our discussion of local government.

When I met the leader of Ynys Môn council, he asked me that the first time I mentioned his authority on the floor of this Assembly, I should not describe it as a failing authority, but instead I should focus on the considerable success that his council has achieved over the last three years. That authority is in a very different position today than it was at the start of the last Assembly term, and I’m very pleased to be able to do just that—to say something about the efforts, all those efforts, here at the National Assembly, through the intervention of regulators and councils themselves, which have helped to bring about this improved picture.

Now, none of this is to suggest that real challenges do not remain, nor could we possibly believe that the provision of local authority services in Wales is uniformly as we would wish it to be simply because no local authority is currently performing below the minimum standard required of it. All Members here will be familiar with the basic position. Each and every local authority in Wales is good at something. Most are good at many things. None are good at everything. The challenge, then, will be to go on securing improvement in a future that will be very testing indeed. Local authorities face rising demand for many of their services, and they and we know that the money to meet those needs is diminishing, and, on current central Government plans, as Jenny Rathbone pointed out, will go on diminishing in each year of this Assembly term.

No-one that I have met in my meetings with local authorities so far argues that the status quo can be sustained. The nature of the problem is widely understood and shared; crafting solutions to it has been less easy. The last Welsh Government attempted to take a lead, to shape an agenda, to set out a way forward and to persuade others to follow. We would not have had the uniform commitment to change, I believe, had that work not been undertaken.

Now, one aspect of the proposed solution, the map, did not create consensus. Many other aspects of the draft Bill published by my predecessor were widely welcomed, both in this Chamber and beyond. Mike Hedges mentioned the general power of competence for local authorities, but the Bill also included greater clarity of relationships between executive and political leadership, the strengthening of the community leadership role of individual councillors, and measures to improve the responsiveness of local councils, answering the issues that Mohammad Asghar identified.

All of these remain important ingredients in securing effective local government for the future. As far as the map is concerned, I have been clear in my discussions with local authorities and others that my intention is to spend these early weeks talking, listening and learning. My aim will be to seek a consensus, if that is at all possible, on a way forward. It is my strong preference for that consensus to include other political parties in this Assembly where common ground can be found. I was very grateful to meet the Member for Arfon last week and for a first and early discussion of these issues. [Interruption.] Yes, of course.

Thank you for giving way, Secretary. I’m pleased to hear that you’re trying to seek a consensus on this. That wasn’t always the approach of your predecessor. Would you agree with me that councils such as Monmouthshire have put forward interesting ideas in terms of providing a combined authority where you would not have the expense of reorganisation, but you would be making sure that those authorities worked together?

Llywydd, I was very glad to meet the leader and chief executive of Monmouthshire County Council 10 days ago. It was a very constructive meeting. They have a series of interesting ideas, which they’ve promised to provide further information to me about. I was very pleased to accept their invitation to visit Monmouthshire again to see some of the practical work they’re doing around community hubs. I am keen to take ideas wherever they are to be found and to see how much we can make of them. I was particularly interested in my meeting with the Member for Arfon to learn more about the proposals set out in the Plaid Cymru manifesto around the regional approach that he has discussed here this afternoon, and the issues of accountability that are implicit in any democratic arrangement. In the same spirit, I look forward to meeting Janet Finch-Saunders over the next few weeks, and was grateful for her offer of co-operation where common ground can be found, for example in considering the future of community councils. Where there is a constructive contribution to be made, I will certainly want to respond in the same spirit. [Interruption.] Of course.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for giving way. We’re coming to the end of the Minister’s contribution. I would be grateful if you could confirm for the electorate next year that the mandate that will be given to elected members will be a full five-year mandate and there is, in your view, no need to curtail that mandate—so that people know who they’re voting for when they go to the polls next May.

Llywydd, I’m very alert to the corrosive effect that uncertainty produces for those who work in local authorities and those who put themselves forward for election. I will publish a written statement tomorrow. I wanted to wait until I’d heard what people had said today before finalising that statement, but I’m happy to confirm, in direct answer to Andrew Davies’s question, that that written statement will say that elections will go ahead for local councils in Wales in May of next year and that those elected can expect to serve a full five-year term.

Llywydd, there are details in the motion before the Assembly this afternoon that the Government might have phrased differently. There are, for example, better explanations for the genuinely concerning low participation rates in local authorities than describing voters as apathetic. One of the things that I look forward to most in my new responsibilities will be to use the powers, which we hope will be devolved to the National Assembly through the Wales Bill, to put before you a genuinely radical set of proposals for the reform of the way in which elections are conducted in Wales—moving from the nineteenth to the twenty-first century and re-energising democratic engagement as we do so. But, in the broader spirit of wishing to create consensus, to participate in dialogue, and to pursue a way forward that is both positive and constructive, the Government side will support this motion this afternoon.

I call on Mark Isherwood to reply to the debate.

Thanks, everybody, for your contributions, and I very much welcome the Minister’s closing comments.

Janet Finch-Saunders began by reminding us that the Williams commission’s recommendations to take public service delivery forward have largely been ignored, there has been little progress on the integration of health and social care, that roughshod has been ridden over our community councillors and local government officers, that early adopters of voluntary mergers have been rejected, and that with low voter turnout at local government elections and town and community council seats uncontested, it’s time to re-engage with the electorate, Welsh Local Government Association and local authorities in order to regenerate local government. She also pointed out the Welsh Government’s failure to implement powers under the UK Localism Act 2011, which could have empowered communities in Wales as they have in England and Scotland.

Sian Gwenllian put the case for a single transferrable vote in local government elections. Andrew R.T. Davies reminded us that lines on the map mean little to communities and we must engage instead of dictating what will happen. Mike Hedges told us that sports facilities are good for health. Thanks for that, Mike. Of course, the auditor general has recommended, in his report on leisure services, that councils do things differently. He says that councils have no ideal size and big is not always better. It is a shame that colleagues in the last Welsh Government failed to recognise that.

Suzy Davies talked about reform needing to be about a balance between Government, local authorities and citizens, recognising that local authorities can’t do it all and the potential of co-production. She said, ‘Whatever happened to people?’, that Labour put state centralisation before mutuality in public service delivery as the best option and that Robert Owen would be ashamed. Mohammad Asghar talked about the need to shift power to the people, giving communities a right to challenge and deliver high-quality services of good value.

Gareth Bennett talked about a need not to take services systematically away from the people they’re supposed to serve and the need to support bottom-up reorganisation. Jenny Rathbone talked about the need for fundamental reform of how we provide services in Wales and the need for that to be delivered now; Rhianon Passmore, the need for a co-productive approach; and the Cabinet Secretary, the need to celebrate local government success—of course, we must—but that real challenges remain, and his intention to spend his early weeks in his new role talking, listening, learning and seeking consensus.

At the final stage of the draft Local Government (Wales) Bill evidence sessions of the previous Communities, Equality and Local Government Committee, the leader of Gwynedd—one of the people representing the WLGA—told us, rightly, that surely the questions to ask are: what do we want to achieve through public services; what do we want to achieve through our local authorities; and then, which structure is required? There is a tendency for the horse and cart to be in the wrong order in this discussion. As the Williams commission report, which we heard referred to, on public service governance and delivery said:

‘the only viable way to meet the needs and aspirations of people is to shift the emphasis of public service towards co-production and prevention.’

As the newly established co-production network for Wales, which the Welsh Government must engage with, has said: this is about the total transformation of public services, delivering them in equal and reciprocal relationships between professionals, people using services, their families and their neighbours, enabling both services and neighbourhoods to become far more effective agents of change. After all, as Marcel Proust suggested,

‘The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.’

Let us hope that the Welsh Government and all parties will have new eyes on this matter.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? I will defer voting on this item until voting time.

The next item therefore is the debate in the name of UKIP on the European Union. Before we start this debate, I’d like to remind Members of what I said last week regarding behaviour in the Chamber ahead of last week’s debate on the European Union. I very much hope that we will have a debate in the same spirit as we had last week. I call on Neil Hamilton to move the motion.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Lywydd. I think, to begin with, it would be fair to acknowledge that this referendum would not be taking place at all but for my party, and my party would not exist but for the upswell of feeling against the European Union, which has existed for quite some time.

When we joined the European Community, as it then was, in 1973, anybody would think, from what we’ve heard in the course of this campaign, that Britain was an isolationist country. In fact, we were already a member of an international organisation—the European Free Trade Association. The way that the EEC was sold to the British people all those years ago was merely as a kind of extension of the free trade area. But, of course, as we now know, and as anybody who had done any research about what we now call the European Union at that time would have known, it was always a political project to create a kind of united states of Europe. The British people never wanted political union. Indeed, Edward Heath, as Prime Minister, in 1973 made the astonishing claim that it involved no surrender of essential sovereignty. Well, the EU is a 1940s answer to a 1930s problem. Of course, nobody wants war again in Europe, but nobody can credibly, I think, advance the proposition that a resurgent Germany would have territorial designs upon its neighbours. So, the problem that the EU was created to resolve is totally irrelevant in the twenty-first century.

When we joined all those years ago, nobody expected that, at this date, we would have 28 countries in the EU, 19 of them in a single currency. Nobody would have believed that 500 million people would now have the right, automatically, to come to this country to live and to work. And nobody would have believed also, I think, that the EU would be able to tell us what sort of vacuum cleaners we would be allowed to buy in this country, nor that the Prime Minister of this country would have to spend days and days locked up in darkened rooms, asking the EU’s permission to change the rules on who is entitled to British welfare benefits.

So, the European Union that we’re in now is very different from the one that the British people expected to belong to as a result of joining all those years ago. Of course, in the 1970s, the United Kingdom was an economic basket case, and Europe had done much better economically in the post-war period. Now, the truth is the opposite. It’s the EU that is the economic basket case and Britain is, at least relatively speaking, resurgent. Since the beginning of this century, there has been almost no economic growth in the European Union. In the 30-odd years since 1980, the proportion of world trade accounted for by the EU has plummeted. It stood at 30 per cent in 1980. It’s now 15 per cent and rapidly going down. Unemployment throughout Europe is a scandal: 49 per cent youth unemployment in Greece, 45 per cent in Spain, 39 per cent in Italy, 30 per cent in Portugal and 25 per cent in France because of the eurozone. This is part of the utopian political project that was embarked upon all those years ago, and despite the devastation that it has caused to countries that have basically become less and less competitive with Germany, they still push on regardless of the cost in human suffering. Germany now has an endemic trade surplus in the EU, and all those other countries have an endemic trade deficit. The problem can only get worse, not better.

Now, what this referendum is about is democracy, not nationalism. And the problem is that the EU is unresponsive to popular opinion. We have one European commissioner; I think that a very small number of people could actually name him if you asked people in the street. We have 8 per cent of the votes in the Council of Ministers, and we elect 73 out of 751 Members of the European Parliament. There is no European demos; therefore, Europe can never be a democracy.

We have seen, in the course of the last few weeks, project fear rampant in the country. The uncertainties of making the decision tomorrow to leave the EU have been up in headlines. Very few people have spoken about the possibility that there is no vote tomorrow for the status quo. Whatever happens tomorrow, there will be change, and we can’t predict what that change will be in the European Union. The five presidents’ report, published not so long ago—a few months ago—forecasts that for at least the 19 countries in the eurozone, they’re going to move to further integration and centralisation. We cannot be immune to the consequences of that because we will be one of the nine countries out of 28 who will be on the outside of that centralising force. And the idea that Britain is going to be exempt from those forces is, of course, moonshine.

We are told that there will be a leap in the dark if we vote for national independence tomorrow. It’s curious to reflect on the history of that remark, because, of course, it was what Lord Derby said of Disraeli’s 1867 reform Bill, which gave the vote to the industrial working classes. That was the leap in the dark then. And, of course, it would be a leap in the dark in one sense tomorrow if we restore democracy to this country for exactly the same reason. And for exactly the same reason as the 1867 reform Act was a success, leaving the EU will be a success for Britain tomorrow.

The worst case scenario is that by leaving the single market, we would have a hurdle of an average of 3 to 4 per cent tariffs to jump over. The consequence on the other hand would be that—.

Can I intervene, sorry? If you’re talking about car components—and there are a lot of car components made in Wales—then that figure is actually 9.8 per cent, which is almost 10 per cent. That would make a lot of car component factories in Wales uncompetitive, which would mean jobs would be lost and that means there’d be less tax, less money to pay for our NHS and less money to pay for our services in Wales. I think it’s unacceptable.

I’m completely confident that there will be no tariffs on motor car components because—. [Interruption.] Well, let me just give you the facts. We import from Germany 820,000 vehicles a year and we have a deficit in motor car trade with Germany amounting to £10 billion a year. I don’t think that Chancellor Merkel, going into an election in Germany next year, is going to advance the cause of a trade war with Britain as the best way for her party to win. [Interruption.] Matthias Wissmann, the president of Germany’s automotive industry association says:

‘Keeping Britain in the EU is more significant than keeping Greece in the euro.’

They’re interested in selling German cars to us just as much as we are interested in selling British cars to them. German engineering exports to Britain are £7 billion a year. Car exports are £18 billion a year. So, I don’t think that there is going to be any trade war between Britain and Germany. I give way.

I thank the gentleman for giving way, but can I just ask him: what does he know that the Ford Europe managing director and my local plant director do not know, when they’ve written to their employees to highlight the very risks that he says are not just inconsequential, but do not even exist? What does he know that Toyota in Britain doesn’t know? What does he know that Rolls-Royce doesn’t know?

What do the experts know?

Yes, we do like experts. The future is inherently unpredictable—I know that—but common sense tells us that Germany will not want a trade war with Britain when it would hurt them far more than it hurts us [Interruption.] The Treasury—. There’s a limit to how many times I can give way.

The Treasury’s Armageddon forecast of just a few weeks ago forecast the worst that George Osborne could throw at us, and, although they were purporting to forecast what the state of the economy would be like in 2030, it would be nice if they could forecast the state of the economy next week. He’s never met a single one of his forecasts for economic growth or the Government deficit in the five years or so that he’s been the Chancellor. But he has purported to know, as an expert, what’s going to happen in the year 2030, and what that report says is that, if we are inside the EU, we can expect to get a 37 per cent growth in disposable income in the next 15 years or so. Out of the EU, it would be a 29 per cent growth in income.

So, there’s going to be no collapse of the economy. Even on the worst-case Treasury forecast scenario, it would be a growth of 29 per cent rather than 37 per cent. But, I pay no attention to these guesstimates at all, because it’s garbage in and garbage out with the computer. It all depends on the assumptions that you use. So, so much for David Cameron’s forecast that this would trash the economy. Actually, what he has done, of course, is to trash the truth. And, as he described himself six years ago, as the heir to Blair, I think, out of the mouths of babes and sucklings.

What voting to leave the EU tomorrow will do is enable us to take back control of some of the most important policy decisions that affect this country, in particular, of course, control of our borders, because uncontrolled immigration, adding a city the size of Cardiff to the population of the UK each year, from population increases alone, has brought massive wage compression so that, for millions of people now, the minimum wage is the maximum wage. The Bank of England’s own research has shown that, for a 10 per cent increase in immigration, there’s a 2 per cent fall in the wages of semi-skilled and unskilled people.

Energy prices have been pushed up by crazy EU green energy schemes and green energy levies. We could probably halve the energy costs of Tata in Port Talbot if we had control of our own energy prices. We could take control of our own trade policy again. Like the United States, we could slap a 522 per cent levy on imports of cold-rolled steel from China, which are exported below cost on world markets, instead of the 24 per cent that the EU has proposed—

Will you take an intervention on steel?

I’m afraid I can’t take an intervention.

On steel.

He’s not taking an intervention. Carry on.

Again, we would be outside the whole state aid rules of the EU, which preclude us from giving help to industries such as the steel industry in Port Talbot.

We would be able to take control of our indirect taxes. The Labour Government, in 1997, was unable to abolish the VAT on domestic heating fuel, so we now have a 5 per cent charge on everybody’s heating bills, and that’s because the EU won’t allow us to have control of our own VAT. Similarly on tampons, that’s also been in the news recently, again, hasn’t it? So, there are so many different ways in which the necessities of life are taxed and we have no means of taking a decision to remove them.

As regards project fear, we have nothing to fear but fear itself, because this is an opportunity for Britain and an opportunity for Wales for the first time in 40 years, once again, to take charge of our own country. Project fear has concentrated in this Chamber upon structural funds to the Valleys and west Wales in particular; we heard that again this afternoon in questions. Well, over the course of the last six years, that amounted to about £3.5 billion. That’s £600 million a year on average. The net gain that would come to the British Treasury as a result of leaving the EU would be £10 billion—that would be three times that particular budget, in itself. We could do everything that is done at present by the EU, and a lot more, if only we restored our national independence. And, £3.5 billion in six years is a drop in the ocean by the £75 billion annual deficit that George Osborne has as a hole in the public accounts.

Similarly, on workers’ rights, you would think that we never had any workers’ rights in this country before we joined the EU, and yet the Equal Pay Act was introduced in 1970, the Employment Protection Act in 1975 and the Sex Discrimination Act in 1975 also.

So, what the other parties in this Chamber that are against Britain recovering its independence suffer from is a poverty of ambition. What we’re fighting here for is democracy in this country. In fact, because the Labour Party has concentrated on this workers’ rights issue, they must imply that there will never ever be a Labour Government in Britain again, and, with Jeremy Corbyn as a leader, who can blame them for thinking that? But the problem that they fail to identify is that it’s the British people, ultimately, who take these decisions, and, if a Government takes decisions of which they disapprove, under a democracy, you can get rid of them. In the EU, you can’t. If you don’t like the decisions of the European Commission, there is next to nothing that you can do to override them. So, it’s a pathetic lack of self-confidence and trust in the judgment of the people.

As for Plaid Cymru, it’s a most bizarre form of nationalism to want to send power not down further to the people, but further up and away from them. They’d rather be governed from Brussels than from Westminster, which is a most extraordinary and rather—[interruption.] Which is a rather extraordinary reflection for a nationalist party, because, if we left the EU, we could devolve the policies that they are responsible for from Brussels down here to Cardiff. We used to see graffiti daubed all over Wales when I was a boy—’Rhyddid i Gymru’—and their party, of course, doesn’t believe in freedom for Wales, because they believe that we should just be a region of the European Union.

Fundamentally, what both the Labour Party and Plaid Cymru believe is that the people of this country are not up to the job of running our own country for ourselves, and, tomorrow, the people of this country have the opportunity to make the decisive vote to restore our freedoms once again.

I’d like to try and address two of the main arguments of those who want us to walk away from the European Union. Now, whenever the benefits of membership are stressed, those people who want to abandon our European partners say, time and again, ‘This is not EU money, it’s our money we’re getting back’, and we’ve heard it again this afternoon. Of course, the UK makes a contribution to the EU; so we should. Those of us who believe in the EU, we believe in solidarity. We believe that the weakest part of Europe should be helped by the strongest parts, and Wales benefits from that. Of course, every club has a membership fee, and, in return for that, we get benefits, not least tariff-free access to the single market. If we withdraw from Europe, we’ll still have costs. We’d still have to pay for access to this market, albeit without any ability to influence its rules.

But the amount of money that we hand over to Brussels, to use the pejorative terms we’ve become inured to after 30 years of anti-European tabloid propaganda, and it’s chipped away—the amount of money is relatively small. The Treasury says we make a net contribution of £8.4 billion a year, which is less than 1 per cent of all Government spending. So, let’s put this in proportion. That’s the size of our contribution. That’s the size of the amount of money we hand over to Brussels: 1 per cent of all Government spending in the UK, enough to fund the NHS across the UK for 19 days a year.

Now, we’ve had, I think, a thoroughly dishonest and unpleasant referendum campaign, capped by the disgraceful and disgusting dog-whistle images of Nigel Farage standing in front of posters of refugees, appealing to the most base elements of people’s desperation, which has been brought on by austerity politics. I think that UKIP should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for the low level of politics they’ve brought into this campaign.

By listening to the people on the doorstep? Thank you.

Well, the people on the doorstep, David Rowlands, have genuine grievances—genuine grievances—and your gutter politics do nothing to bring solutions to the everyday problems—[Interruption.] If you want to make an intervention, stand up, but gabbling away like a goldfish doesn’t do anybody any good. People on the doorstep are genuinely fearful, and you are playing into the worst base elements, with none of the—

Respect the people on the doorstep, please.

Well, that wasn’t really worth waiting for, was it? [Laughter.] I do listen to the people on the doorstep. I have long, painful discussions with people on the doorstep explaining to them that the problems we face—and in constituencies like Llanelli, we face them in spades—of left-behind areas, because of the economic model we have in this country, none of that is going to be helped by pulling out of the EU.

Neil Hamilton has talked about car manufacturing this afternoon. In Llanelli we have a successful car-manufacturing plant, owned by a foreign company. We have a sister plant in another part of the EU. Are we honestly saying that, if we pull out, the medium- and long-term capital investment decisions to be made by the headquarters of that plant are going to favour a plant outside of the trading bloc with tariffs or inside of the trading bloc without tariffs? People don’t buy that. It’s dishonest politics that you’re sending. So, let’s be clear that the—

Will the Member give way?

Yes, indeed.

If the company he’s speaking to is Ford, is he not aware that Ford had a plant in this country—at least in the UK, which was in Southampton—that went instead, that closed down in Southampton and moved, to Turkey, paid for with European Union money, paid with our own taxpayers?

I appreciate he’s new to these parts, but Ford does not have a plant in Llanelli, and the forces you describe are global forces—global forces we are better equipped to deal with by being part of a strong trading bloc.

So, the disingenuous pledges of the ‘leave’ campaign of what they’d do with a supposed mountain of money are not worth the paper they are written on.

So, it brings me to the second of the arguments we’ve heard here from the right, and that’s not that the EU has secured peace in Europe over the last 70 years, but our membership of NATO. And, of course, the promise of American military protection has been crucial during the cold war, but peace is more than just the absence of war. Three generations of peace are built upon layers of confidence and understanding between peoples and crucially—crucially—the institutions to resolve differences. For my holiday reading I made my way through Christopher Clark’s mighty history of the run-up to the first world war, ‘The Sleepwalkers’. He points out that one of the reasons the economic turmoil of the eurozone crisis did not result in fighting, while the events of 1914 did, was the existence of powerful supranational institutions. I’m proud that, by being part of the EU, we have played a role in an alliance that has brought stability and prosperity to a continent with a history of instability. None of this is an accident. It’s the result of patient and painful integration: economic, democratic and, yes, bureaucratic. But give me directives over demagoguery any day.

I welcome the opportunity to take part in this debate. Tomorrow every citizen over the age of 18 from every part of the UK gets to decide whether we remain as part of the European Union or whether we become independent once more. This is democracy. People can decide and they can choose for themselves. It will be of little surprise to anyone that I believe that Wales is better off out. My colleagues will be making the economic arguments, the security arguments and the political arguments for why Wales would be better off outside the EU.

I want to focus my comments today on the health arguments for leaving. Under European law, Governments and citizens of other European Economic Area countries and Switzerland reimburse the UK for the cost of the NHS providing treatment to people they are responsible for, just as the UK reimburses other EEA countries and Switzerland for the cost of providing treatment to people we are responsible for. However, figures obtained by the Labour MP, John Mann, show a huge deficit to the UK. The UK paid out a staggering £674 million to European countries for their health costs last year, but we only received £49 million in return. We are subsidising the healthcare of other EU countries. [Interruption.] We are.

Would you give way on that very point?

No, Huw, because I’m trying to get through something. Is that all right?

However, is it right for people living outside of the UK who pay no tax and national insurance to just continue to benefit from our free healthcare service, or should we insist that those living outside the UK should have health insurance? And the biggest threat to our NHS comes from EU directives. In 2011 the EU introduced a healthcare directive that Labour MPs warned would lead to the demise of the publicly-funded national health service. Negotiations are continuing on the EU’s proposed trade and investment partnership or TTIP deal with the USA, which could have a serious impact on the NHS and lead to the privatisation of our national health service.

‘The British Medical Journal’ recently warned that the risk to the NHS would be that it could never afford to return a service in-house once it was contracted out, and top QCs have warned that TTIP poses a real and serious risk to future UK Government decision making in respect of the NHS. This means, if we do remain in the EU, it will become harder and harder to keep the NHS in public hands. And Labour politicians from all levels and the trade unions have all attacked TTIP, yet those same politicians are arguing for us to remain as part of the EU.

The EU is incapable of reform. Faced with the possibility of Brexit, they couldn’t even agree the meagre changes sought by our timid Prime Minister. The EU dances to the tune of the big corporations and big money. This is clearly evident from the TTIP negotiations and the introduction of many laws that undermine the NHS. EU officials have imposed extensive expensive restrictions on the development of cancer drugs, with the clinical trials directive creating serious problems, delaying the testing of lifesaving drugs.

The European court will increasingly use the charter of fundamental rights to take more control of public health if we vote to stay. Remaining a member of the European Union is a clear and present danger to the very existence of our NHS. I say: don’t allow Brussels to take control of our NHS, don’t allow them to threaten patient safety, but, above all, don’t allow them to subject our NHS to the greed of the big US corporations, and secure the future of our NHS by voting ‘leave’ tomorrow. Diolch yn fawr.

A very long referendum campaign is, thankfully, due to come to an end, and I’m sure many will agree that the tone, the nature and the content of this campaign has not been a particularly good advertisement for democratic engagement. As the campaign enters its final hours, it appears that the ‘leave’ side in particular wish to focus on two primary areas, those of immigration and sovereignty. Sadly, on both issues, the ‘leave’ side have tried their best in not allowing the facts to get in the way of a good story. The facts on the issue of immigration have been well versed, and I do not wish to spend too much time repeating them this afternoon, save to say that I am of the firm belief that migration has made Wales richer in both a cultural and economic sense. There will always be a challenge in open, democratic societies in striking a balance between multiculturalism and integration, but the terms of such debate and discussion are only ever helpful when they’re conducted in a spirit of tolerance, rather than seeking to play up fears of the other. Perhaps one day such a context will exist.

I’d like to specifically address the question of sovereignty, which is often intentionally conflated with the principle of democracy by many Brexiteers. In listening carefully to those making the case for the reassertion of state sovereignty, one could be forgiven for thinking that we’re in the company of Thomas Cromwell, back all those centuries ago. Back then, there were arguments over whether Parliament’s sovereignty superseded holy scripture; now, it is parliamentary sovereignty versus EU regulation.

There was never a glorious time of absolute parliamentary sovereignty, even during those days of empire. In the twentieth century, following the devastation of war, international treaties creating fundamental rights for individuals and global conventions outlawing genocide were accepted as being universal and beyond the so-called sovereignty of any nation or any state. And, on this continent, blood soaked for much of the last century, nations decided to come together in a spirit of peace and solidarity. And, on this point, I want to emphasise that I find the suggestion that a UK withdrawal from the EU would lead to war to be crass and distasteful, but let no-one ever underestimate the fact that the European Union has laid the infrastructure for peace that makes war between its members impossible.

From a Welsh perspective, of course, we’re able to compare and contrast two very different unions of which we are members. The UK is based on the principle that the Westminster Parliament is supreme. We need no written constitution here to know that to be, indeed, the political reality. Here we have an unequal, uneven union built to endure, not to thrive. The EU, for all of its faults and its imperfections, and the challenges that it faces, has principles of subsidiarity and consensus built into its very anatomy. For those of us who love Wales, we must consider where power will lie in the event of a UK withdrawal from the European Union tomorrow. A ‘leave’ vote will amount to a transfer of functions from the European partnership to the hands of Whitehall, who will be free to do as they please to Welsh communities. A vote to leave means Europe leaving Wales behind in the shadows of the Palace of Westminster, occupied by an establishment drunk on a new self-confidence.

Will you give way?

I will not give way.

‘Remain’ results in our nation having the best possible chance of a national future of its own within a proper family of nations. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

It’s been a long campaign, and perhaps in many ways we’ll all be glad to see the back of it, whatever the outcome.

You can’t chew gum when you’re speaking to the National Assembly.

Okay. Apologies for that.

Carry on with your contribution.

Sorry, I wasn’t aware—

Disregard anything that was said to you from another place. Just carry on with your contribution.

Thank you, Llywydd. There was no disrespect intended.

I’m tempted to ask: where do you start on the EU? We’ve been bombarded with so many facts and figures from both sides, most of them of course conflicting with each other. There are so many aspects of this question to consider. Some of them we have already covered. It’s impossible to cover all of it in one speech, so I will confine myself to the issue that Labour Members frequently raise, of workers’ rights, which they are completely correct to do. But I have to point out that, in my opinion, there is no divinely ordained level of workers’ rights. We had workers’ rights legislation in the UK before we joined the EU, and we will still have it once we have left. The question is: what level of workers’ rights? [Interruption.] That is indeed the question, but the point is this: that it is a matter for an elected UK Government to decide on that, not an unelected bunch of EU bureaucrats.

If the electorate of the UK disagrees with the employment policies of an elected UK Government, they can always vote out the Government at the next election. That is what is known as democracy, and that is what we’ve had in this country for a long time, which is now being impeded by the EU. Of course, Labour Members have every chance to convince the UK electorate of the need for more a left-wing programme now that they have such a capable leader in Jeremy Corbyn. My own view on workers’ rights is that there are actually two versions. There is the version peddled by the Labour Members, which depends on regulations emanating from governments, and there is the version in the real world, which depends on the supply and demand of labour in the employment market. In this real-world scenario, wages and working conditions improve as demand for workers in an industry increases. Without a ready supply of alternative labour, bosses are forced to properly pay their workers, treat them reasonably well and even invest in their training. But, since 1975, when we last voted in a European referendum, more than 200 million workers have entered the EU labour market. [Interruption.] No. The inevitable effect has been to depress wages and worsen working conditions for British workers. More and more foreigners arrive and are used by big business as cheap labour. That is one important factor in why wages at the bottom end lag, and why we have the so-called ‘Amazon culture’. This reality is a nightmare for British workers.

Now, Labour has made great play about the people supporting the ‘leave’ campaign. Well, perhaps it is a motley crew of characters, but then it is inevitable in such a referendum that you do have strange bedfellows occurring. You remainers are in bed with David Cameron and George Osborne, the architects of austerity, as you keep reminding us. You are also in bed with Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, the International Monetary Fund—need I go on? On the leave side are not just Ukippers and Conservatives—[Interruption.]

Allow the Member to carry on, please.

Thank you, Llywydd. On the leave side are not just Ukippers and Conservatives. We also have Labour people like Frank Field, Gisela Stuart, John Mann and Dennis Skinner. Not enough has been made of the fact that David Owen, one of the most enthusiastic of Europhiles until recently, is now a convinced Brexiteer. Ultimately, you have to decide if you want to side with the workers or the bosses.

Here, to conclude, are two short interviews from ‘The Sunday Times’ a couple of years ago, which, taken together, I think illustrate the point fairly well. [Interruption.] Yes, well it has to be selective—there is a lot of material to draw on. Do you mind? What an asinine point.

Carry on. Carry on. Carry on.

First, a piece quoting Darren Hunt—

We’re looking forward to hearing the two interviews. Carry on.

Thank you. First, the piece quoting Darren Hunt, the boss of a construction company in Scunthorpe. These were his words: ‘It is proving very difficult to get British people in. It seems that people are no longer interested in earning their wages by the sweat of their brow. It is disappointing that we are having to go to Europe to get workers, but we have no option. The good thing about the eastern Europeans is that they have an old-fashioned approach and they’re not afraid of hard work. They don’t mind working long hours at weekends and they’re willing to get stuck in.’

So, that is the view of business. Here, to contrast with that, are the words of Eddie Sullivan, a 33-year-old trained chef: ‘I have worked from the day I was 16, but now it’s almost impossible to find a decent job here. My last job was part time in an electrical shop on a retail park. I was paid less than £60 gross for 10 hours a week. What jobs there are seem to go to immigrants. Locals don’t get a look in. Employers know that the foreigners will accept any job and never complain or question the pay, conditions’—[Interruption.]—No, sit down—

No. the Member is bringing his remarks to an end now.

[Continues.]—’and never complain or question the pay, conditions or hours.’

So, there you have it. Whose side are you on, you saviours of the working class? Are you on the side of the workers or the bosses? Thank you.

Tomorrow’s vote is the most important decision to be taken by Britain for a generation. It will set in stone the direction for our country, not just for this generation but for our children’s generation too. It is vitally important that everyone casting their vote takes this long view. This decision is not about the here and now, but it will shape the next 30 to 40 years of Britain’s future. This decision should not be a popularity contest between today’s politicians. It’s not Boris or Dave that matter, it’s our children and grandchildren. That is why everyone must think about that when they vote tomorrow.

This is why I want to address my remarks to my constituents in Torfaen in particular and to the people of Wales as a whole. In Torfaen, I want you to think hard about the prospects for your children and grandchildren. I’d like you to remember that, very often, in the last few years, it has been Brussels that has stood by us and our kids when Westminster turned its back and walked away. Please think about employment projects like Bridges into Work, which has seen £5.4 million of EU funds, providing opportunities and training for young people in Torfaen, or the EU funds helping to deliver accredited employment support locally, such as in the Cwmbran centre for young people.

If the vote is to leave the EU tomorrow, what will happen to this kind of sustained commitment to jobs, skills and regeneration? Do we want to rely on Farage, Gove or Boris Johnson? These are the people who turned their backs on us, gave us the bedroom tax and will slash investment as a matter of ideology. I know that many are worried about the pace of change in our communities, but voting to leave the EU will not address these worries. These arguments from the ‘leave’ campaign on immigration are nothing but snake oil.

If local workers are being undercut then the answer is a decent living wage—properly enforced and properly policed. If there is a shortage of skills, the answer is investment in training. When the housing situation is difficult, the answer is decent, affordable homes for everyone. The Valleys are not full—we’ve been bleeding people—our population has declined for generations. That has to stop if our communities are going to survive. We cannot steer our way through the problems we face by turning our back on the world and wishing it away. Change must come, but we may best shape that change if we retain a seat at the European table.

To the voters of Wales as a whole, I ask: what kind of Wales will you vote for tomorrow? Will it be one that embraces the £150 million on offer from Europe for the Valleys metro, or one that squanders that transformational investment? Will it be a Wales that utilises the £90 million on offer from Europe to complete the work on superfast broadband and take a connected Wales into the twenty-first century, or a Wales that remains firmly in the twentieth?

Will you take the long view for the sake of your children and grandchildren? Do you want them to feel committed to a free, democratic and stable Europe—free to travel, study and work within the biggest free economy on Earth, and benefit from the huge advantages that offers? Or, will you offer them uncertainty and a disconnected future? Will they inherit a Wales cut off from the biggest economy in the world, and will you gamble with their job prospects and prosperity? Tomorrow, remember why the EU was founded and why its future stability is crucial to the future our children and grandchildren will inherit. Remember that the EU is, first and foremost, about peace. UKIP will tell you that it has been NATO that has kept the peace in western Europe since 1945, and they deny the role of the EU. They are wrong. It is true that NATO has been indispensable in the military and political spheres, but the EU has been indispensable too, in the social, economic and cultural spheres. Military alliances matter, but they can’t deliver peace on their own. Europe in 1914 was awash with military alliances. Our children now live in a Europe where war between European democracies has become unthinkable, precisely because our EU has linked hands, not just militarily, but socially and economically too. That stability has given us 70 years of peace. Don’t deny our children and our grandchildren the best chance of another 70 years of the same.

If Britain votes to leave tomorrow, it will be a vote to cut off my constituency from desperately needed investment in jobs, skills and infrastructure, plunging us into economic uncertainty and making us poor. If Britain votes to leave tomorrow, then we destabilise the EU itself, and the world becomes a little more dangerous—maybe not immediately and maybe not for us, but for our children and grandchildren certainly. So, I call on everyone to take the long view. When you stand in that polling booth, even though the ballot is secret, you will not be alone. The futures of your children and your grandchildren will be standing right next to you. Don’t gamble with that future. Keep it safe.

Much has been made, particularly in this Chamber, of the benefits to Wales of so-called European money. We’ve heard a Member say today that the £10 billion we give to Europe is absolutely inconsequential. But, when a part of that comes back to Wales, they represent it as absolutely crucial to the economy of Wales. So, one thing doesn’t tie up with the other. So, can I seek to enlighten those who appear to be devoid of the ability to comprehend the very simple fact that there is no such thing as European money? The money Wales receives from Brussels, as with the rest of the UK, is British money coming back to us after Brussels has taken more than 50 per cent to subsidise projects across the whole of the European mainland. It therefore follows, to even the most fiscally inept, that if we retained the whole of this money within the UK, we would all benefit from the retention of that 50 per cent currently spent by Brussels Eurocrats. The lording of this European money is often followed by the spurious argument that, if we were to leave the UK, the British Parliament would not give Wales its fair share of the £50 bonus. [Interruption.] I call this a spurious argument because those who promulgate it must be suggesting that the 40 MPs who represent Wales in Westminster—most of whom are, of course, Labour MPs—are impotent in ensuring that Wales does not indeed get a fair share of this money. Further, are they suggesting that the four MEPs that we have in the European Parliament are a far more effective force than the 40 we send to Westminster?

Last, but by no means least—[Interruption.] I’m sorry, no. Last, but by no means least, let’s put this European money into its true perspective. Westminster’s willingness to invest in Wales is evidenced by the fact that Wales receives around £14.7 billion more from the UK Government than it pays in taxes. That’s every single year. This, of course, dwarfs the total amount of money Wales has received from Europe over the whole of the last 16 years. It follows that in any unbiased accurate analysis of facts, devoid of party politics, Wales would be better off out of this European superstate.

Can I finish by saying that in this matter of the European superstate, I find it incomprehensible that the two so-called socialist parties in this Chamber find themselves supporting big banks, big business, and a political elite against the interests of the working classes of Wales?

I think it is important to concentrate on facts and not project fear. We should be focusing on project—[Interruption.]

What about your project fear—world war three?

We should be—[Interruption.]

That’s not project fear?

I’ll take an intervention; it would be entertaining, no doubt. [Interruption.]

Carry on.

I’ll decide if the Member carries on, not you.

Sorry, Llywydd.

Carry on, Adam Price.

By the way, I have no objection to Members chewing gum—it works for Chris Coleman; maybe we should all start.

Look, I figure we should concentrate on the Welsh national interest, and particularly in terms of the economy, I have to say that I think many of us are right to be afraid. Because, you know, it’s a fact, isn’t it—the sectoral composition of the Welsh economy is different? We have a much bigger manufacturing sector, agriculture is more important to us, and that leads to a different pattern of trade. We’re one of the only parts of the UK that has a substantial trade surplus with the EU. As we’ve heard from the leader of UKIP, the UK has a massive trade deficit; not true for Wales. Wales per capita has the biggest trade surplus with the EU, and as a result of that it makes a critical positive contribution to the whole of our GDP. I mean, brush down your memories of your economics A-level; you know, Y = C + I + G + (X − M). Net exports: in Wales, we have a surplus, which is equivalent to about 10 per cent of our entire GDP in terms of trade in goods. We’re an export-sensitive economy. If that trade surplus goes down, it has a direct effect on our economic wealth and our prosperity. We’ve seen that already, actually, in 2014. We had a little glimpse of that; exports went down by 11 per cent. What happened? We had—. I won’t take any more interventions from you. What happened? What happened as a result of that? Our GVA growth went down in Wales, right, because there’s a direct relationship between our surplus in trade and our economy as a whole.

Now, nobody can know for certain what will happen to our economy as a result of Brexit. Four different scenarios have been offered by ‘leave’; we don’t know which one it’s going to be. Therein lies the rub. Uncertainty is toxic for business, for investment, particularly for manufacturing where the lead times necessary for investment projects are three to seven years. That’s the key. It’s not the issue of the terms of trade—you know, whether we’ll have to accept tariffs or whether there’ll be a compensating fall in terms of the exchange rate; it’s the uncertainty that will kill the Welsh economy as a result of this Brexit. There haven’t been many experiments when nations have walked away from a successful trading relationship, and there are good reasons why. Why would you? The only example that economists can find is what happened to the Finnish economy when it lost overnight as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union half of its exports to the Soviet Union—a 55 per cent collapse in investment as a result of that—actually, the deepest worst economic contraction to an industrialised country since the 1930s. That’s what could be facing Wales. That’s the economic argument; there are other arguments as well, which are closer to our sense of who we are.

When we sing ‘Hen Wlad fy Nhadau’ in Wales, we sing it as Welsh Europeans. You know, the Celts were the fathers of Europe. We came in, by the way, through Asia Minor, which is now known as Turkey. We created, yes, some of the glories of European civilisation along the way in our march west in La Tène and Hallstatt. Wales itself is a fusion of that Celtic inheritance and Roman civilisation. When we sing that other song, ‘Yma o Hyd’, we mean Europe too, because it contains within it that great creation myth of the Welsh nation that we were founded by Magnus Maximus—Macsen Wledig—a Roman legionary born in Galicia. That red dragon flag that we all waved earlier is a Roman military standard—’draco cocus’, in vulgar Latin that you, Neil Hamilton, and I learnt in Amman Valley—y ddraig goch. And that’s just two of the thousand words of Latin that there are in the Welsh language. We’re not just the original Britons of these islands, we’re the original Europeans too. You’re not just trying to cut us off from a continent, you’re cutting us off from our own history in an act of collective suicide.

If Brexit does happen against our own will, then maybe we can remind ourselves of the words of Raymond Williams:

‘I want the Welsh people—still a radical and cultured people—to defeat, override or bypass…England.’

If England does want to go off into some splendid isolation, then maybe we need a new campaign, ‘rejoin’, but this time as our own nation in Europe.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government—Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd. Well, there’s a motion before the National Assembly this afternoon that sets out three tests for a decision to take Wales out of the European Union, and, as has been undoubtedly demonstrated over the last hour, the motion fails on each one of those tests that they would have us accept. Wales would neither be stronger, safer and certainly not more prosperous if we were to leave the European Union, as this motion suggests.

Now, those of us who remember and were part of the campaign to establish this National Assembly will recall that, while we had no constitutional convention of the sort established in Scotland, we did have a very effective cross-party and cross-sectoral group that argued the case in the slogan that was used at the time—that a National Assembly would give Wales a stronger voice in Europe. And, thanks to the work of many Members here and many, many others across Wales, that proposition has been very directly delivered. Our language and our culture are stronger through our membership of the European Union. Our research base in science and in our universities is stronger because we are in the European Union. Our social protection for workers and consumers is stronger because of the safeguards guaranteed through the European Union.

Llywydd, Wales is safer too. The quality of our water is safer because of common action across the European Union. Food quality and security is safer because they are protected by European Union membership. Our membership of the European Union-wide networks on illegal drug use makes our citizens safer here in Wales. Our ability to deal with transnational crime and the modern scourge of terrorism, through the machinery of a European Union, makes us safer every single day. That’s the view of the most senior figures in the field—the head of MI5, the head of MI6, the head of the Government Communications Headquarters, five former NATO chiefs, the British head of Europol, and our allies in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States.

Now, Llywydd, I’m not much given to quoting Conservative politicians, but we’ve not heard much from them this afternoon. So, let me make up, in a very small way, for that deficit by repeating and adapting what Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader at the Scottish Parliament, said yesterday: when it comes to a choice between listening to all those people and listening to those who proposed this motion, I’m going to vote for the experts every single day of the week and twice on Sundays, too. And they do that, and they say that for those reasons that Lynne Neagle expressed so eloquently here this afternoon—because membership of the European Union makes the future safer for our children and our grandchildren too.

Will the Cabinet Secretary give way? I fear I must try to help him out as he’s made a reference to the Conservative group. I don’t speak for it; I speak only as an individual. But talking about the benefits of the European Union, the ‘leave’ side say we’ve given up essential sovereignty and it’s not worth the price, but if we’ve given up essential sovereignty, how on earth are we having a referendum tomorrow on membership?

Well, that’s an extremely good point that the Member makes. It plays into, I think, the third part of the proposition that we’re invited to sign up to this afternoon: that, somehow, we would be more prosperous if we were to leave the European Union; that we would be more prosperous without the 500 companies from other EU countries that have operations in Wales, providing more than 57,000 jobs; that we would be, somehow, more prosperous if the 70,000 people in Wales who have benefited from European Union funding helping them into work—if we didn’t have that available to us; and that, somehow, Welsh farming would be more prosperous without the €300 million of European funding that it has every year. The notion that Wales would be better off outside Europe is just a product of the voodoo economics that we’ve had outlined to us this afternoon. In its place, we’re offered a self-inflicted, do-it-yourself recession, an enormous act of economic folly, a retreat from the complex realities of the world we actually inhabit; and at best, a retreat to the sidelines and the sideshows of the real world, at worst, a retreat to the contemptible distortions of a poster that exploits the terror of children and the despair of their parents, caught up in events so far beyond their own responsibility or control.

So, Llywydd, there we have it: we want a Wales that is stronger, safer and more prosperous, and we know how to achieve it too. Wales benefits hugely from our membership of the European Union. Wales belongs in Europe, Wales needs to remain in Europe and, tomorrow, let’s vote to make sure that we do.

I call on Neil Hamilton to reply to the debate.

Unfortunately, I have only a minute to reply, so I can’t—I’ll be available afterwards to continue the discussion. But, I’m amazed at the other Members in this house who take a different view from me of the European Union. Their defeatism and their pessimism about the spirit and character of the Welsh people—that, somehow or other, they’re incapable of making their way in the world. As for the so-called experts that we’re supposed to rely on: are these the same experts who recommended that we joined the euro, the same experts who failed to predict the banking crisis and, in many cases, were responsible for it? Great people, aren’t they? I’m sure we’re all very happy to have their advice at this time.

Fundamentally, what this debate is about—it’s between democracy and bureaucracy. The people who are taking the decisions that affect our daily lives: are you going to elect them or not? If they take the wrong decisions, how do you get rid of them? That was the question that Tony Benn always used to ask when he met somebody with power: ‘Where did you get it from? How are you going to exercise it and if you make a mistake, how are we going to get rid of you?’ How do you get rid of the Commissioners in Brussels if they make a different set of decisions from the ones that they’re taking now that you actually happen to like? If you don’t like the decisions they’re taking then what you do? Then you’re stuck. With elected politicians, at least, you can, every so often, vote to get rid of them, and that’s what we’re going to do tomorrow: put the power back into the hands of the people.

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

It was agreed that voting time should be held after the final item of business. Unless three Members wish the bell to be rung I will move immediately to voting time.

I first of all call for a vote on the Plaid Cymru debate and the motion tabled in the name of Simon Thomas. If the proposal is not agreed we will vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 33, abstentions 4, against 11. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

We will therefore move to the Welsh Conservative motion, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies. If the motion is not agreed we will vote on the amendment tabled to the motion. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 37, 5 abstentions, 7 against. The motion is therefore agreed.

We will now move to the motion in the name of the United Kingdom Independence Party, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Neil Hamilton. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 10, against 38. The motion is therefore not agreed.

I now move to the short debate. For those of you who are not remaining for the short debate, please leave swiftly and quietly. I call on Julie Morgan to speak on the topic that she has chosen. Julie Morgan.

Thank you. Diolch, Presiding Officer. Just to say at the beginning of the debate, I’ve given a minute to Rhianon Passmore and a minute to Joyce Watson at the end of my speech. The title of the debate that I chose was ‘Should I Stay or Should I Go? What factors have influenced public opinion over the EU referendum campaign?’

Now, I tabled this debate before the terrible events on Thursday last week when the MP for Batley and Spen, Jo Cox, was tragically killed in her constituency. I think it is fitting that we look at the influences on public opinion in the run-up to the referendum tomorrow. Sadly, I think Jo’s death has had an influence on the debate over the weekend and on into this week. It was right and fitting that there was a lull in campaigning over the weekend, but now we’re back to it quite ferociously, as the previous debate has shown, but perhaps there is, UK-wide, a slightly different tone.

So, I hope, in the light of the type of person Jo was and what her husband, Brendan Cox, has said following her tragic death, that she would be happy and would want us to carry on with the debate on the EU referendum and the fight to remain in the EU because she was, as her husband said, a passionate supporter of the EU and was campaigning for a ‘remain’ vote. So, Presiding Officer, I want to say a bit about Jo, personally, and then link her beliefs to the vote that we will be having tomorrow.

Today would have been Jo’s forty-second birthday, and events are taking place all over the world to remember her. There were events in New York, Brussels, Buenos Aires, Dublin, London, and there will even be a tribute at the Glastonbury Festival. There’s also a candlelit vigil at a woman’s charity in Syria because Jo was a great supporter of women’s rights. I’m very pleased that we had the cross-party event of women Assembly Members on the steps of the Senedd yesterday, highlighting what the EU has done for women because, as I say, Jo believed that the EU was delivering for women. And an event is taking place just up the road now—or has already taken place—in the Temple of Peace and Health here in Cardiff, at the Welsh Centre for International Affairs, with the theme of ‘What can we do?’

I didn’t know Jo Cox, but I feel like I do, and as one of my colleagues said recently, I wish I had known her. I identify with her as a woman politician and as a mother, and I can especially imagine the excitement she must have felt arriving in Westminster just over a year ago, after the general election in 2015. I can remember that feeling, when I was elected in 1997 for the first time as a Member of Parliament. I think we all felt it, just six weeks ago, when we all had the thrill of being elected and came to this Chamber with our plans to change the world. The poignancy of what has happened to all those hopes and to her individually, I think, strikes me so strongly, but the things she believed in, I think, are what we must carry on with.

I must say, I was particularly struck, listening to the present women MPs talking about being in the House of Commons with Jo and how they all used to talk about their worries, about how they balance their family life, looking after their children and doing politics, and the maternal guilt that this produces, which many of us have had. The discussion in the House of Commons, in that sort of way, strikes a chord with many of us. What has emerged from the coverage of Jo’s life is how she loved her family so much, but she loved her politics as well, and they didn’t conflict. She was a passionate campaigner, and she was full of compassion. She campaigned for human rights, international development, the plight of refugees, the plight of people who are dispossessed, and her background was working in campaigning non-governmental organisations, like Oxfam. Of course, we’ve already heard a lot about her ability to work on a cross-party basis, and the Conservative MP Andrew Mitchell said that Jo was

‘a truly exceptional woman, whose goodness and passionate dedication to humanitarian values has inspired us all.’

Jo’s husband Brendan has said that, before she died, she was becoming increasingly concerned about the tone of the debate in the EU referendum campaign, and I think those feelings have been reflected here this afternoon in the debate we’ve already had. Four days before she was killed, Jo Cox wrote an article warning against the spin around immigration in the EU debate. She wrote

‘We cannot allow voters to fall for the spin that a vote to leave is the only way to deal with concerns about immigration.’

Following her death, in his Commons tribute to her, Stephen Kinnock warned that ‘rhetoric has consequences’, and I think that is very important for us to remember. We must be very careful when we talk about sensitive issues like immigration, because rhetoric does have consequences. He referred to the poster that the Cabinet Secretary referred to earlier on today and said that Jo Cox would have been disgusted had she lived to see the UKIP poster, which depicted a crowd of refugees fleeing from the Syrian civil war as a way of boosting support for Brexit, and:

‘I can only imagine Jo’s reaction had she seen the poster that was unveiled hours before her death—a poster on the streets of Britain that demonised hundreds of desperate refugees, including hungry, terrified children, fleeing from the terror of ISIS and from Russian bombs. She would have responded with outrage, and with a robust rejection of the calculated narrative of cynicism, division and despair that it represents’.

And I do believe that that is the tone that this referendum has encouraged, because immigration has been a running theme throughout the referendum campaign. It’s been hugely reported in the newspapers, online and in the broadcast media. I’m sure many of you will have seen the debate last night and, as Sadiq Khan said in the referendum debate last night, to the ‘Out’ campaign, with regard to immigration,

‘Your campaign hasn’t been project fear, it’s been project hate’.

I’ve been out campaigning in my own constituency in Cardiff North, and when I speak to people, I think there’s absolutely no doubt that the tone of the debate has influenced, and is influencing, people’s view on immigration. And I think it’s really important that, when we talk about immigration, when we talk about immigrants and migrants, we should think about the effect that this is having on people who are immigrants, who are migrants, who are living in this country. What do they think about this debate? What is their reaction? There’s absolutely no doubt that this is having an effect on people in that situation. They feel they’re not wanted here. People have come and told me here that they feel they’re second-class citizens, and I think it’s absolutely outrageous that human beings in our country should be made to feel like this. I think it is possible to have a debate about immigration, a proper, balanced debate, but not in the tones that this debate has been framed. I think it has been insidious, and I think it has influenced people when they are considering how they’re going to vote.

Also, it’s very important that we have a debate that is based on facts, and we know that the figures that are given, and the tone of the debate, are just grossly exaggerated. According to figures from Cardiff University School of Social Sciences, the percentage of non-UK-born nationals in Wales is just 5.8 per cent, and the percentage of migrants of working age in Wales is 8 per cent of the population. That includes asylum seekers, refugees, 25,000 international students—and we know how much we want to encourage international students here—and, of course, migrants engaged in both high- and low-skilled work. We know that migrant workers are likely to be younger, they’re more likely to be better educated, and they’re more likely to be employed than the UK-born population. I think those figures show the huge contribution that migrants are making to Wales and to the UK.

Thousands of migrants are working in the NHS. Thousands of migrants are working in the care industry. What if they all decide to go home because they’re so fed up of the way they’re being treated in this country, that they’re being treated like second-class citizens? Of course, across the UK, EU immigrants make up 10 per cent of registered doctors, and we know how difficult it is to get doctors. What is going to happen if they decide they want to go home? Also, why should migrants living here get the blame for any deficiencies there are in housing or hospitals or schools? Because that’s what people have taken from this insidious propaganda—they say, ‘They’re taking our houses; they’re taking our places in schools.’ We have seen a prolonged period of austerity from the Tory Government at Westminster, which has made even more cuts to local authority services inevitable, but it is not the fault of the migrants if there aren’t enough council houses to go round, or if a local library closes. That is in the hands of the Government—our Governments here in the UK.

The other arguments that have actually been aired very robustly here this afternoon are about sovereignty—the idea that we should take back control of our borders, when we already know that we’re not part of the Schengen agreement, so we do have control of our borders—and also the idea that unelected officials in the EU are making policy here in the UK, which is completely false, because nothing can go through unless it’s agreed by the Council of Ministers, who are elected. It is very rich that a country that still has a House of Lords thinks that the European Union is bureaucratic and non-elected, because, really, I think most other countries thinks that it’s absolutely extraordinary that we have a House of Lords here.

So, in terms of work and the idea that immigrants are taking people’s jobs, this again is another myth that has been perpetuated. There are more people in work in Wales now than at any other time, and there are more people born in the UK who are working now than ever. That is true of Wales and the UK. Migrants are part of the economic success. So, this idea that migrants and immigrants are taking jobs is nonsense, and I just hope that, when people vote tomorrow, they will take into account these important facts and will not be influenced by the insidious spin that has been put on all these facts, because there’s no doubt that there is a divide in the country—a divide in how people are going to vote. Whatever the result, we’re going, I think, to have a job in trying to restore community cohesion. But I do hope that people, as they vote, will think of their children and their grandchildren, as has been said this afternoon in the debate, and the hopes and opportunities for their children and grandchildren, but also think about the huge contribution—the economic contribution, the cultural contribution—that every person who lives here in our country, in Wales, contributes. When we say things, let’s remember that.

Diolch, Lywydd. It is also with great sadness that I stand here today and speak to the influences of public opinion. The tragedy here is that this has been predictable in terms of the shift across the media in particular in terms of the tabloid newspapers that have, indeed, fuelled this insidious racism—let’s call it what it is. I feel very sad that, as a result of this type of misinformation, as a result of that the facts haven’t got through effectively in terms of immigration, that the expert opinion of every known economic body, almost, to man has been discounted in favour of an insidious race to the gutter in terms of the party opposite, who, quite frankly, haven’t even bothered to turn up to this short debate this evening or this afternoon—. I find it, personally, quite tragic that this has contributed to increasing division in our society, an increasing lack of cohesion in our society, and increasing racial hatred, which the data now are actually proving in terms of what’s coming through.

The sick pictures that have been referenced by many today are still out there; they’ve not been recalled as far as I know. I know that Unison is taking action with the metropolitan police in terms of incitement to racial hatred, but what I find very tragic is that this is actually normal and it’s been normalised. The tone of this debate has got to such an awful point that we’re actually here talking about pictures of refugees being used as political fodder, so that we can actually target opinion based around false facts around immigration and false argument around what this is all about.

You need to bring your words to a conclusion.

Okay, thank you. So, instead of pandering to these issues around immigration and ignoring the facts, all I would say, to finish my comments, is that, to honour the memory of Jo Leadbeater—Jo Cox—who was for equal treatment and humanitarian causes, aid for refugees and a fair media, we must choose to collaborate and work within the EU, not outside of it. To use her words, we are all far better working together than divided apart, and I think this is a fitting statement for us to consider and for Wales to consider when, tomorrow, we actually make that vote.

I thank Julie Morgan, first, for bringing this debate and, secondly, for giving me one minute, which I shall try and stick to. I, like all the colleagues here, present now, want to pay tribute to Jo Cox. We are all stunned by what happened, but we are also, I hope, inspired by what she left behind, and want to pick up what she believed in and what she, hopefully, has left behind as a marker, as a catalyst for change in political discourse, going forward.

There is no doubt that the political discourse hasn’t been very helpful in this referendum campaign, but there has been a change. The sadness is that it took somebody’s death for that change to happen. I believe—and I’m sure everybody else does here—that what we need to do, whatever the result tomorrow, is move forward in celebrating the diversity that the different cultures and individuals bring to our society. We must make a promise here, today, on what would’ve been Jo’s birthday, to never promote division and fear, but to unite together to move forward in hope and love.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford.

Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd. I’m very glad that I’ve had the chance to stay and hear this short debate. I thought Julie Morgan’s contribution was absolutely characteristically thoughtful about the issues and committed to finding answers for people who need them most of all.

She began by talking about the life of Jo Cox, and I don’t think there’s anything I could say that would add to the tributes that were paid yesterday, and again in the short debate, to her life. I thought what I would do is just to think, for a moment or two, about the causes that the money that has flooded in in the aftermath of her death—the causes to which that money is to be devoted. Because that money is a spontaneous way in which people, so touched by what happened and struggling to know what they could do to say anything about their own reaction to it—handing some money in is just one way that people feel they can do something practical, and there are three causes, as people will know, that her remarkable family have decided that that money should be devoted to.

The first is to help volunteers in combating loneliness in her constituency. Now we were urged earlier this afternoon to listen to what people say to us on the doorstep. And when we are puzzling, as we must, as to why so many people who in other ways would share many other things that we think are important are going to vote in a different way than we would hope they would vote tomorrow, then—I think, as I went around the business of knocking doors in my constituency in March and April, that the more people are cut off from the life of the rest of the community around them, the more they feel they lack connections to ordinary and mainstream things, then the more people were likely to ask you about the referendum and more likely to tell you that they were going to vote to leave the European Union.

The social bonds that connect us in our own communities are the same social bonds that allow us to feel confident in wanting to be part of communities even beyond our own. The work that that money will do in helping to combat loneliness is part of work to stitch back that social fabric for people who have been disconnected from it by the impact of austerity, but also, for people that Julie spoke of who come to live in our society and who often struggle most of all to feel that they are welcome and that they have connections that they can build on to build a future for themselves amongst the rest of us, that money will help them as well. And it will help them in a way that the second of the organisations that money will help explains very well indeed, because it will be money for HOPE not hate.

It is true, as we’ve heard in this Chamber this afternoon, that, amongst some of those who have tried to persuade other people to vote to leave the European Union, their appeal has been to fear and to hate. We cannot possibly fashion a future that is the one we would want to see for ourselves or those that we hold dear to us that is based on that way of thinking. For a family that has been the direct recipients of the outcome of what hate can do to put money into hope, and hope for the future, I think is an absolutely remarkable decision, and which links the way in which people who feel apart from society, and therefore are susceptible to appeals that there is some easy answer that involves blaming somebody else for the predicament that they find themselves in—. To say that what we must offer those people is not hatred of other people, but hope for themselves and for their communities, is, I think, a genuine tribute to her life and what it has meant.

The third organisation is the White Helmets organisation, an organisation that operates not in this country, let alone her constituency, but in Syria—an organisation that has saved 51,000 lives of people trapped under the rubble that comes from being under a real threat of death and disruption. And that third sense of being connected, not just to the life of people in the community that is around you, but the way that that community can be connected to the lives of people experiencing things that we can barely imagine, I think is that third and remarkable tribute to her life, but not just to her life, but to the things that her life held to be important, and which would be identified with so very strongly by so many people in this National Assembly for Wales.

Now, Julie went on to make her own connections between the life of Jo Cox and the decision that is going to be made in this country tomorrow. The public has undoubtedly been exposed to a huge range of information during the referendum campaign, so much of it highly negative. But the case that we would make, the Welsh Government would wish to make, and other people in this Chamber would wish to make, for the future that has us in the European Union is one that is wholly positive. Being part of the European Union has been a positive experience for Wales economically, environmentally and socially.

When we think of what we know about how people may vote tomorrow, then, as well as a difference between those people who feel isolated and cut off and those people who are able to live connected lives, there will be a difference, as far as we can tell, between the decisions of older people, who are more likely to feel that they are at a distance from the life of the community, and how young people will vote. The future of the European Union for young people in Wales seems to me absolutely essential in making it clear that we are a nation in the European mainstream where our young people can work, live and study in other European states, can go, can take the richness of the culture we have here in Wales and return to Wales enriched still further by the opportunities that they will have had. It’s that positive sense of what being a European is about that I think should be at the heart of our message to people and why we want them to vote tomorrow for Wales to continue to be connected into a European Union that is vital to the present and future prosperity of Wales, that promotes and protects our businesses, our children’s education, our environment and the services that we rely on, that protects our workers’ rights, that is clear that environmental damage does not stop at borders and that progress against climate change, for example, can only be made by nations acting together—a Europe that helps keep us safer at a time when understandable fears about security are felt by everyone, a Europe that acts together to tackle the great challenges of our time and acts positively to provide a future for our children and our nation of the sort that those three organisations that the money raised in memory of Jo Cox will be doing in her part of the world and across the world as a whole. Thank you very much.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary, and that brings today’s proceedings to a close.