National Assembly for Wales

I call the National Assembly to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, and the first question is from David Melding.

A political structure, including a directly elected mayor, is an option available to all principal councils in Wales, either as a result of the council deciding to pursue it, or in response to a public petition. In both cases, a local referendum is required.

Cabinet Secretary, do you regret the decision to raise the threshold required to trigger a referendum? Because we’ve seen all around the UK now that the use of elected mayors has revived local government and, indeed, is at the heart of devolution within England. Many people feel that these questions at least should be put to the electorate, without absurdly high qualifications to trigger the process.

Llywydd, I don’t regret the 10 per cent level in Wales. I don’t regard it as absurdly high. I think, given that we have some relatively small electorates in some councils in Wales, a 10 per cent threshold of the electorate to trigger a referendum meets our needs and circumstances.

Is the Minister aware that many people in Cardiff think that we need an elected mayor? The city is run by invisible people at the moment, effectively elected by a handful of people. Now, I suspect they would prefer to keep it that way. And I understand that Llanishen Labour Party selections now take place in the constituency office of the Member to my left—she may want to confirm that, or not—and short listings, for example, or selections, in the front room of the New Labour elite. What this causes is a disconnect between the public and the council, the elected members, and we see a system in this country that is, frankly, not fit for purpose. Will you, as Minister, formally support a referendum for Cardiff on the elected mayor and put a timetable in place?

No.

I find it slightly strange that there are two Members here clamouring for an extra tier of bureaucracy. I don’t think it’s necessary. We had a recent attempt to introduce a directly elected mayor in Cardiff by a Labour councillor, Ashley Govier. It pretty much died due to lack of popular support. So, I would welcome what the Minister actually has said so far. If he could just further assure me that, with further legislative change in this Assembly, we won’t have a situation where an area will have a directly elected mayor forced upon it when it may not even want that.

Llywydd, it’s important for me to get my position clear. I’m in favour of local authorities and local populations having the right to choose their own political structure. That means that the choice is available for those authorities and for those populations where they choose to support a local mayor. Where they don’t choose to support it, in answer to the Member’s question, I have no plans whatsoever to force it upon them.

I thank the Member for that question. In response to the economic downturn, our focus on growth and jobs, including supporting the business sector, has underpinned the budget allocations to the economy and infrastructure portfolio over this period.

Cabinet Secretary, you’ll be aware of my keen interest in monetary reform, having been an attendee of the cross-party group on monetary reform in the previous Assembly. I was very pleased to see you picking up on a Welsh Conservative idea of establishing a development bank here in Wales, in the announcement that was made yesterday. It’s something that I’ve long advocated, and I’m pleased that Plaid Cymru also picked up on that idea in their previous manifesto. Can you tell us precisely what support will be available through the development bank and how you will ensure that the investments that it makes are available in all parts of Wales and not confined to the south?

I thank the Member for that. He’ll be familiar, I’m sure, with the view of the Roman historian, Tacitus, that victory has many fathers—defeat is in orphan, but victory has many fathers. So, the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure has made an announcement in relation to the investment bank. It will be supported by finance that I will make available through my portfolio. It will operate right across Wales. It is very important—I agree with the Member—that we have to demonstrate that we go ahead over the whole of Wales. In north Wales, our plans currently include investment of over 240 schemes, with the total Welsh Government capital investment value of over £1.3 billion, and I have no doubt that the investment bank will allow us to continue to carry out that development further and faster.

Cabinet Secretary, in the last financial year, we saw circumstances arise, such as in my constituency when Tata made the announcements in January, which required instant action by the Welsh Government. Obviously, the business support to the businesses that feed into Tata was critical in that aspect. Will there be planning in the future to ensure that there are sufficient funds within that portfolio to cover any future opportunities that might arise as a consequence of actions such as Tata’s last January?

I thank the Member for that question. He’ll be aware that discussions continue with Tata itself, involving the Welsh Government and the UK Government. Only in recent days, I see that the Minister has asked for any further applications that wish to be put forward for business rate relief in the enterprise zone that’s been created in the Member’s constituency. I can say this to him: that in preparing for the Welsh Government’s budget, I remain very alert to the need to make sure that we are in a position to respond to the needs of that community and to work closely with the company to ensure the continuation of steel making here in Wales.

As Plaid Cymru’s been calling for a development bank since the 1970s, we’re very grateful to see that it’s finally happening. But the question to the Cabinet Secretary is this, really: from the Government statement, the annual lending that’s aimed at eventually is around £80 million. That’s less than a fifth of the £500 million funding gap that the Government’s own feasibility study quoted, which was the basis for the creation of the bank. Why the gap between the funding gap and what the Government’s proposing to do?

Well, I think there are a number of answers to that question, Llywydd. First of all, there is more than one way in which we are able to address the funding gap. This is one, but there are others, and we’re taking other actions in this area. And, secondly, in these very hard times, we have to act within the means that we have available to us. We have made a significant investment in the new investment bank, and, I think, rather than regretting what it can’t do, I hope we will focus on the many good things that it will be able to achieve.

I call now on the party spokespeople to ask their questions to the Cabinet Secretary, and first, Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Adam Price.

Last week, Cabinet Secretary, you announced that the business rate relief scheme currently in place in Wales will now be extended for 2017-18. Perhaps in an attempt to conceal rowing back from one of your top manifesto pledges in the recent election, this was presented as a tax cut for small businesses in Wales. Now, surely continuing with the current rate relief, whether it’s making it permanent or otherwise, is not a tax cut, is it? Can you confirm for me today whether or not you still think this is a tax cut, or, in the words of the Federation of Small Businesses, is this the worst form of spin-doctoring possible and merely an extension of the worst tax regime in the UK for small businesses?

It most certainly is a tax cut, Llywydd. The current scheme is due to lapse at the end of this financial year. Had it not been extended, £98 million-worth of tax relief would not be available to small businesses. They would have been paying that tax. Now they will not be paying that tax. The tax that they would have had to pay, had we not made this announcement, has been cut. It is a tax cut, and there’s no ambiguity about it.

I’m not sure whether this is Orwellian or Kafkaesque, but it doesn’t make any sense to me. You’re paying exactly the same taxes; it’s only a tax cut in Wales apparently now. There are other things that you as Cabinet Secretary could have done to support businesses in terms of rates. You could have indexed the business rate multiplier to the consumer prices index rather than the retail prices index in order to ensure more accurate rate bills and avoid businesses suffering from declining income. You could have actually introduced a double multiplier, a dual multiplier, reflecting the difference in terms of large businesses and small businesses as they have done in Scotland and England. Why didn’t you do that, Cabinet Secretary?

Llywydd, what I announced is this: we will extend the scheme. If the Member knew that he had a bill to pay next year of £100 and I came along with a scheme that told him he wouldn’t need to pay that £100 after all, I think he’d regard it as a cut in the liability that he would otherwise have had to meet, and that is exactly what we have done. What I have also announced is that, alongside extending the scheme for a further year, the scheme will be made permanent thereafter. So, it is a permanent tax cut for small businesses in Wales, and we will use the next 12 months to work with the small business sector and others to see if there are ways in which the scheme can be further improved to offer even more help. The ideas the Member puts forward can certainly make a contribution to that discussion.

I’ll try my best with this one then: following the revaluation of business rates by the Valuation Office Agency, which comes into effect on 1 April next year, current predictions by the retail sector and other businesses are showing that the projected rate poundage for Wales could jump by a staggering 10 per cent, making Wales the highest taxed and least attractive place to do business in Britain if your Government decides to make up the difference lost in revenue by changing the uniform business rate multiplier. We could be in the position, bizarrely, where we have the highest tax and the highest business vacancy rate in the whole of the UK. Can you confirm today that you will not change the uniform business rate in response to a potential fall in Government revenue?

Well, the Member will have to wait until 30 September, like everybody else, to see what the VOA’s revaluation of non-domestic rates will actually say rather than what people speculate on what it might say. Members here will be aware that what revaluation does is not to increase at all the amount of money taken from businesses, but it simply makes sure that the distribution of those rates reflects the most recent set of economic circumstances. We will see what the VOA has to say on 30 September.

The Welsh Conservatives spokesperson, Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Lywydd. Cabinet Secretary, figures released today by Citizens Advice Cymru show that council tax arrears actually remain now the biggest and single cause of debt in Wales. In your programme for government, there is mention of working with local government to review council tax. Just how do you intend to bring this forward and are we to assume that one of the models to be considered may even be, as suggested by Plaid Cymru, part of your ‘working together’ over this next term?

Thank you for the question. The way I intend to approach the development of council tax is in two different phases. I think there are some immediate actions that we can take to improve the operation of the scheme that we currently have and to make it fairer to individuals. But I do want us to think more widely than that. I think there are a number of ways in which local taxation could be reformed. There’s been a series of reports that rehearse the advantages and disadvantages of those models at a theoretical level. I plan to set in train some work here in Wales that will look in detail at how those different mechanisms might actually work in the Welsh context. We’ll then be able to have a better informed, applied discussion about whether any of those models offers us a better way forward on account of the council tax.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. The First Minister stated yesterday that you’re intending to have 22 local authorities, though now with regional shared services. I think this will come as news to many, and we still have no detail whatsoever on this. Would you enlighten the Chamber today as to how you will bring this forward? Will there be elected representatives at the head of these shared services as with regional combined authorities in England, and what strategic measures does the Welsh Government have in place to ensure successful delivery on shared service projects?

Well, Llywydd, I don’t think what the First Minister said yesterday will come as a surprise to many who’ve been following the developing discussions about the future of local government here in Wales over recent months. I have been grateful to the Member for her willingness to take part in those discussions. I visited all 22 local authorities in Wales over those months and an emerging set of key ideas, I think, is beginning to solidify. Members will have seen, from the business statement, that I’m due to come before the Assembly on 4 October with a statement on the future of local government and I plan to set out what I hope will be a way forward on some of these matters for Members to consider then.

Thank you. Your programme for government also sets out a promise to provide a funding floor for local government funding. However, there is no mention or consideration of rural councils, which have consistently and previously, over previous terms, been weighted against when it comes to the local government settlement. Will you commit to an immediate review of the funding formula to ensure that the local government settlement also considers and recognises the unique challenges that our rural councils face?

Llywydd, the funding formula is reviewed every year. A group of people with expertise in this field, including representation from local government look, every single year, at the formula. They look at all the component parts of it: demography, geography, economy and social factors and, every year, they bring forward proposals, and governments, in my experience, accept the advice that they get—that advice coming from local government itself.

I can say to the Member that, in those visits that I’ve made to 22 local authorities in Wales, every single authority has a story to tell about why its unique circumstances are not properly reflected in the funding formula, whether its rural authorities that believe that rurality is not properly reflected or whether it’s urban authorities that argue that the problems that go with the density of populations are not recognised. Everybody has something unique about the circumstances in which they find themselves. That’s why we have to rely on the best expert advice to make sure that our formula is as fair as it can be in balancing all those many different factors.

Llefarydd UKIP, Gareth Bennett.

Diolch, Lywydd. The Minister is probably aware that we’re facing a problem in the UK regarding waste collection. In short, there’s a lot of rubbish lying around. In Wales, we have Conwy council rolling out a four-weekly collection, but this kind of scheme has already failed across the border in Bury in greater Manchester. So, how does the Minister view these four-weekly collection cycles?

Llywydd, I think it is very important for us to get our relationship with local authorities right. The Welsh Government sets out key priorities and key ambitions that we expect local authorities to work towards and to achieve. It’s then for local authorities themselves, who are democratically elected and have democratic responsibilities of their own, to make decisions that they think best reflect their local needs and circumstances. They will meet their electorates in May of this year. If local electorates are not satisfied by the performance of their local authorities, then they will have to account to them for it. It’s not for me, as Minister, to be micromanaging each local authority and putting myself in the place of those local electorates to whom those councils are accountable.

Thank you, Minister, for that statement. I appreciate that you see a separation between your own powers and the jurisdiction of the local authorities. However, we could perhaps take more of a leading role in the Assembly in this kind of area. I note that a lot of the impetus to reduce rubbish collection was to comply with EU targets on recycling and landfill. As we are now seemingly set to leave the EU, is there a case for the Assembly to push for the amendment of these targets?

I’m heartened to hear the Member’s recognition of the excellent work that the EU did in this area in leading some of the environmental improvements that we’ve seen across the United Kingdom. The European Union was responsible for dragging the United Kingdom into some of those actions that have done so much to improve our local environment. Without the European Union—of course, he makes an important point—we will have to design our own policy approaches in this area, and it’s right of him to point out that that will be something that we will need to do in future.

Thank you, Minister; thank you for that acknowledgement that there may be a role in the Assembly for that debate. I further note that a large part of the EU legislation in this area—sorry to labour the point—was driven by Germany and Denmark, which had few available landfill sites. In the UK, we have many disused quarries and gravel pits, so we simply don’t need to comply with these targets, do we? What’s your view on that?

As I’m sure the Member knows, our ambition has been to bear down upon, and, as far as possible, eliminate the use of landfill sites, and I see no attraction whatsoever in reversing our position on that matter.

I thank the Member for that question. The First Minister has established a European advisory group, which will draw together expertise from civic and political society in Wales. It will provide advice on the wide-ranging impacts of Wales’s exit from the European Union and how best they might be addressed.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his answer. Presumably, as this is an advisory panel that has been called by the Welsh Government itself, the panel, in its inaugural meeting, will be furnished with position papers from the Welsh Government on elements of EU withdrawal and the view of Welsh Government on many of the matters that accompany the process of withdrawal from the European Union. Can he confirm that that is indeed the case, and would he be prepared to outline the contents of some of these Welsh Government position papers on EU withdrawal?

There will, of course, be an agenda set for the first meeting of that advisory panel, but I think it’s important to say that the purpose of the advisory panel is for the panel to advise Welsh Government, rather than for the Welsh Government to advise the panel.

Obviously, the Welsh Government has taken various steps to reorganise itself in light of the Brexit vote on 23 June. There is this external advisory group. I believe that you yourself, Minister, are chairing a Cabinet sub-committee on the EU discussions, or there is a role that you are doing within Government via the sub-committee. Could you tell us how the advice that might be received from the external advisory board will be taken forward by the Welsh Government, given that you’ve set out very clear principles in June of this year, albeit we’ve seen some of those principles become a little more flexible as the summer’s progressed? But, there were six key principles that the First Minister put on the table. So, it would be interesting to know how those principles will be either adapted, modified or upheld pending the advice from the advisory board.

I thank Andrew Davies for that question. I am a member of the Cabinet sub-committee, but it is chaired by the First Minister. The First Minister will attend the inaugural meeting of the advisory panel but I will chair it thereafter, so it will be my responsibility to make sure that the advice that the panel provides is communicated directly to the Cabinet sub-committee. In the way that Steffan Lewis asked, the advisory group will be informed of the Government’s position—the six points and the way that debate has evolved over the summer. They will provide their advice against that backdrop, but it will be an iterative process in which the key thing about the panel will be that we in Government will have access to some of the most expert and informed advice that we can get, in order to make sure that our influence in discussions within the UK is maximised, and that we can make sure that Welsh interests are always at the forefront of those discussions.

I’m sure the Minister will agree with me that, if this advisory panel is to be stuffed full of faint-hearted Remainers, it will be of very limited use. Therefore, there ought to be a role for Brexiteers such as myself and Andrew R.T. Davies, for example, who have a more optimistic view of the future than some of those that I’ve just mentioned. Although we might engage in what I might call constructive confrontation in this Assembly, in a body such as this panel we could actually engage in some constructive engagement. Having been a member of the EU Council of Ministers, in my case—as indeed Huw Irranca-Davies probably was—there are Members in this house who could play a very constructive role on this panel.

I hear what the Member has to say; I’ll make sure the First Minister knows of his views, because it is the First Minister who is responsible for inviting people to be members of the panel. It will be full of people of genuine expertise with robust views of their own. It’s their expertise that brings them to the panel rather than any prior views on whether the United Kingdom should be part of the European Union, and I look forward to a very vigorous set of discussions there.

Nathan Gill.

I pass on this.

I thank the Member for the question. Local authorities are democratically accountable for their own performance against priorities that reflect local circumstances. The Welsh Government supports that effort through funding, advice and legislation.

I would like to quote as an example a particular Welsh Government strategy, namely the aim of 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050. In a written response to a written question, the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, on a question on the contribution of local authorities to the target in terms of Welsh-medium education, the answer received was that local authorities didn’t have to attain towards any targets, and you have just confirmed that. Now, that is a surprise to me, because education is a crucially important element if we are to attain the target of 1 million Welsh speakers. Local education authorities will have to plan for a substantial increase in Welsh-medium education if the Government is to have any hope of reaching its aim of 1 million Welsh speakers.

There were some very interesting figures in the Welsh Language Commissioner’s annual report for this year. Of the 22 local authorities in Wales, the authorities performing worst in terms of the number of schools in the authorities providing Welsh-medium education or bilingual education are those that are run by the Labour party. In Cardiff—

You’ll have to come to a question, Sian Gwenllian.

Okay. If you compare that with Plaid Cymru councils, they are performing extremely well. How will you ensure, therefore, that local authorities—and particularly local authorities run by your own party—do take action in order to achieve this vision of 1 million Welsh speakers in the field of education?

Well, may I begin by agreeing with the Member about the importance of local authorities in this particular area? There are a great many things that local authorities do that are relevant to the Welsh language, and the ambition that we have to increase the number of people in Wales who can speak the Welsh language for the future.

Nid fy nghyfrifoldeb i, fel Gweinidog llywodraeth leol, yw gosod targedau ym maes y Gweinidog sy’n gyfrifol am y maes hwn nac mewn perthynas ag ysgolion, ond rwy’n cytuno â’r pwynt cyffredinol y mae’r Aelod yn ei wneud. Mae awdurdodau lleol yn chwarae rhan bwysig iawn mewn perthynas â’r iaith Gymraeg. Dyna’r rheswm pam y comisiynodd fy rhagflaenydd adroddiad a gadeiriwyd gan Rhodri Glyn Thomas, ac a drafodwyd yma ar lawr y Cynulliad cyn toriad yr haf, a pham rwy’n cael trafodaethau rheolaidd ag arweinwyr awdurdodau lleol wrth gyfarfod â hwy ynglŷn â’r gwaith y gallant ei wneud yn y maes hwn.

Minister, despite the best efforts of the Welsh Government to protect local government in Wales from the impact of UK Government budget cuts, Torfaen, like all local authorities in Wales, is having to work incredibly hard in very challenging financial circumstances to deliver public services locally. Will you therefore join me in congratulating Torfaen council on their recent Wales Audit Office report in which the council was described as having a clear strategic vision, driven by open and inclusive leadership and actively developing its corporate arrangements to deliver improved outcomes?

I thank the Member for that. Let me begin by agreeing with what she said at the start of her question. Any Members here who’ve seen the recent Institute for Fiscal Studies report, with its account of what it calls the ‘extraordinary impact’ of 11 successive years of cuts to budgets for public services in Wales, will recognise what she said about the pressures that that brings to local authorities.

I was very pleased indeed to see the Wales Audit Office report. It followed a very positive report on the Vale of Glamorgan. Hugh Vaughan Thomas, the chief of the Wales Audit Office, said of Torfaen that this was

‘a very positive report that Torfaen Council should be proud of.’

I’m very pleased to pay tribute to the leadership of that council and the very hard work that those who work for it do every single day to provide services to the people of Torfaen.

I thank the Member for that question. We will continue to fund local government through a combination of the annual settlements and specific grants. Local authorities, of course, possess independent powers of raising both revenue and capital to fund their activities.

Thank you for that. I did listen to your answer to Gareth Bennett that you set the priorities and local government are charged with implementing them as they see fit in their local area. However, Minister, I would like to understand what ability you have to influence the fair deployment of funding throughout a local authority. One of the cinderella services ends up being enforcement. Local authorities don’t like to enforce because they say they don’t have the staff. They also worry that things will go to appeal and, therefore, they’re in for a long legal, and very costly, battle. But what that can result in is enormous areas of unfairness. So, for example, in Pembrokeshire, I have at least three communities who are separated by a number of miles who have all been subjected to illegal Gypsy and Traveller sites arriving, they’ve been terrorised and intimidated, and forced out of their homes. It’s a completely horrendous situation. I have been to everybody, the previous Minister, the police, but, above all, the county council, because they do have the enforcement capabilities. However, they simply will not step forward because they say they don’t have the funds, they say that they need the funds for other vital services and yet we are disproportionately affecting other groups of people. I think it’s incredibly unfair and I would like to understand if the Welsh Government is able to use its powers to ensure that local councils take into account all of the residents within their areas and not just look after protected minorities, because, trust me, if you or I tried to do something this illegal, we would have everything coming down on our shoulders like a tonne of bricks, and these poor people—the level of intimidation is horrific.

Well, there are a number of different strands in what the Member has said. I’ve no way of knowing what the position is in relation to the final point that she made. I would be very disappointed indeed if she were implying that some groups in our society are treated differently to others. That is not the way that things should be, as she knows.

Her general point simply goes back to what I said in answer to Lynne Neagle—that in an extraordinary 11-year period of retrenchment, local authorities face the consequences of those decisions made, foolish and flawed, to pursue the politics of austerity and the economics of austerity, with the consequences that that has for public services. In relation to local government services, there are services that are statutory and that local government must provide. It is inevitable that the squeeze is greater, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies report demonstrated, on those parts of the budget where local authorities don’t face that same level of statutory obligation. I recognise, however, what she says about the fragility of some public protection services in parts of Wales, and I hope to have something to say on that when I make my statement on 4 October.

I welcome the Government’s announcement today of the extension of council tax reduction, and I was pleased to host the launch of the Citizens Advice report, which has already been mentioned in the Chamber today, into council tax debt. We heard about lots of good practice that supports individuals struggling with council tax debt and supports councils in their recovery of council tax. Will he agree to review the recommendations in the report and act where he can to address the matters highlighted in it?

Thanks to Jeremy Miles for drawing attention to the Citizens Advice ‘Fairness for all’ report, a very important report that I take very seriously. There are three specific recommendations for Welsh Government, two of which fall into my own area of responsibility. The first was to continue with our council tax reduction scheme. It’s an expensive scheme. It costs £244 million every year, and I am proud of every single one of those pounds because they go to help the very poorest and most vulnerable households in Wales. I am very proud of the decision that this Assembly took to support that scheme, and the sharp, sharp contrast that it draws between the position of families in England, millions of whom have to pay money towards the council tax at a point when their own benefits and their ability to do so has been frozen and further compromised. So, I was very pleased indeed to be able to make the announcement today that that national council tax reduction scheme will continue for a further year, and that I will be discussing its further continuation with local authority colleagues.

However, the report does draw attention, to my mind, to some concerning evidence in relation to the deployment of bailiffs. I want to be clear that the use of bailiffs should never be anything other than a last resort, that other courses of action should always have been exhausted first, and that public authorities that contract with bailiffs need to think very carefully about who they are contracting with. I intend to commission some fresh research into the way that these things happen in Wales in order to work with public authorities to try to make sure that, where people find themselves in this degree of difficulty, we respond to them in the most sensitive way possible.

Thank you very much to the Member for that question. The Welsh Government is committed to securing a successful city deal for the Swansea bay region. It’s a matter for the region itself to put together an investment proposal to pursue funding for the city deal. Regional stakeholders do receive support from my officials and Welsh Government and UK officials with that task.

Thank you very much for that response, Minister. Naturally, when this was announced earlier this year there were very ambitious plans that had been brought forward, but people said at the time that they needed to know the details. People at a local level are still awaiting those details. So, could I just push you a little further on: what discussions, and how many discussions have you had with partners, including the UK Government, on working on these important details to ensure that we can achieve our aspirations? Thank you.

I’m pleased to be able to reassure the Member that the Swansea bay city region and the city deal for it are very regularly discussed, both in my contacts with the United Kingdom Government—I’ve raised it with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury; I’ve talked directly to the Chancellor of the Exchequer about it—and that that is mirrored in a series of very active meetings that go on between local partners. I met all four local authority leaders, on this topic alone, back on 9 August. It does remain true, and he’s right to point to this, that there is a lot of work that still needs to be done in a short period of time. At the United Kingdom end, my discussions have been constructive but they are taking place, it seems to me, against a wider background in which the enthusiasm for city deals at the UK Government may be reducing as a result of changes in personnel in the UK administration. This means that it’s urgent for all those players in Swansea and its wider city region area to apply themselves now to the business of the significant prioritisation of projects, which is needed, to identify the spatial and economic impact that is to be obtained from any deal, and to set that out coherently and in a co-ordinated way, and to confirm the governance arrangements that will oversee such a deal if it is to be successful. I’m optimistic that that work can be done, but there is still a lot that has to be achieved and needs to be focused on in an urgent way.

Can I associate myself with the remarks that Dai Lloyd made? I think that almost everybody, if not everybody, who represents the area, and certainly the people who live in the area, are concerned that it seems to be taking a long time for the city deal to actually come to fruition in Swansea as opposed to other places in Britain.

What I would like to ask the Minister is: what further needs to be done by the Welsh Government to ensure the city deal finance is released to the Swansea bay city region? If you’re saying, from what you answer was earlier, that the Welsh Government has done everything they can, then the pressure will need to be put on the local authorities and the Westminster Government, but what I don’t want to happen to me and to others is to have bounced back, ‘Well, it’s the Welsh Government that has not done everything they need to do’.

Well, Llywydd, it’s important to set out a certain tension in the position of the Welsh Government in relation to the Swansea city deal. I continue to want us to play our active part in shaping that deal, advising on it, making sure that it comes to a successful fruition, lobbying on behalf of it with the UK Government and so on, but, in the end, those who propose the deal have to make a case to the Welsh Government to release the funding that is there. So, we have to have some distance in which we can challenge the deal, as well as being part of helping to make it happen, and we do our best to provide both of those roles in relation to it. So, it’s my job as finance Minister to do what is necessary to make sure that funding is available, if a deal is successful. Through my officials, we continue to participate in all those discussions that are there to shape the deal, but, in the end, it is for those local partners in local authorities, in the university, which has played such a constructive part in this deal, in the private sector partners as well—they have to do the hard work that is necessary at this point in the process to make sure that they have a compelling proposition to unlock the funding that’s available.

Yes, can I also be associated with those remarks? And Mike Hedges is quite right to say we’re all rather concerned about this.

The membership of the board is pretty evenly balanced between public sector and private sector, but there’s no place on it for business membership groups like the Federation of Small Businesses or other key organisations that really could help maximise use of local supply chains in what should be an ambitious vision for this region. I met the Association of British Ports at a recent reception in Cardiff Bay and was surprised to hear that, at that stage, they’d not been involved in any discussions on the city bay deal vision at all. Could you remind the Assembly how the membership board was decided, and do you have any concerns about whether the very individualistic nature of the representation of the private sector—and I make no comment about the individuals involved—compared to the more corporate representation by local authorities might be limiting the speed at which the deal is progressing at all? It’s going to take a major buy-in from a wide private sector in the bay to advance any ideas for a potential ‘Mittelstand’, for example, and I just don’t see any sign of this stuff being publicised to any of us. Thank you.

I thank the Member for those points; I’ve listened carefully to them. I suppose my immediate response is that those people who have been involved in all the work that has gone on to the deal so far need to stick with it now and get it over the line. Once we’ve got a deal that is agreed and is able to be funded, then I think the point she makes about making sure that the people around the table have a representative ability to reflect business in the area will be very important, and I’ll make sure that that is reflected in the discussions that we have with them.

I thank the Member. Local authority performance data for 2015-16 were published on 7 September. They showed that performance had improved for 65 per cent of comparable indicators over the previous 12 months. The gap in performance between authorities had also narrowed for over half of the indicators.

I thank the Minister for that response. I think we’ve seen local authorities doing incredibly well with diminishing funds. The local government data unit’s details on council performance was, I found, very interesting. I can, however, find no evidence that larger authorities are performing better than medium or small authorities. Can the Minister find that evidence from the data?

If the Member is suggesting that there is no inevitable connection between the size of a local authority and its performance, then he’s obviously right. Large authorities do well on some things and small authorities do well on some things. There is no inevitability about it. That’s not to say, I think, that there are not some aspects where being able to draw on a wider population and a wider number of staff, for example, may not help to create greater resilience in services.

I thank the Member for that. The Welsh Government has provided procurement guidance to local authorities for waste management contracts within the municipal waste infrastructure programme. Advice regarding the procurement of waste collection services for local authorities is also available in policy documents such as the municipal sector plan and the collections blueprint.

Cabinet Secretary, the First Minister kindly agreed to look at the issue I raised with him yesterday at FMQs with regard to Bridgend County Borough Council’s decision to prohibit the largest waste management company in Wales, the Potter Group, from bidding for a waste management contract because it doesn’t have an annual turnover of more than £50 million. I understand that this is in line with regulation 58 of the public contract regulations 2015, but I very much hope that you would agree with me that it can’t be right for a regulation to prevent large Welsh companies from bidding for these contracts in Wales. So, given the programme for government commitment to the improvement of procurement policy yesterday, will you also commit to looking at this issue to ensure that large Welsh companies can indeed bid for large public sector contracts in Wales?

Well, thank you, Llywydd. I was in the Chamber yesterday when the Member raised this with the First Minister, and I know that he’s undertaken to write to provide details, and I will certainly undertake to share in any response to the particular circumstances that he outlines. Since the matter was raised yesterday, I have made some very initial enquiries with my officials on this matter. They report to me that they met with the company concerned on 15 September, last week, and although there was a useful discussion there about proposed investments in two small energy-from-waste plants in mid Wales, the issue of the Bridgend contract wasn’t raised at that meeting, and therefore there was nothing pursued about it. But I’ll certainly undertake to follow up his discussion yesterday with the First Minister.

Thank you very much for the question. As set out in the supplementary budget, which was approved in July, £276 million in revenue funding and £107 million in capital funding have been allocated for the budget this year in the environment and rural affairs portfolio.

I’m very grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for that response. The programme for government for this Government, which was published yesterday, mentions a small-grants scheme that will be part of the rural development programme. As the Cabinet Secretary for finance, can you confirm whether this funding will be available in this financial year for this particular programme? If so, how much funding will the Welsh Government provide for it? Perhaps you could take this opportunity to give us an update on the funding of this programme.

Llywydd, I don’t have the accurate information immediately to hand and I wouldn’t want to do anything other than to make sure that the Member got the best information that he’s asking for. I’m very happy to write to him to provide the answer to the question that he’s raised this afternoon.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is questions to the Assembly Commission. No questions have been tabled.

So, we move to item 3: the motion to elect Members to committees. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion.

Formally move.

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

Item 4 on our agenda is the motion to elect Members to committees. I again call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion.

Formally move.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? There are no objections and the motion is therefore agreed.

The next item is the motion to elect Members to the Assembly Commission. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion.

Formally move.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? As there are no objections, the motion is agreed.

The next item is a statement by the Chair of the Finance Committee on the budget process. This is the first statement by a committee Chair in this fifth Assembly. I hope that it will lead to many committee Chairs taking the opportunity to make such statements to the Assembly. Therefore, I call for the first statement from the Chair of the Finance Committee, Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I hope that this will lead to a great many statements of this kind and I’m very pleased to be making this statement today. I welcome the wisdom of the Business Committee to enable committee Chairs to inform the Chamber of their committee’s work and priorities. As it is the start of a new Assembly term, and the Finance Committee has been busy setting out its work programme, this is an opportunity for me to share our thinking with you.

This is both an exciting and challenging time for Wales with fiscal devolution and new budgetary processes. Just last week, the committee met with its key stakeholders to discuss these challenges and to look at our aspirations for the future.

One of the main roles of the Finance Committee is to consider the draft budget and how fiscal devolution to Wales is going to impact on how we do this. This year’s budget is due to be published on 18 October and we have already held a consultation, which is closing today. However, as the consultation has been issued prior to stakeholders having sight of the actual spending plans, we also intend to launch a dialogue that will allow interested parties to convey their views via the Dialogue app. We hope that this, along with the formal consultation, will provide evidence for not just the Finance Committee, but the other committees during their budget scrutiny sessions. We will also be holding a stakeholder event in Merthyr Tydfil.

This will be the last year that the budget is considered under the current Standing Orders—hopefully—and just this morning in committee we considered a paper on the proposed changes. As Members will be aware and recall, from April 2018, Wales will be responsible for collecting and managing two new Welsh taxes, namely the land transaction tax and the landfill disposals tax. The Welsh Government will also have new borrowing powers for capital investment of up to £500 million, and borrowing powers of £500 million—an additional £500 million, that is—to manage short-term budgetary fluctuations arising from tax devolution. These changes will result in changes to our budgetary procedures, which I will return to shortly.

In the last Assembly, Royal Assent was granted to the Tax Collection and Management (Wales) Act 2016. This Act establishes the Welsh Revenue Authority, responsible for collecting and managing these devolved taxes. By now, the Land Transaction Tax and Anti-avoidance of Devolved Taxes (Wales) Bill has been introduced to the Assembly. We had our first scrutiny session in committee this morning on that Bill. Therefore, the autumn term will be very busy for the committee as it scrutinises this technical and complex Bill, which I am pleased to tell the Assembly is the longest piece of legislation to be introduced into the Assembly so far. The Bill will impact on a great number of the Welsh public, so our engagement will be vital to ensure that it is clear, robust and workable as a piece of legislation shaped for the needs of Wales.

Many of the key stakeholders for this inquiry are from professional and legal backgrounds. So, the committee will be hosting a roundtable CPD accredited event with a variety of professional organisations, institutions, law firms and those from the tax and conveyancing fields to discuss the implications of the Bill, as well as making a general call for evidence, which was issued last week.

These taxation Bills will lead to revenue raising powers for the Welsh Government, which leads me to one of our key priorities for this coming period, which is to consider changes to the budget process in order to deal with these new fiscal developments and to ensure that funding arrangements are suited to Welsh circumstances and priorities. In preparation for these changes, the fourth Assembly’s Finance Committee undertook work to consider a future budget process.

A new budget process in required in readiness for the draft budget for 2018-19. The committee will begin scrutinising that budget next autumn. It’s crucial that the Assembly has robust processes in place to scrutinise the Welsh Government’s plans. Assembly officials have been meeting regularly with Welsh Government officials to discuss options for an interim non-statutory budget process and protocol, which would be achieved via changes to Standing Orders—hopefully—and by updating the existing protocol between the Finance Committee and the Welsh Government.

In considering this process, we hope to develop a model that maximises time for meaningful scrutiny of Welsh Government spending, taxation and borrowing plans by the Finance Committee, other relevant committees and the public. We have also aimed to ensure that delivery partners have certainty of funding available at the earliest possible opportunity.

This work on fiscal devolution means that it is an exciting time for the Finance Committee and, hopefully, for the Assembly as a whole. We hope that the Wales Bill will allow us to put our budgetary procedures on a statutory footing with an annual budget Bill, which is a further step in the Assembly’s evolution to being our Parliament.

I welcome the statement by the Chair and the new practice of committee Chairs reporting to the Plenary session. Can I congratulate whoever came up with that as an idea, because I think it does help with the Assembly to make sure that committees don’t work in little silos, but actually inform the rest of the Assembly as to exactly what’s happening?

As we move from solely an allocation of resources to a system where income is raised as well, then we need to change the way the Finance Committee works. I agree with the Chair that we need a revised protocol, updating the current protocol between the Finance Committee and the Welsh Government. Can I at this stage pay credit to the former Minister for Finance and the former Chair of this committee for the work they did on the last protocol? I think that they both worked very well to try and ensure that the Finance Committee was in a position to scrutinise the budget and that the protocol was able to work effectively. So, I think that we owe a debt of thanks to them because whatever we do in the future will be building on the work that those two ladies did.

Does the Chair agree with me that we need to consider whether tax and spend scrutiny should be done at the same time or separately, as they are at Westminster? And, do we need a tax review mechanism to ensure that the taxation system for raising revenue in Wales is working effectively?

I’d like to thank the Member for also being the first to ask a question of a committee Chair, and I will certainly pass on his congratulations to the enlightened people who came up with this idea. I’d also add my thanks to the previous Chair and the previous finance Minister for their work in this regard as well. A lot of what I said in the statement was building on—as he knows, as a member of the previous committee—the work of that previous committee.

I think he raised two specific questions with me. First, how we deal with tax and spend. Yes, I think the scrutiny of that is an open issue for the committee and the Assembly to debate. My own preference would be that we did it together. I think you look at tax and spend together. I think looking at it in the round is a preferable way to do that, but other institutions have other ways of doing it, as he pointed out, and I think that that’s something that we need to bear in mind, learning from other places, but never copying other places, necessarily.

A tax review mechanism, I think, is an interesting point. I think it brings us, really, to the heart of why taxes are being devolved in Wales. It’s not simply as an administrative function, as might have been thought of, it’s a key thing that actually empowers Welsh Government and powers the accountability of Welsh Government, because for the first time we’ll have a Government that’s responsible for part of the revenue that it spends. I think any Government, therefore, would want to have a process by which it reviews that tax revenue and would have a mechanism for the most effective way and the most efficient way of raising taxes. I think that will keep the committee very busy for the next five years.

Can I thank the Chair of the Finance Committee for his statement this afternoon—a first in the history of this institution and an exciting development? Also, can I thank him for allowing all Assembly Members early sight of the statement before Plenary today, which did avoid the shuffling around that sometimes happens of limited copies of oral statements? That’s something that the Welsh Government might like to consider as well in the future.

The substance of the statement is vitally important, as Simon Thomas has said: the devolution of tax powers and the development of financial capacity both of the Welsh Government and of the Assembly. You do make the obvious point in your statement, Simon, that the consultation has been issued prior to stakeholders having sight of the spending plans—understandable time wise, but not entirely satisfactory. What kind of dialogue, conversation, are you envisaging that we have with stakeholders from this point on to gain their views when that information is properly available?

As you say, a key priority is to consider changes to the budget process, hence the fourth Assembly’s committee report, which I was familiarising myself again with earlier. Are you content that the recommendations, the 12 recommendations, that were made in that report—I know it’s not necessarily our remit in this Assembly, but are you confident that those recommendations are being followed, at least in the main?

You did mention the devolution of tax powers and the new Welsh Revenue Authority. There have been a couple of meetings, involving the Cabinet Secretary, on the establishment of the WRA and the adoption of the chair, over the last couple of weeks. What role do you envisage the Finance Committee having in the ongoing formulation of the WRA and the selection of the board and, indeed, of the chair? We were there at the very start of the legislation—are we going to have an ongoing role in watching over how the WRA develops?

And, finally, you say you hope to develop a model of budget scrutiny that maximises time for meaningful scrutiny of the Welsh Government. How will this model work? I’m sure you’re aware it’s not just a case of the committee finding time, it’s also a case of the Welsh Government finding time as well to be scrutinised. So both those elements have to work in tandem. But thank you for your statement—a first in the history of the fifth Assembly.

I thank Nick Ramsay for his questions, and for his welcome, obviously, to this process. I think, first of all, in terms of the stakeholders, he put his finger on an ongoing issue, of course, which is that the consultation we have on the budget is before we see the budget itself or a draft budget, and, indeed, before we saw the programme for government, which was only launched itself yesterday. Ideally, you would want to match a programme for government with the allocation of resources, and then make some kind of series of recommendations about whether they were appropriate or effective or efficient. However, we will redouble our efforts as a committee to engage with stakeholders once we see the draft budget, from 18 October.

I mentioned the Dialogue app that we’re going to use. That’s fairly new from the Assembly’s point of view, but it has been used over the summer, I understand, to engage with different individuals and in consultation. The app allows people not merely to respond but to respond to how others have responded. So it allows an iterative discussion around priorities and ideas. So I think, and I hope, that that will enrich not only the Finance Committee, but the other committees that are looking at what people have to say about their remit as well. And we’ll also, as I said, have a formal stakeholder meeting in Merthyr Tydfil, which I hope you will attend, and also a formal consultation. So, we’re trying to cast the net as widely as possible to get people on board.

But that really comes down to how we go forward. There was a set of recommendations, as you mentioned, from the previous committee. I am confident that the spirit of those recommendations is being taken forward at present. There is some negotiation and some agreement that has to be agreed between the Assembly side and the Government side, regarding the exact timetabling, when it happens, how recess is timetabled into that, how we deal with it in Standing Orders, so that the Government has the correct amount of flexibility it needs to produce a budget, but we have the time. And the aim of this—as he will remember from the recommendations—is to increase the time for scrutiny of actual proposals, budget proposals, and also to allow other committees to have a more coherent approach to the budget scrutiny themselves, with perhaps the Finance Committee having a slightly more strategic kind of directional way of helping those other committees, individual subject committees, to do their work on the budget as well.

I haven’t been approached formally to be part of any process around the appointment of any members of the Welsh Revenue Authority. I’m sure that the committee will want to maintain its scrutiny of that authority and that process, and I’m sure we will also want, in time, to invite members of the authority in and the chair for scrutiny and for sessions where we’re able to question them and see the approach being taken by the new revenue authority. But it’s very early days, of course, on that.

I think, in terms of the model of scrutiny work, that’s dealt with in the way that we discussed how we take forward the recommendations of the previous committee.

I warmly welcome the statement itself and the constitutional innovation that it represents, which also reflects the development of this institution as a parliament and takes us to the core of the statement: the need to review and amend the process of agreeing the budget, which, in comparison with many other Parliaments in the world, gives far too much power to the Executive and too little to this place. As I understand it, the Finance Committee has a right to make recommendations, but the Assembly has no power to amend the final budget motion, although this power does exist in unlimited ways in some Parliaments—I’m thinking of Congress in the USA, but, even in Westminster, there is a right to cut expenditure and, of course, to vary the tax recommendations through a finance Bill or a fiscal Bill, and, in Sweden, of course, the committees have the right to decide on the allocation of funding within particular areas of spend. Will the committee look at some of those options as we assess changes to Standing Orders?

And, secondly and finally, Presiding Officer, to what extent will the committee be able to look at the issue of the information provided to the Assembly so that we can achieve our scrutiny role successfully? The information is a little bit thin and a little bit superficial at present—that is, headings rather than spending at an individual programme level, and there’s no information about the expected performance against spend. We could look at best practice internationally in terms of budgetary transparency, for example, published by the OECD, and, in order to allow this Senedd to achieve its role effectively, shouldn’t we invest in specialist capacity similar to what Congress has—the Congressional budget office—that is independent of Government and accountable to us as an Assembly, which would be a basis for us to make our decisions based on more expert advice?

Thank you to Adam for those questions. I wouldn’t have expected any less than those very detailed and interesting questions from him, and it’s true to say—. There are three things, truth be told, that I think he had to say: first of all, the rather thin information that he described, and that has been a concern of committee members for several years now. Perhaps the most obvious one is when you look at the allocation of funding for the health service in Wales, which is just very simply put to health boards, and there’s no understanding then of how the funding is then used below that level. The committee has an interest in improving that information. That has to be done on a joint basis and in agreement with the Government, so it comes down to the protocol that we will be able to agree with the Government, but I also suggest that the other committees, the subject committees, have a role to request additional information. And, sometimes, indeed, by the time that those committees look at the budget, there is additional information available. I do hope that the two things that we’ve suggested, the protocol and the additional time, are going to add to the opportunities to draw down that information, but, at heart, Adam is asking for more information at the very beginning. I think the Finance Committee has heard that request and is eager to fulfil it.

The second part is what you will do with the information and whether there is a need for independent scrutiny of that, and, very interestingly, this arose in evidence from the Cabinet Secretary in committee this morning. Adam will know very well that there’s a budgetary framework agreement in Scotland, which means there has to be an independent budgetary office to report on the financial situation in order to have a voice on that in any dispute between the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament. And the same is true—the Member mentioned Congress, but the same is true in Canada as well. There will be, I think, a need to search for that and seek that independent voice in this process. Whether that comes from an independent office whether that comes from an independent office or other protocols with, for example, the Office of Budgetary Responsibility in London, using their resources and skills, we haven’t discussed in committee yet, but it certainly is something that we are aware of, and we are eager to lead on that discussion in this Assembly.

The final point—well, yes, it’s very interesting. When you look at the budget that is proposed, passing it or rejecting it are the options, of course. That’s what I was referring to at the end of my statement when I spoke about a financial or budgetary Bill. Of course, when you introduce a Bill, you can amend it and you can change it. There are very interesting questions arising from that. There’s no time to go through all of those, but there are very interesting questions about whether the Assembly could add to expenditure or just cut expenditure, whether the Assembly can increase taxes or just decrease taxes. There are different rules, as Adam Price will know better than I—there are different rules in different countries. But, in terms of the committee looking at this issue, I’m happy to confirm that we’ve had a meeting last week with the parliamentary budget office in Canada where this was a topic of discussion and where we discussed what Canada’s doing in terms of the federal parliament and regional, state parliaments. So, it’s a very live question, but, certainly, if this place is to grow into a proper Senedd for Wales, then we will have to, to all intents and purposes, have the budget introduced as a Bill that can be amended by Assembly Members.

May I also thank the Chair for outlining the committee’s priorities over the next year? It’s clear that we’re going to have a very busy autumn with this huge Bill on land tax devolution that we will be scrutinising, and we will also be scrutinising the draft budget, of course, and also there’s the possibility now of us scrutinising landfill tax, so there’s a huge amount of work in the pipeline.

Roeddwn yn awyddus iawn i ddod yn aelod o’r Pwyllgor Cyllid am fy mod yn credu ei fod yn lle gwych i gael trosolwg o ble y mae’r Llywodraeth yn gosod ei blaenoriaethau ariannol, sy’n amlwg yn adlewyrchu ei blaenoriaethau gwleidyddol. Roedd rhagfynegiadau brawychus y Sefydliad Astudiaethau Cyllid yr wythnos diwethaf ynglŷn â thoriadau i wariant cyhoeddus yn y dyfodol yn hynod o sobreiddiol. Ar ryw bwynt, credaf y bydd angen dull llawer mwy radical arnom o ran ein dull o ddarparu gwasanaethau pan fydd y toriadau hynny yn ein hwynebu. Mae iechyd, wrth gwrs, yn faes sy’n llyncu bron i hanner cyllideb Cymru, a hoffwn bwysleisio’r pwynt a wnaeth Adam Price: credaf fod gennym allu cyfyngedig i graffu yn y maes hwn yn yr ystyr mai’r byrddau iechyd sy’n gyfrifol am y gwariant manwl hwnnw, a chredaf fod hwn yn faes—rwy’n falch o weld eich bod yn cytuno bod angen i ni allu craffu’n well yn hynny o beth.

Credaf fod y gorgyffwrdd rhwng y Pwyllgor Cyllid a’r Pwyllgor Cyfrifon Cyhoeddus yn ddiddorol. I raddau helaeth, credaf mai’r gwahaniaeth yw bod y Pwyllgor Cyfrifon Cyhoeddus yn edrych yn gyffredinol ar werth am arian ac effeithiolrwydd gwariant y Llywodraeth, ond mae ein cyfrifoldeb ni wedi ei gyfeirio’n fwy at wariant yn y dyfodol. Credaf fod yr wythnosau nesaf yn hollbwysig i’r Gweinidog cyllid yn y drafodaeth ar fframwaith ariannol Llywodraeth y DU. Hoffwn ofyn a gawn ni neilltuo amser i sicrhau y gallwn graffu ar unrhyw gytundeb y bydd y Gweinidog yn llwyddo i’w gael yn y cyswllt hwnnw. Rwy’n arbennig o awyddus i wybod am agweddau benthyca unrhyw gytundeb ariannol newydd. Hoffwn gael cadarnhad fod hynny’n rhywbeth y byddwn yn neilltuo amser ar ei gyfer.

Rwyf hefyd yn awyddus iawn, fel aelod o’r pwyllgor, i ystyried y rhagolygon ariannol tymor canolig a hirdymor ar gyfer Cymru. Er ein bod yn oes gadael yr UE, ac mae unrhyw ragolygon yn anodd ar hyn o bryd mewn perthynas â’r economi a fframwaith rheoleiddio a fframwaith masnach, credaf fod angen i ni edrych o ddifrif ar y newidiadau demograffig a fydd yn ein hwynebu yng Nghymru. Mae angen i ni wneud rhywfaint o gynllunio ariannol hirdymor a chredaf fod honno’n rôl yr hoffwn i’n pwyllgor ymgymryd â hi a hoffwn ofyn a fyddech yn cytuno â hynny. Edrychaf ymlaen at weithio gyda’r Cadeirydd a holl aelodau’r pwyllgor, gan fy mod yn credu bod y pwyllgor hwn yn hanfodol ar gyfer y Cynulliad.

I thank Eluned Morgan for her kind words and for pointing out how busy we were and then asking us to do more work. [Laughter.] I think that’s a very appropriate way forward. I think, on the first point, if I can say, through the Presiding Officer, if there’s been one positive thing that’s come out of this first statement, it’s clear that we’ve had members of different parties, all demanding, or at least requesting, more information on the budget process to scrutinise the Welsh Government and I think that, in itself, has been a valuable way of airing these things because this is about better information for better decision making. This is not when we’re looking at the budget process through committee, certainly, and this is not about a necessarily party-political approach; this is about key questions that she has raised and, as she said, that the Institute for Fiscal Studies has raised as well about where the burden falls. She will know from the report—and I was interested to go to the briefing from the IFS—that if we, for example, were to protect health in Wales by 1 per cent or 2 per cent, the cuts in local government would then shoot up into the scale between the 10 per cent and the 12 per cent and up to 17 per cent. It looks quite frightening. These are the main choices that have to be made.

We, surely, as an Assembly and in our committee structure, should assist the Government at least in finding the information to make those choices and for exploring, together with the public, how those choices are made. Eventually, once the decision is made by Government, it’s the Government that’s accountable for that, but as a committee we should throw as much light on it as possible.

On the relationship with the Public Accounts Committee, the Chair is a member of the Finance Committee at the moment, of course, which helps things. She will know, from this morning as well, that we, as a Finance Committee, are responsible for the actual revenue or rather the estimates of the Auditor General for Wales. So, we have a relationship there. But, broadly, I would agree with her—I think the Public Accounts Committee looks at value for money. It’s a retrospective learning process, which is very useful of course, and extremely, sometimes, headline-grabbing, in the way that it does that, and that’s inevitable, whereas I think we have a far more forward-looking, planning kind of approach. I think both of us—both committees, that is—need to work together in that way.

I think the final, main point that she was making, of course, is in terms of mid and long-term planning, demographic changes. That’s not just for the Finance Committee, but all the subject committees will have to be doing some of that work as well. But I agree that we should be looking at it in those long terms. It does turn around whether we’ll get a financial framework that is robust enough for this Assembly to approve a legislative consent motion for the Wales Bill. That’s what it boils down to. We know that we are reliant on Welsh Government to negotiate with Westminster on that. The Scottish Government took a long time, or rather Westminster took a long time—I don’t know quite who to blame, but they took a long time. We had confirmation in committee this morning, in a public session, that the Minister meets monthly at least with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. So, there’s a process ongoing, and I agree with the Member that the Finance Committee should give its views on that process in order to help and inform and show and demonstrate, particularly to Westminster, that as an Assembly as a whole, we have a stake in this as well.

Presiding Officer, may I add my congratulations to you and the Business Committee for introducing this procedure. I only wish it had applied in the fourth Assembly when I was Chair of a committee. Perhaps there is a direct link with the fact that I am no longer a Chair that we can now be trusted to exercise this type of scrutiny and feedback in the Chamber.

I think that how the Government presents its budget and the accompanying documents is a key test of the openness of any democracy. I think that our procedures need to provide for maximum amount of transparency and clarity. I think, inevitably, budgets are challenging, but information can be presented in very opaque ways and that absolutely aids no-one, including the public, those interested and the civic sector. I was delighted to hear, incidentally, about the development of the Dialogue app. I’m sure that will connect us much more broadly to the outside world, or at least to those outside in Wales who are going to be influenced by our decisions.

I think accountability is also key in allowing effective analysis, so that budget decisions can be tracked year to year—it is often very difficult to do that, incidentally—and also maximum consistency in how financial information is presented. We know that governments are powerful beasts and it doesn’t matter who’s running them, but, sometimes, a way of avoiding embarrassment is to present the accounts in a slightly different way to previously and it can be very tough to analyse them. Above all, I think we need time for deliberation of these measures. I think we have a fairly good record in the Assembly so far, but, of course, our workload now gets more intricate and extensive in terms of its financial responsibilities. I do hope that we never see the day when we guillotine things and reduce the time for effective scrutiny and deliberation. Can I finally ask the Finance Committee to look at ways we analyse those areas of important public policy and the initiatives in those areas that Government introduces in areas that cut across departments. It can be very difficult to know how much money is being spent, for instance, on improving mental health and well-being because so many areas of Government are affected, or, indeed, another example very close to my heart—looked-after children and care leavers. I think when a Government does announce a major initiative in a cross-cutting area of public policy, that’s a good time for the Finance Committee to make some sort of estimate of what the total spend is there, how it’s changing and how effective it is. Thank you.

I thank David Melding for his questions, and I recall that I wasn’t aware that he was shy in coming forward in the previous Assembly with his views at any stage, and I think he maximised the opportunity, but I’m very pleased that there are even more opportunities now for Chairs and for committees as well to inform the Assembly.

I think he raises an important point around tracking changes from year to year and being able to see the effectiveness, as I would put it, of Government programmes. I don’t think the Finance Committee is an accounts committee, and I think we are better when we don’t, possibly, look at it as an accounting way, but rather look at the global sums—or, rather, fairly headline sums—and look at the effectiveness of spend, and whether what the Government says it intends to do has sufficient resources to deliver on that. But I certainly agree that, as we move to this new process, we need to understand under our Standing Orders how we can follow the pennies, or at least the tens or the hundreds of millions, and how they might be done in a way that makes sense, as we see, for example, when a programme changes ministerial responsibility, that it can then disappear from a particular line and it’s very difficult to see.

I think David Melding put his finger on a couple of other key ways we can do this, which is to look and track cross-cutting issues. You mentioned mental health and looked-after children; I would agree with those. I would also add to the mix, from the perspective of the Chair of the committee, the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, which is now entrusted to the Minister who most reports to this committee, but which, of course, is designed to affect Government spending and the way that Government resources are used right across the board, and it doesn’t fall easily within one committee. So, I think there’s a role for something like the Finance Committee to take an overview of things like the future generations Act and similar ‘well-intentioned but let’s see how they deliver’ kind of objectives from Government. Really, it then comes down to whether resources are being put behind that which the Government says it wants to achieve under, say, its six or seven objectives or whatever it might be under a Bill, or an Act as it becomes then. That’s a clear way that the Finance Committee can help and assist other committees without trespassing on other committees’ responsibilities.

I thank the committee Chair. I have certainly learned a great deal from this afternoon’s statement, and it’s good to see the Cabinet Secretary was also here to listen to the committee Chair’s statement.

We now move to the Plaid Cymru debate, and I call on Llyr Gruffydd to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I move the motion in the name of Plaid Cymru, Plaid Cymru, of course, has called this debate this afternoon to note that it is now three years since the publication of Professor Sioned Davies’s report, commissioned by the Welsh Government, on the situation of Welsh as a second language in English-medium schools. The report’s conclusion, of course, was that it was the eleventh hour for Welsh second language. The report stated that the attainment levels of pupils was lower than in any other subject, and it went on to say that if this had been said about mathematics or English, there is no doubt that we would have seen a revolution. If we are serious, therefore, about developing Welsh speakers and seeing the Welsh language prosper, then we must change direction as a matter of urgency, before it is too late.

Now, just a few months earlier, the census had actually painted a picture in terms of a reduction in the number of Welsh speakers. A month after the publication of the report, the recommendations of the Welsh Government’s ‘Cynhadledd Fawr’, if you recall, stated that very substantial changes were needed in terms of Welsh taught as a second language. In August 2014, the First Minister himself said in his policy document ‘A living language: a language for living—Moving forward’ that there was a need, and I quote,

‘for all learners in Wales—whether they attend Welsh-medium or English-medium schools…to speak Welsh confidently.’

In November 2014, a whole year after the publication of Professor Davies’s report, Professor Davies herself expressed some concern that not much had happened with the report since its publication. Professor Davies said that, amongst all of the things that she suggested, there were things that could have been done overnight, but that there were other things, such as capacity building, that would take many years, according to her.

As I said in the report, it is the eleventh hour for Welsh second language. I don’t know what comes after the eleventh hour, but I would say that the clock has almost struck again, I think.

And that was a whole year after the publication of her report. We’re now three years on from the publication of the report and, to all intents and purposes, we’re still awaiting action.

Rather than moving away from the Welsh second language regime, what we saw earlier this year was Qualifications Wales consulting on the GCSE Welsh second language qualification and coming to the conclusion that they wanted to retain that for the time being, although the majority of respondents to the consultation said that it needed to be abolished—although, the Welsh Government’s policy, of course, is to abolish Welsh second language—and although academics, educators, organisations and institutions of all kinds want to see the abolition of the Welsh second language qualification.

Now, in fairness, Qualifications Wales says that this is a temporary step, but there is no clarity from the Welsh Government as to what is meant by ‘temporary’ in that context. So, I have to say that I do understand and sympathise with the concern and frustration that many have expressed that so much time has passed since the publication of Professor Sioned Davies’s report without any real action or determined action on this agenda, and then, of course, seeing Qualifications Wales, to all intents and purposes, seemingly continuing with the old regime. I understand, therefore, the suspicion as to whether that commitment is really there from the Welsh Government to change the situation in this area.

Now, of course, we should remind ourselves that the First Minister had stated in a letter to Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg that he and the previous education Minister had come to the same conclusion, and they were of the view that the concept of Welsh second language

‘creates an artificial difference, and we are not of the view that it offers a useful basis for making policies for the future.’

Despite all of that, I have to say that I am pleased to see in the Welsh Government amendment a statement saying that,

‘from 2021 the new curriculum will remove the distinction between Welsh and Welsh Second Language’

I welcome that, but I would like the Minister to confirm not whether the new curriculum and the new qualification will be available to everyone by 2021, but that it will be used and in place by 2021, and will be actually part of the examination process and, therefore, that the old regime will have been removed. That is the assurance that many are seeking, and Qualifications Wales among them, I’m sure.

Now, the second clause of the Welsh Government amendment isn’t quite as good as it is too vague and general, in my view. It actually scraps clauses 4(b) and 4(c) in the original motion, which talks about action, and then replaces that with a ‘notes’ amendment. Now, the Government likes to note a number of things, but what we want to see is action, of course.

We mention in the original motion the need to adopt measures, for example, to increase the number of education practitioners who teach through the medium of Welsh, but not only that, but increase the support for trainee teachers, serving teachers, classroom assistants and teaching practitioners and the need, of course, for additional resources to achieve that.

Now, the challenge of reaching the Government’s target of 1 million Welsh speakers is a considerable one, and effective and timely action does need to be taken. According to the annual report of the Government itself on their Welsh-medium education strategy, the increases in the number of those in receipt of Welsh-medium education is not adequate, and I don’t know that anyone would actually dispute that point. We have seen, since 2001, an increase of 0.1 per cent. Now, that isn’t the ambition and that isn’t the transformational educational landscape needed in order to reach that ambitious target of 1 million Welsh speakers. Someone told me that, at that rate of progress, it would take 800 years to ensure that all young people in Wales received Welsh-medium education. Now, I know that the wheels of government turn slowly, but surely not even the wheels of the Welsh Government turn that slowly.

Plaid Cymru and I are of the view that this is unacceptable. Educators within the sector are of the opinion that it is unacceptable, and, indeed, the Welsh Government policy itself states that this is unacceptable. So let us now take serious, determined steps to create this one Welsh-medium continuum. It’s not enough on its own, of course, but it is a key part of a broader strategy. If we do that, then perhaps we will succeed in reaching that target of a million Welsh speakers.

Thank you very much. I have selected the four amendments to the motion. I call on the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language to formally move amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

Diolch. I call on Suzy Davies to move amendments 2, 3 and 4 tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I move the amendments in the name of the Welsh Conservatives.

May I thank Plaid Cymru for bringing this matter of Welsh as a second language back to the Chamber so soon in the Assembly term? The Government amendment shows that there are constraints, might we say, on your cosy relationship after all. But, by bringing it back so quickly, it shows that some things can be done quickly, and we support entirely the point that the Welsh Government has wasted time since Sioned Davies’s report. For that reason, we would prefer to support the motion without the Government amendment, if possible, because we are here to hold the Government to account, and to remind the people of Wales that young people are still entering and leaving our education system without the advantage that the system can give them, namely better Welsh language skills.

Also, deleting point 4 of the motion would mean refusing to face the central challenge, which is workforce skills. It’s impossible to say anything meaningful about the quality of qualifications, or to move forward in terms of the difference between Welsh second language and first language, unless you face the fact that teachers and education professionals have to achieve this. The capacity isn’t there yet to do that.

I would like to focus on these matters of quality and ability, and why we have tabled our amendments, as they stand, to focus on qualifications. The introduction of exams in 2020 or the following year means that anyone starting in year 7 this year or next year would sit those exams. They would have had experience of the English-medium primary sector as it is now. Despite the fact that the Welsh language has been a compulsory part of the curriculum at all ages since 1999, it is fair to say that many children will reach their secondary schools with a lack of skills, understanding and confidence to start Welsh language classes, as they would be for French classes. For some, they would consider this as another lesson in modern languages, rather than an opportunity to develop a core part of their identity and everyday skills.

So, my question for this cohort of young people is: how will the new curriculum help them to achieve a higher level than what has been in existence in the past? Their experience in primary school will be no different to that of the previous cohort, and that experience, individual young people’s talents, and the change in teachers’ expectations, I think, will mean that it would be unrealistic to expect this cohort to sit the same exam as their peers who have grown up through the Welsh-medium system.

This doesn’t mean that the content of the course in secondary school for Welsh as a second language can’t be challenging. But there’s no point having that discussion about a more challenging course included in a continuum, unless children arrive at secondary school having had more contact with the Welsh language, and it being a core part of their experience in primary school. I don’t want pupils to fail their exams in 2020 or 2021 because their earlier years in school have failed to prepare them. That’s why points 4(b) and 4(c) shouldn’t be deleted from this motion—because they are relevant to the primary sector as well.

There’s one problem with this motion, which is the timetable. If fundamental change for the role of Welsh language in our English-medium schools was to be implemented today, then those children wouldn’t sit GCSEs until 2027. They are the ones who have the chance to be able to sit the same exams as their Welsh-medium peers.

So, what’s going to happen to the exam in the meantime to protect its reputation and the number of people who pass it? Are we considering steps similar to the science GCSE, with a differential curriculum and exams, perhaps? I don’t know what those plans are at present, but this is not a long-term aim. The aim of our amendments today is to strengthen the message that, in order to normalise the Welsh language for everyone, to create an education system that can do this, and exams that reflect this aim, we have to start before children go to school. We have to include that workforce within points 4(b) and 4(c).

That was just a point to remind, in point 4. I’m coming to an end here. The Welsh language is a skill in the workplace, it is a communication skill and is part of our way of life. It doesn’t end at school. Thank you.

Thank you for allowing me to contribute to this debate today. The issue of the Welsh language is an important one. I wonder whether it might have been better to spend a little more time on this issue than the half hour allocated. We’re doing Brexit again—it’s like groundhog day.

I agree with the principles supporting this motion, but I feel that it may well fall short of what it seeks to achieve. I will therefore be supporting the amendments put forward by the Welsh Government, though I support the first three points of Plaid Cymru’s motion. I’ve read carefully the letter that all Members have received from Qualifications Wales, and I’ve also followed the arguments advanced today by Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg. In their letter, Qualifications Wales say:

‘substantial changes to qualifications must be managed carefully to allow sufficient time for teachers and learners to prepare; changes made too quickly are likely to pose risks to learners and ultimately to the success of any new qualifications.’

I don’t think that they’re suggesting 800 years, though, but I do think that it does reflect—if I’ve understood correctly—some of the realities that were identified by Suzy Davies, I think.

In my previous occupation, I designed, validated, monitored and delivered qualifications. My view, based on that experience, is that the key to success is to place the learner at the heart of the programme that you are creating; what are the learners’ needs, what are their motivations, what are their hopes for the future? I feel that point (a) of the motion has at its heart an aspiration for our language, but not necessarily for our learners. It’s a good aspiration and one that also raises a political question: why aren’t we further advanced than we are today? That’s a reasonable question to ask, and it should be asked and, indeed, answered by the Minister, but it’s not one that is helpful to the learners that we want to support, in my view. In practical terms, point 4(a) could do the opposite of what it seeks to achieve, which is to bridge the gap between aspiration and practical achievement.

I learned Welsh as a second language up to GCSE level, back when the option in English-medium schools was basically, ‘Take it or leave it’. I achieved an A grade but didn’t go on to take A-level Welsh because I still lacked the confidence to study further. That confidence I feel I still lack in Welsh. The very fact that I’m making this speech today in English demonstrates a longer-term failure that the Welsh Government has actually taken steps to address, and we are asking the question today: what more can we do? But there is a deep cultural issue that I’ve seen often in my community that requires any Government intervention to be fully thought through. To give you an example, when I hear Members speaking in this Chamber and I have to pick up the earphone, I feel frustrated that my knowledge of the language is not good enough and it’s a feeling that perhaps fluent Welsh speakers may not always appreciate in that context. Yet it is a classic barrier to learning that we’ve all experienced. When something is difficult, how do we motivate ourselves, how do we avoid giving up and rejecting something—in this case, the Welsh language—that is too tough to achieve?

A good teaching and learning strategy grapples with this challenge but it also takes time to develop, sometimes through trial and error. The motion recognises this in parts, and you could say that sections (b) and (c) perhaps do, but in setting a 2018 deadline for the design and development of the qualification, it limits the time that we have to consider appropriate assessment approaches. I don’t think that additional resources on their own, such as spending money on teacher training, are going to be enough. Time and cultural development are key issues as well.

As I’ve said, I support the principle of the motion but feel that we cannot realistically achieve the aim in point 4(a) before the necessary curriculum reforms are in place. For these reasons, I’ll be supporting the motion as amended by the Welsh Government, which itself commits to publishing a realistic timeline for change.

Thank you very much. I’m going to refer to point 3 in the motion, which is on the importance of the education system in its entirety to reach the Welsh Government’s target of a million Welsh speakers. I’m going to discuss Welsh-medium education, rather than the Welsh second language qualification as such. I do note that the Welsh Government, in the ongoing consultation on increasing the number of Welsh speakers to a million, does note, under the point on education, that:

‘We need to see a significant increase in the number of people receiving Welsh-medium education and who have Welsh language skills, as it is only through enabling more people to learn Welsh that we will reach a million speakers.’

Clearly, education is crucial for you as a Government too in this area.

Today, the vast majority of Welsh speakers do learn the language at school, while the vast majority of those who were born in the middle of the last century and prior to that did learn the Welsh language at home. This is information emerging from the report published by the Welsh Language Commissioner. One of the main reasons for this change is that language transfer at home isn’t as effective now as it has been in the past. It is not that Welsh-speaking parents are less likely to transfer the language; that isn’t the problem. It is that there are fewer families in which both parents speak Welsh. Therefore, if we are to reach this target of a million Welsh speakers, it is crucial that the number of children in Welsh-medium education does increase. Clearly, Welsh-medium education is far more likely to produce Welsh speakers than English-medium education, but, unfortunately, as we have already heard, the percentage of children in Welsh-medium education isn’t increasing. The percentage of Welsh-medium schools was lower in 2014-15 than it was in 2010-11, and the numbers of children educated through the medium of Welsh doesn’t appear to be increasing much either. Therefore, it is clear that we have to be far more ambitious.

We must actually scrap this inconsistency that exists across Wales in which you have a situation where, in Cardiff, out of 124 schools in the authority, only 19 are Welsh-medium or dual-stream schools. In Merthyr Tydfil, out of 28 schools in the authority, only three are Welsh-medium or dual-stream schools. This is in stark contrast to Gwynedd and Ceredigion, where almost all schools are either Welsh medium or bilingual—a total of 167 schools.

The Welsh in education strategic plans are therefore crucially important, and that’s why I raised the question earlier with the Cabinet Secretary for local government, because there are no targets contained within those strategies; therefore, they cannot be held to account, and, therefore, how can we make real progress? We must have realistic targets and realistic timetables, and it’s not me saying that; it was Alun Davies who said that this morning at a committee where I was in attendance. He seems to be agreeing again now, which is excellent.

It may be useful to go back to the recommendations made by the Children, Young People and Education Committee in the previous Assembly—there were 17 very important recommendations that actually do provide a way forward in terms of Welsh-medium education. For example, No. 13:

‘The Minister should use the powers available to him under existing legislation to intervene where local authorities are failing to deliver their WESPs.’

That’s just one recommendation; there are many other excellent recommendations contained here.

So, certainly, we need to raise our game in terms of Welsh-medium education or we will never reach that very laudable target of a million Welsh speakers. There’s a huge amount of work to be done, and we need to drill right down in order to ensure that there is real action. Thank you.

I applaud the sentiments that Hefin David brought in his speech, and I feel very similar to him, because I had the misfortune, when I was in school, back in the 1960s, to be faced with an unpalatable choice at the age of 14: to carry on studying Welsh or to switch to German. I took the decision then to switch to German. The result is that I could make a very passable speech here in German, but, unfortunately, I could not do the same in Welsh. But I hope, by the end of my sojourn in this place I will have achieved reasonable fluency in the language.

UKIP will be supporting the Plaid Cymru motion today, and indeed the Conservative amendments, and we will oppose the Government amendment, because the Government amendment removes the sense of urgency from the motion, and that is what we now need. As Llyr Gruffydd said in his speech, it is the eleventh hour for the Welsh language, and although the 2011 census showed some encouraging signs in the age stratification tables, younger people being able to speak the language, and subsequent surveys in 2013, nevertheless these are self-selecting, and one can’t entirely trust those figures.

At the Eisteddfod this year, the archdruid said that, without the language, we have nothing. I didn’t quite agree with him if you take that literally, but I know what he meant, and I agree with his sentiments, because a language is a pedigree of a nation. It is what actually marks out the Welsh nation, and it is the essential spine of national sentiment in Wales. We’re fortunate in comparison with Ireland in that respect. It’s religion that has been the essence of their nationalism, but in Wales I think language is one of the principle features of it, and it’s one of which I approve. I approve of the aspiration of a million Welsh speakers by 2050, and I approve also of the appointment of the Minister to his position. As a robust and combative individual, he is the bulldozer of the administration, and if anybody can achieve this objective, it is him, and I wish him all success in that.

The big problem that we have in a world of globalisation, of course, is the growing dominance of English worldwide and the threat that that poses to all minority or smaller languages. That is the practical difficulty that we have to face in Wales, but what we must seek to achieve is that Welsh does become the language of the playground, of leisure and the home, because that is the way in which its preservation and advance will be obtained.

It’s a very short debate. I agree with Hefin David—it deserved a lot more than 30 minutes. I don’t want to take up too much time, but I just want to put on record that UKIP is fully behind the sentiments behind the motion for debate today, and I hope that we’ll have other opportunities to explore the things that the motion asks for on another occasion.

Thank you very much. I call on the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I also add my thanks to Llyr and to Plaid Cymru for finding the time to hold a discussion on this issue this afternoon. The Government will be supporting all of the amendments this afternoon, not because we think these slow down the progress that we are making, but because we want to emphasise where there is agreement around the Chamber this afternoon. I think that there is a great deal more agreement than the debate has perhaps reflected up till now. I will try to emphasise, in the time that I have, where that agreement lies.

Sian Gwenllian and Suzy Davies have emphasised the importance of education in the new strategy we will be launching next year. I agree with you that education is vitally important to reach the target of a million Welsh speakers. Sian Gwenllian has asked whether I would intervene if there were to be schemes that came before us that were insufficient. The answer is that I would intervene. I have made that entirely clear in the Chamber, and Kirsty Williams will be making that clear with the local authorities when they meet tomorrow. We are serious when we talk about creating a million Welsh speakers over the coming years, and we are serious about how we are going to achieve that. And when I say that we’re serious, I do listen to Hefin David’s words, and I listen to what he said about the culture that we’re working within. It’s very important to acknowledge that it’s not the Wales that we would all want to see, but Wales as it is today that we’re working with. That involves moving from where we are at present, with a kind of speed and progress that we want to make, and the speed that we can achieve, accepting where we are today.

There is no disagreement in this Chamber about Sioned Davies’s report. There’s no disagreement that we do have to move from a situation where Welsh as a second language is not succeeding to create Welsh speakers. And we have to move to a continuum of teaching Welsh from the early years to the end of the school period.

We have to move from where we are to where we want to be. The debate that we are having, I think, is how we achieve that, not, perhaps the timetable, because we all know—and to answer Llyr’s question in his opening speech—that we will be moving towards a new curriculum in 2021, and we will be moving towards looking at the kinds of qualifications that we have at that time to see what kind of qualifications we will need for the future. So, we will be considering those issues in 2021.

So, what do we do from today and until 2021? I think that we have to develop the workforce to enable us to ensure that we can expand the provision of teaching of the Welsh language for it to happen in more depth than it has in the past. We have to ensure that we have the resources in the workforce and in schools in order to achieve that. We have to change the curriculum and change the way that we have been teaching. We are changing the curriculum, and I do think that the letter that we have all received from Qualifications Wales does assist us with that, because it shows that we are changing, and changing next year, how Welsh is going to be taught.

All of us—. I do appreciate Hefin’s words, and I had the same kind of options and choices that faced Neil Hamilton. I left school with no Welsh—I wasn’t able to sing ‘Hen Wlad fy Nhadau’. No child, I hope, will face that kind of situation after the changes that we want to see coming into force. So, we have moved on this, and we are making progress. We are going to ensure that there are realistic targets. We could debate now what is realistic and what is unrealistic. I accept that, and I do look forward to that debate. But I do want to be entirely clear that Welsh as a second language will not be a part of the new curriculum. There will be a continuum of Welsh teaching in the new curriculum. Before we move towards that new regime, I do hope that the children of Wales won’t be failed over the interim period, because we are going to emphasise speaking and using the Welsh language, not just learning from books, but speaking Welsh, using the Welsh language, feeling confident to use the Welsh language, having opportunities for people to improve their Welsh to ensure that people and children leaving school feel that they are able to use the Welsh language. We are going to be doing that from next year onwards.

The name, perhaps, won’t please everyone at all times, but I would ask those who are concerned about these things to look at the content and to look at the curriculum. When we do that, I think that there will be more agreement than some might think.

So, I do hope this afternoon—. I am very pleased that we have had the opportunity to debate and consider this issue, and I do hope that we will have an opportunity to do that very soon again. But, please, let no-one leave this debate thinking that there isn’t a commitment by this Government to change the way that the Welsh language is being taught in English-medium schools in Wales. There’s no way that we are going to let the children of Wales leave school unable to speak Welsh.

Thank you. I’ll call Llyr Gruffydd to briefly reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd, and thank you to all the Members who have contributed to the debate. Thank you also for the support for the intention behind the motion—the difference is, of course, in how we go about this, as the Minister has said, and at what pace the various different elements are brought together. Of course, that makes it even more distressing to think that three years have passed and we’re still waiting for the Government to tell us what their plan is and what their timetable is. Just imagine how much capacity building could have happened in that three-year period in order to take us closer to our target. But I do accept what the Minister said, and I’m sure that the passion in his voice will be reflected in the way in which this Government will actually take action in this area.

I hear what Hefin David has to say, and I thank him for his contribution. I think he’s quite right in saying that perhaps there hasn’t been enough focus on the learner—in terms of the motion, but more broadly, too. But, of course, what I see is the Robert Hill report in 2013 stating that only in around one school in 10 do pupils make excellent progress in acquiring Welsh second language skills. And that was even before Professor Sioned Davies’s report. Well, that regime is letting learners down, and that’s what makes me impatient to see the change that we do need.

I agree 100 per cent with Sian Gwenllian that the Welsh in education strategic plans do have a lot to answer for, and I’m pleased to hear that the Minister would be willing to intervene. Of course, what we want is to get to a point where there is no need for intervention, because the legwork would have been done, as those plans are being drawn up. So, we look forward to getting to that point. We could be three years closer to our objective, but we are not. I hear the Minister’s comments, and I do hope that this debate will at least have ensured that we have had those commitments and that they have now been made a little more robustly than they have perhaps been in the past. So, thank you all for your contributions.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Thank you. Therefore, I’ll defer voting on this item until voting time.

We’ll move on to the next item on our agenda, which is again a Plaid Cymru debate, on the membership of the European single market. I call on Adam Price to move the motion. Adam.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. This one-line motion has a very simple goal: it’s to bring some clarity to the current position in terms of the Government’s policy on Brexit. We’ve seen a policy that is confused, chaotic and completely lacking in any credibility. That obviously has incredibly detrimental consequences for the interests of the people of Wales as we face probably one of the biggest challenges that any of us have faced in our lifetime.

With the latest attempt by the First Minister, it’s not so much a case of a u-turn by the First Minister, but a pirouette every time he gets up on his feet. After the latest attempt to clarify, in the ‘Western Mail’, I was more confused than ever. Apparently, it doesn’t matter what we call it, so we can just make it up as we go along, which he frequently does. He, apparently, is in favour of access to the single market, not membership. Well, to quote the Institute for Fiscal Studies, access to the single market is a virtually meaningless concept. Every European country has access under World Trade Organization rules to the market et cetera, it’s the terms under which that access is provided. Single market membership, as the IFS has said, involves the elimination of barriers to trade in the way that no existing trade deal, customs union or free-trade agreement can offer.

It’s curious to me, and I don’t quite understand it, that the First Minister has aligned himself with the advocates of a hard Brexit—with UKIP and David Davis—against the First Minister of Scotland and the Mayor of London, both of whom are firmly for membership of the single market. He’s also, even more curiously, perhaps, aligned himself with Jeremy Corbyn, who has also come out against membership of the single market. This is what his rival, Owen Smith, said about that position, which is now shared by the Welsh Government:

‘Tens of thousands of Labour members and trade unionists will be worried to hear that Jeremy Corbyn appears to agree with David Davis that our membership of the Single Market is not worth fighting for.’

We’ve had this illusory concept, of course, of single market access without free movement presented as a policy, and yet, even in the last few days, we’ve heard the litany of voices—the people who will actually decide on the final Brexit deal—saying this is a geopolitical impossibility. Jean-Claude Juncker, the President of the Commission, has said so in the last few days; Guy Verhofstadt, the lead negotiator of the European Parliament, who will have a vote on the Brexit deal, has said that, if the UK wants access to the single market, it must accept freedom of movement. The Visegrád nations in central and eastern Europe—four of them—have said that they will veto any Brexit deal that will prevent freedom of movement for their citizens. The Taoiseach of Ireland has said the EU will not allow free access to its single market without reciprocal free movement. And the Prime Minister of Malta—who, by the way, will be the President of the European Union, chairing the Brexit discussions when they begin—said, ‘I don’t think there’s a situation where one can discuss access to the single market without freedom of movement.’

The reality of this, of course, is that the current position of the First Minister of Wales is incredibly detrimental to Wales. We’ve seen the Japanese Government make clear that Japanese businesses in the UK invested here in the belief that they would be able to trade with the rest of the EU on the same terms as anywhere else in Europe. We would lose access to Horizon 2020 and Erasmus if we are not members of the single market, of the European Economic Area. I can’t understand it.

The reason that the First Minister has said he adopts this position is because of freedom of movement. And, again, I find this really strange, because, as has been pointed out in the Chamber, on 24 June, the day after the result, the First Minister, quoted on ITV and Wales Online, quoted on Julie Morgan’s website, said that one of his red lines was that we retain freedom of movement of people. That was on 24 June, the day after. I asked the Cabinet Secretary for finance when the policy changed; an answer did not come. I went back and checked the original press release, and it is true that the statement on the Welsh Government website—the third of the six priorities does not mention freedom of movement, from 24 June. But, one of the wonders of being bilingual, I checked the Welsh language version, which does, actually, under the third point, curiously, mention freedom of movement. Is this a case of a retrospective policy development? You change your mind, and therefore you go back and change the policy and the press notice that was put out at the time.

The Government, I understand, has now confirmed that they did change the original version of that press notice, which did include a commitment to freedom of movement, and that they forgot to change the Welsh language version. Not only misleading, but misleading and inept as well. What a combination to have as a Government at this time. I asked the Cabinet Minister when the policy changed. Well, we now know exactly, with precision. Because the original press notice, in English as well, maintaining a commitment to freedom of movement, went out at 9.20 a.m. on 24 June, and it was corrected by 10.04 a.m. So, in those 44 minutes, we’re led to believe—. Presumably, there was a Cabinet meeting, was there? Presumably there was a discussion with the other members of the Labour group, and with the Liberal Democrat member of the Government. Policy on a fundamental matter wasn’t brought to this Assembly; it was changed by diktat in 44 minutes. No way to run a Government on anything, least of all on probably one of the most important challenges that our people face in this generation.

Thank you very much. I have selected the amendment to the motion. I call on Mark Isherwood to move amendment 1 in the name of Paul Davies.

I move amendment 1, noting the importance of access to the EU single market for the Welsh economy; calling for clarity on the Welsh Government’s position on the free movement of people between the UK and EU after the UK leaves the EU; welcoming the interest in establishing new trade agreements between the UK and other countries around the world; and calling on the Welsh Government to work with the UK Government to ensure the best deal for wales.

Carwyn Jones, as we’ve heard, appears to have dropped his commitment to retaining the free movement of people. His statement on 13 September called for continuing access to the single market for goods and services. But his statement on 24 June had gone further, when he said,

‘it is vital that the United Kingdom negotiates to retain access to the 500 million customers in the Single Market and that we retain free movement of people.’

Given EU insistence that full membership of the European single market requires free movement of goods, services and people, will this First Minister therefore confirm that he now seeks access rather than full membership?

As I noted last week, two months ago, the UK Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union announced that the UK already had 10 post-Brexit trade deals lined up. We were told that we would be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the United States, but it now seems possible that there will be a UK-US deal before any EU-US deal. The same may be true of Canada, which is certainly more interested in a bilateral deal with London than endless arguments with continental protectionists. From Australia to Uruguay, countries are lining up to sign trade deals with the United Kingdom.

When Theresa May made her first visit to Wales as Prime Minister in July, she said that she wants the Welsh Government to be involved and engaged in Brexit negotiations. Clearly, we very much support that. So, let us together champion initiatives such as the Country Land and Business Association Cymru’s New Opportunities campaign to ensure that farming, the rural economy and the environment in Wales are treated as a priority as the UK prepares for Brexit. They’re optimistic and see significant potential to do things better, but to do this, they’re calling on Governments in Cardiff and Westminster to work together to prioritise agriculture and food exports in Brexit and trade negotiations, and improve protection for consumers and the environment, whilst reducing burdens on business.

When people voted to leave the EU on 23 June, they were voting for control. That means that what Britain does once we leave the EU is a matter for the British and Welsh people and the Parliaments and Governments they elect. This process is not about picking which bits of our membership of the EU we like and want to keep; it’s about forging a new role for ourselves in the world—a deal bespoke to us, not off the shelf. It won’t be a Swiss-style deal or a Norwegian-style deal, or any other country that you can think of; it will be a UK deal. Britain is a bold, outward-looking nation, or should I say ‘family of nations’? It’s the fifth largest economy in the world; it was the second-fastest-growing major economy in the world last year and it ranked in the top six countries in the world as a place to do business, with record employment and the deficit cut by almost two thirds since its peak in 2010. So, we can be confident about the fundamental strengths of the UK economy and optimistic about the role we will forge for the UK and Wales, building on our strength as a great union of trading nations in the future.

The United Kingdom will leave the European Union and we will build a new relationship with the European Union. That new relationship will include control over the movement of people from the EU into the UK, but also include the right deal for trade in goods and services. That is how to approach it. Theresa May told the United Nations General Assembly yesterday that we’re committed to giving the British people more control over the decisions that affect them as we leave the European Union. She also said that the UK did not vote to turn inwards when it backed Brexit, and that the UK would not walk away from our partners in the world. Amen to that.

I think it’s worth just repeating that we didn’t want to leave the EU, but the majority of the people of Wales disagreed, and much as I sympathise with Simon Thomas’s motion for Plaid Cymru, noting the importance of membership of the European single market, which has been enormously important to the Welsh economy, the referendum result was clear. And the only way that we can be members of the European single market is by being members of the European Union. Therefore, we can’t support the motion. We do support Paul Davies’s amendment, because access to the single market is something that the First Minister has repeatedly said that we support—full and unfettered access.

But it’s rich of the Tories to ask the Welsh Government for clarity. We don’t have clarity form the UK Government. It’s they who have put us on the path of leaving the EU; it’s they who have failed to plan for what happens next. We didn’t want to leave. We warned of the economic consequences. It was the First Minister who warned that Wales would lose out if we were outside the single market. It was our Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, who promised we’d prosper outside of the EU. Now, it’s up to him and the PM to spell out how.

My concern is how we address the underlying disaffection that fuelled the vote to leave. In my view, the referendum was a cry of pain. Voters that I spoke to in Llanelli were fed up and thought they had nothing to lose. Since devolution, we’ve managed to stabilise Welsh economic performance but we’ve been swimming against the tide of an economic model that concentrates wealth in the south-east of England and relies on that to trickle down to other parts. That approach has failed. The vote to leave was as much a protest against that as it was a protest against the EU. We could use Brexit as a trigger, a spur, to develop a radical economic strategy that tackles that likely fallout from Brexit and which re-establishes Wales as a western furnace of innovation and industry.

The digital revolution is transforming the world we live in at a speed that has never before been witnessed. We must seize the opportunities presented or we will be left behind. We need to build on what we’ve got. Professor Karel Williams’s work on the foundational economy is forged on his study of his home town, Llanelli. They may not be glamorous sectors, but there’s much we can do with the everyday: food, energy and healthcare. These are sectors that have become dominated by large-scale privatised companies. Here’s where we need to take back control; not tear up trade rules that we rely on, but take back control of our local economy to benefit our communities and the four in 10 Welsh workers employed in these everyday sectors.

I listened with interest to Adam Price’s speech. The decision to leave the EU was the biggest shock in post-war foreign policy. It’s unsettled the markets. It’s no surprise it’s unsettled Governments. The First Minister is acutely aware that the case for Brexit was sold on extra money for the NHS and on the Australian-style points system. We didn’t support that, but despite that our voters did, and it would be wrong to ignore those lessons. We must give space to the UK Government to come up with their solutions. I share his scepticism that it’ll work. I share the scepticism. [Interruption.] I’m not sure if I have time to give way.

It’s up to you.

I share his scepticism, but let’s give them the space to prove that what they said they could deliver, they will deliver.

It’s up to you if you want to take an intervention.

If I have time, I’m happy to.

I thank the Member for Llanelli for giving way. Can he confirm, based on what he’s just said, which I think is very significant indeed, is it now Welsh Labour policy to support an Australian points system as immigration policy in the United Kingdom? [Interruption.] That’s why I’m asking for clarification.

Well, I’m happy to clarify. Of course, that is not—not that I make up Welsh Labour policy. My point is that I’m trying to explain the First Minister’s position, which is that he’s acutely aware of the message our voters sent, in contrast to the message we gave them. They listened to the lies of the leave campaign that Brexit would deliver a different approach to immigration and extra money for the NHS. I share the scepticism that that will be delivered. But we cannot come out simply saying, ‘We’ve not heard that message and we support freedom of movement as currently constituted.’ Let’s give the UK Government space to come up with a deal, which they say they will. I doubt the deal is going to be feasible, which is why I think we may well return to this question. But it is not for us to fill in the gaps in their thinking. What I’m saying is, ‘Let’s focus on what motivated our voters to reject Europe.’ It’s said, ‘Never waste a crisis.’ So, let’s not waste this opportunity to rejig our economy, to refocus on what matters.

Well, yet again we see Plaid Cymru wanting to ignore the wishes of the Welsh electorate. Is this because Plaid Cymru does not believe the proletariat has the intelligence to make an informed decision? One of the key reasons we heard time after time on the doorstep was ‘No free movement of peoples.’ When will Plaid Cymru listen to the people?

[Inaudible.]—agree with you now, David. So, you know, celebrate a victory; they actually agree with UKIP policy.

Thank you. [Interruption.] By all means, but that does not cover the fact that you are ignoring the will of the Welsh people, which was given to you in a democratic vote.

Have you finished?

Yes.

Thank you very much. Neil Hamilton.

A very commendable brevity on the part of my honourable friend. [Laughter.] I’m not sure I shall be able to replicate it, but what one must do, I think, in all these debates on the single market is to keep matters in perspective. Exports to the EU amount to about—talking about the UK now—5 per cent of GDP and, of that 5 per cent, 65 per cent of the trade would be subject to a tariff level of 4 per cent of the maximum if we came to no agreement whatever with the EU. So, only about one third of that—1.5 per cent of GDP—would be subject to an average level of tariffs of about 15 per cent. We’re not talking about a game-changing set of figures here. Of course it would produce some transitional problems for some industries if there were no trade deal to be done with the EU, but it’s massively in the interests of the EU to come to a free-trade arrangement with us. The deficit in our trade with the EU this year will be approaching £100 billion a year.

If we just take the example of cars, the deficit in cars alone is £23 billion and, of that £23 billion, £20 billion is with Germany alone. We buy 820,000 cars from Germany in this country every year. Is it conceivable that the German Government is going to facilitate a situation where there is no successor trade deal with the UK? I just don’t believe it is possible. Germany is not just the motor of the European economy, because half of the economy of the EU are basket cases, largely because they’re in the eurozone, but the German economy is the motor of the European economy and, of course, it is also the engine house of political decision making in the European Union as well. Of course, Chancellor Merkel is now in very severe political difficulties in her own country because of her own failure to recognise the political problems that are caused by uncontrolled mass immigration, both into and within the EU. This is something that simply has to be recognised. I cannot understand the blinkered approach of Plaid Cymru and a few in the Labour Party as well who seem to think that mass immigration is not a problem. So, it is inconceivable in my view that the Government—any Government—following this referendum result, could possibly adopt a policy of full membership of the single market, because, as Simon Thomas pointed out, Lee Waters is in fantasy land if he thinks that you can be in the single market without having uncontrolled immigration. So, to be like Norway, a part of the single market, also implies that you have to have free movement of peoples within the EU and any countries that are in agreement with it.

So, I think that we’ve got to see that the real advantage of the options that the referendum gives us is not membership of the single market, but actually our freedom to trade with the rest of the world and to strike trade deals with other countries, as Mark Isherwood has pointed out. So, what this is all about is freedom for our Government to decide for ourselves the policy that is going to govern our own people and the laws that are made in this country so that our own politicians, who are answerable and accountable to the electorate at elections, are actually responsible for making those decisions.

So, this is a great opportunity. There are challenges, of course, but the challenges are minor compared with the opportunities and therefore I welcome the conversion of the First Minister to UKIP policy on migration and I hope that this will infect other parties as well and that the Labour Government here in Cardiff will see the massive opportunities that are open to Wales as a result of the decision of the people, which was forced upon them on 23 June.

Thank you very much. I call the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, Ken Skates.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I thank Members for their contributions today and start by saying that, as a Government, we have been absolutely clear about the importance of full and unfettered access to the EU single market? This is a fundamental priority. We must have access, tariff-free, for goods and services to the EU single market with no technical barriers in place.

We have also been absolutely clear that Wales is open for business and have not wavered from this message since the vote to leave the EU was taken. The fundamentals that make Wales a great place to live, work and invest in remain. We are currently taking forward a significant and challenging piece of work to analyse a vast range of data and options to help inform Wales’s position.

These issues are not simple. The European advisory group meets next week and the Council for Economic Renewal also has a powerful contribution to make. Across the sectors, we are listening and, of course, we are listening here in this Chamber. We welcome contributions to the debate about our future interests. In due course, we will set out fuller details on our approach to the negotiations to ensure the best possible outcome for the people of Wales. What we shouldn’t do now is allow the discussion to become focused on terminology rather than substance. This is about protecting jobs and economic growth, which I think we should all agree on.

Our reason for opposing the motion is that, in our view, talking about full membership of the single market confuses rather than clarifies what we mean, since only member states are indisputably members of the single market and continuing EU membership is clearly incompatible with the referendum result. What other non-EU countries have—such as Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and others—are negotiated and variable agreements with the European Union. The stated intention of the UK Government is not to take an existing model off the shelf, but to negotiate a specific agreement that reflects the diverse interests of the United Kingdom as a whole. That’s the intention of the UK Government, and our aim is to ensure that Wales’s interests are fully represented and present in that negotiation.

So, in this debate, let’s focus on substance. Our headline economic goal is a straightforward one, and one that I’ve been crystal clear on since 23 June. We must continue to have full and unfettered access for goods and services to the EU single market. ‘Unfettered’ means without tariffs, quotas or technical barriers. I accept that Plaid Cymru have said on numerous occasions—for example, Steffan Lewis himself said it—if full membership of the single market is the best option for Wales, that is what the Welsh First Minister should advocate. I accept the position taken by Plaid Cymru, but I cannot agree with it for the simple reason that to be a member of EFTA is not to automatically be a member of the single market. Indeed, on their own website, let’s just see how they describe themselves. They say that EFTA is an international agreement that enables these three EFTA states to participate in the single market, not to be members of the single market. To be members of the single market means that you have voting rights, that you have decision-making rights—it means being a member of the EU. [Interruption.] Let’s just have some humility in this Chamber. You lost on 23 June. The vote was lost. We all lost—we lost together. Let’s accept that. The difference is I accept what the people of Wales said. Now, I think it’s rather a brave or bold decision that you’ve taken in your motion to ignore it.

Will you give way?

Absolutely.

He’s just telling us that membership of the single market doesn’t actually exist outside the EU. So, why was the former shadow Secretary of State for Wales, Owen Smith, saying that that is his policy? Was he making it up as well?

I can’t speak on behalf of Owen Smith, but the point that you’re making is that you would wish Wales, against the will of the people, to be a member of the European Union, when the result was very clear on 23 June. You cannot be a member of the single market without being a member of the European Union.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I’m very grateful to you for taking the intervention. You talked of humility just a little earlier. You surely do recognise that the Welsh Government’s position has changed since 24 June, when point 3 of the six points that were put forward by the Welsh Government talked of goods, services and people. I note that you haven’t once said ‘people’ today. I happen to agree with the points you’re making, but you have moved the position, and the Welsh Government’s position has changed.

I will come to the point of people, but, just to remind you of what the First Minister said to you directly in response to a question yesterday, when you asked him this very same question about movement of people, he said:

‘Access to the single market for goods and services is the red line; the issue of free movement of people is something that will need to be examined and discussed as part of the negotiations.’

Because it is such a complex issue that we must analyse. What I’m concerned with is making sure that what we get out of that deal is in the best interests of people who live and work in Wales.

As I say, we want—[Interruption.] As I say, we want, very clearly, unfettered access to the single market so that Wales remains an attractive place for investors and exporters. We also want a robust settlement, clearly, to replace any lost European Union spending, and we want a secure farming sector.

Wales’s economy is in an incredibly strong position. We are outperforming all other parts of the UK in terms of driving down unemployment and, indeed, we’ve seen the sharpest decline in the rate of unemployment over the past 12 months. But we must build on our successes and develop economic priorities that deliver for everyone in Wales in every community of our country, as Lee Waters rightly said.

Now, returning to the point of free movement of people raised by the opposition Member, the leader of the Conservative party, first, let me be very clear about our view that EU citizens living and working in Wales are valued members of our society, and, as a consequence, they should certainly be able to remain here after the UK’s exit from the EU. Our economy, our culture, our public services and society have benefitted hugely from the contribution of EU citizens living in Wales. Let me be absolutely clear in my condemnation of any xenophobia whatsoever, or racism, directed at any members of the immigrant community, EU citizens or otherwise.

Migration featured as a very significant issue in the EU referendum debate, and the UK Government has signalled its intentions to introduce further controls. This is among the issues that we will discuss with the UK Government, with our devolved partners, and with our stakeholders. Migrants form an essential part of our economy and public services and we’re working to understand more, precisely, about what our future needs are. We do not want to see controls introduced that would harm job security or job creation for people who live in Wales, nor would we wish to see harm caused to Welsh public services. Let me state very clearly that we will not stand for any form of racism or bigotry in Wales. Members, I can assure you that, whilst we may well be listening to and responding to concerns about immigration, we will also stand firm against discrimination.

Thank you very much. I call on Adam Price to reply to the debate briefly, thank you.

Well, I think that what we’ve just heard from the Minister must fill us all with a sense of despair. Because I realise there are different positions in this Chamber in terms of the best Brexit for Wales, and they’re held for legitimate and sincere reasons, but I think that most of us would agree that we need clarity and leadership from the Government that we’re currently lacking. Now we’re told that more detail—more detail—will appear at some point in terms of the Government policy.

We’ve heard the Minister claim that membership of the single market outside the EU doesn’t exist. It’s called the European Economic Area. It’s existed since 1992. It was created at the same time as the single European Act. You know—[Interruption.]—Yes, it is true that not every member of EFTA is in the EEA, but those that are in the EEA are members of the single market, and I tell you why, Lee Waters, it matters. It matters to some of the automotive component companies in your constituency, because, if you’re not members of the single market, what happens when you hit the border of the EU is all the components have to be tested in a mandatory fashion. That means 10 days’ delay. In the era of just-in-time production, that kills your supply chain in the automotive sector. That’s why membership of the single market is important.

And talk about humility: I just shared with Members of the Assembly the fact that not only has the Government changed its policy without telling us, they actually changed the original press release that the leader of the Welsh Conservatives was referring to. Why—to spare the blushes of the First Minister? I’m not sure if this is cockup or conspiracy, but it’s not acceptable for you to say one thing, then, when your opinion changes, or circumstances change, you change the press release and there’s not even an apology issued to Members of this place.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Thank you very much. Therefore, we will defer voting on this item until voting time.

We move on to our next item on the agenda, which is the Welsh Conservatives debate on transport in north Wales and I call on Mark Isherwood to move the motion—Mark.

Following publication by the North Wales Economic Ambition Board of a growth vision for the economy of north Wales and its submission to the UK and Welsh Governments, this motion is unashamedly about north Wales.

The vision is supported by the leaders and chief executives of all six unitary authorities within the region, the North Wales Business Club, Bangor University, Glyndŵr University, Coleg Cambria and Grŵp Llandrillo Menai college.

North Wales is a united region with a strong sense of identity, and the vision gives clear direction for future planning. It sets out shared aims and aspirations

‘for a confident, cohesive region with sustainable economic growth, capitalising on the success of high value economic sectors and its connection to the economies of the Northern Powerhouse and Ireland’.

Although we agree with Plaid Cymru’s amendment 1 about the importance of transport connections for the whole of Wales, it is not appropriate to this north Wales-specific debate. However, we will support Plaid Cymru’s amendment 2, which matches Welsh Conservative proposals for an integrated transport travel card for the whole of Wales, recognising that a north Wales-specific scheme would be a matter for north Wales under the devolved powers it is seeking. Our motion recognises the importance of transport connections within north Wales and between north Wales and the north-west of England and the English midlands, and believes that the proposals contained within the ‘Growth Vision for the Economy of North Wales’ offers the basis for improving the economic performance of north Wales.

The UK Government announced, in its March 2016 budget that it was opening

‘the door to a growth deal for north Wales’

and that it would, crucially, be looking for the next Welsh Government to devolve powers down and invest in the region as part of any future deal. The UK Government has also encouraged local partners to prioritise their proposals, which is precisely what this growth vision does when it calls for the devolution of powers by the Welsh Government over employment, taxes, skills and transport, stating that this would boost the economy, jobs and productivity, create at least 120,000 jobs and boost the value of the local economy from £12.8 billion to £20 billion by 2035.

As the vision states:

‘The region is prepared and ready to accept new responsibilities and powers on key decisions that affect the region…through a “Team North Wales” approach.’

Examples they provide include:

‘Integration of employment and skills programmes at the regional Level’,

including Welsh Government skills initiatives

‘to tackle worklessness in a much more meaningful and effective way’;

an asset-backed investment fund achieved if a local authority and Welsh Government public body assets ‘were pooled’;

‘Strategic land use planning…identifying the supply of land required for housing’

and economic growth

‘more regionally and strategically, as well as identifying strategic sites;’

‘A regional transport authority with the opportunity to prioritise schemes’

from across the region;

‘A business support and trade team’;

and, with business rates devolved to Wales,

‘New fiscal powers at the regional level’

particularly ‘Tax Increment Finance projects’ funded by additional business rates tax revenue gains ‘from economic development activities’.

Both north Wales and the UK Government, therefore, need to hear from the Welsh Government how it proposes to respond and take this forward. It is, therefore, concerning that when I called for a Welsh Government response to the north Wales growth vision here last week, the Welsh Government leader of the house stated and said that they awaited the UK Government’s response. Well, yes, we do need the UK Government’s response, but we need the Welsh Government’s response, I would argue, first, and north Wales needs to hear the Welsh Government response given their key calls are to the Welsh Government for internal devolution. The Welsh Government’s position, described yesterday, therefore, wasn’t good enough, and we hope to hear better today.

Welsh Conservative policy, outlined at the 2016 Welsh general election, would create a north Wales powerhouse. By working with local authorities, business groups and the voluntary sector, Welsh Conservatives would devolve key economic levers and deliver true devolution to north Wales, with powers devolved to a regional north Wales board, delivering economic growth levers to north Wales and letting businesses and people take control. These would include extra powers over business rates, planning and integrated transport via an independent body.

At a meeting in November 2012, attended by leaders and chief executives of local authorities and the business community in north Wales, and chaired by the then Secretary of State for Wales, David Jones, it was agreed that the North Wales Economic Ambition Board would build a business case for the electrification of the rail line from Holyhead to Crewe and develop actions and strategies for transport in north Wales.

The Growth Track 360 report was issued in May 2016 by the Mersey Dee Alliance, the Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership and the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, calling for substantial rail investment to enable growth in the cross-border economy of the north Wales and Mersey Dee region. Prior to this, the ‘Fast Track to Growth’ north Wales and Northern Powerhouse document noted that north Wales, the Mersey-Dee area in Cheshire and the M56 and A55 corridor form a regional economy worth £35 billion, and there are 1 million cross-border commutes per month between north Wales to and from north-west England. It added, however, that north Wales has the highest proportion of travel-to-work-by-car rates in the UK, and poor transport infrastructure is strangling economic growth; that although tourism is worth £1.8 billion to the north Wales economy, equivalent to 40,000 jobs, current rail services are a drag on the region’s competitiveness; and that freight from Ireland arrives at Holyhead by HGV roll-on/roll-off, and makes its onward journey along congested roads.

Gross value added, as we know, measures the value of the goods and services per head of population produced in an economy. Economic development has been devolved, in the hands of the Welsh Government, since 1999. According to the latest published figures, west Wales and the Valleys, including four north Wales counties—Anglesey, Gwynedd, Conwy and Denbighshire—has the lowest GVA of all UK sub-regions, at 64 per cent of the UK average. Anglesey has the lowest GVA amongst all UK local areas, at just 53.5 per cent of the UK average. Even GVA per head in Wrexham and Flintshire, which stood at 99.3 per cent of the UK average in 1999, has now fallen to just 86 per cent of the UK average. So, it is in this context that the North Wales Economic Ambition Board states:

‘The Vision complements the developing strategy for the Northern Powerhouse, is fully integrated with the Strategy Growth Bid submission of the Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership, and has the Growth Track 360 plan for rail investment at its core. By building an investment strategy around this outward-looking vision we can succeed in capitalising on the opportunities within the North Wales region whilst adding value to a connected and cumulative set of regional plans for Northern England and the wider UK economy.’

So, our motion calls on the Welsh Government to publish a plan to improve and upgrade the A55 trunk road. In respect of the A55, the ‘Growth Vision’ document calls for strategic projects, including the long-awaited Aston Hill improvement, the Flintshire bridge alternative route, congestion issues at Halkyn and Abergele, the A483/A55 junction at Chester business park, Holyhead port access and Menai crossing. A third Menai crossing has been on the agenda for more than a decade. A consultation commissioned by the Welsh Government in 2007 came up with eight options to ease traffic backlog on the Britannia bridge, yet no action has been taken since. So, guess what, jump forward to August 2016 and the Welsh Government announce that consultants are to be hired later this year to look at routes for a proposed new crossing to Anglesey. A cynic might say that it’s groundhog day all over again. North Wales cannot afford yet more apparent action as a smokescreen for doing nothing over nine years.

Our motion calls upon the Welsh Government to work with the UK Government on the North Wales Economic Ambition Board to deliver upgrades to the north Wales rail line. Alongside electrification, the ‘Growth Vision’ document calls for service frequency and speed improvements, network capacity improvements, rolling stock improvements and improved stations at Deeside, much of which is in the gift of the Welsh Government, rather than the UK Government.

About 30 per cent of the Welsh economy is in north-east Wales alone, and it cannot be acceptable that rail’s share for travel to work is just 1 per cent in Flintshire and 0.9 per cent in Wrexham, or that one in five applicants for work on the Deeside industrial park subsequently turned down interviews or job offers due to inaccessibility—now including my own son.

Following £10.7 million of UK Government investment, the Liverpool city region combined authority approved the full business case and release of additional funding for the delivery of the Halton curve scheme in April, offering new connections between Liverpool, Liverpool John Lennon Airport, Runcorn, Frodsham, Helsby and Chester, but connections with north Wales are only ‘in future’ because the Welsh Government is dragging its feet, as usual.

Our motion calls on the Welsh Government to publish a detailed business plan for the development of the north Wales metro, while the Welsh Government’s proposals remain vague and disconnected from the collaborative approach sought in the growth vision, which doesn’t even mention a north Wales metro. As the ‘Growth Vision’ document concludes, north Wales is well placed to receive a range of new responsibilities, and is confident that the negotiated powers that will be devolved to the region will have a positive impact, boosting productivity levels and improving the employment prospects of our residents—a vision supported by Plaid Cymru leaders, Labour leaders, independent leaders, cabinets with members of all parties, including my own, and the whole of the business community and third sector. So, it’s now over to the Welsh Government to deliver.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion, and I call on Dai Lloyd to move amendments 1 and 2 tabled in the name of Simon Thomas.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I am very pleased to take part in this debate as the shadow Minister for infrastructure. As Mark has already mentioned, there are a number of things that we can all agree on. Fundamentally, this discussion is on transport and the importance of that and the influence that it has on the local economy. I wouldn’t disagree with that. Of course, it gives me an opportunity, as you will note from the way that I pronounce in Welsh, to tell you that I originally come from Merionethshire, and so these matters are very close to my heart.

But, there are a number of opportunities to promote cross-border activities between north Wales and England. In a nation that is a mature one, we don’t mind talking about cross-border working and even promoting that cross-border activity to promote the regional economy in north Wales. But, all of that talk about promoting cross-border activity between Wales and England should not impair on constructing an independent economy in Wales, in and of itself, and improving links within Wales between our different communities, and developing our own internal transport infrastructure. That’s the basis of the amendments that are before you. Because one Government after another in London, and here in Wales, have focused too much, I believe, on using large cities to drive economic growth in the hope for a cascade effect on areas such as north Wales, with the hope that things trickle down. That hasn’t happened, and the attitude is an incorrect one.

So, there is mention made in the motion of the report of the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, which believes that working on a regional basis is a crucial part of unlocking the potential of the north Wales area. I would agree with that 100 per cent. That’s why we as a party, in agreeing with that concept, have launched our policy in our opposition programme, which would establish regional development agencies to unlock economic potential, with economic policies on a regional basis. I agree very much with that.

In the time that I have remaining, I wish to talk specifically about transport and about our amendments. The first recognises the importance of transport connections within Wales and between Wales and the rest of the UK and Europe, as well as talking about the need to introduce one transport smartcard for the whole of Wales to connect all of our communities in an integrated transport system. I’m very pleased with the support for that ambition. Across the nation, we have all been campaigning for a number of years, and one of the fundamental questions that we are always asked is: why does it take so long to go from south to north Wales or from north to south Wales? The question remains unanswered. It takes three to four hours. You know that, when you have a meeting in north Wales—or when I visit family in north Wales—it is going to take the whole day, and you have to plan ahead. It always feels very far away. That’s not the way to develop a nation, and the unity of a nation. We have to come closer together—

Would the Member give way?

Nick.

Thank you for giving way, Dai. I fully agree with you on the benefits of developing a smartcard-integrated system. Would you agree with me it would be a start to get reliable, fully-integrated timetabling, so that, at the touch of a button, you’d be able to see exactly where those services are going to and from?

I agree with that 100 per cent, and when there is a bus or train that says it’s going turn up at a particular time, that it does turn up at that time. We do have to have a dependable service as well.

But, of course, we have to do something about this distance between the north and south, when it shouldn’t really exist. In other nations facing a more significant challenge than we face in drawing together the north and south parts of our nation they have done that in terms of transport, and yet we have failed to do so. Yes, it is important for our unity as a nation, and it’s important for the growth of the economy, regionally and nationally, that we can improve our transport links. In terms of being in this Senedd and in talking about any region of Wales, we are talking about the need to grow this place as a place to lead a united Welsh nation here in Wales. That starts with simple things such as us being able to reach north Wales relatively quickly, so that it doesn’t seem far away, and so that people living in north Wales don’t feel that the south is far away, and might not want to come here, and that it’s much easier for them to cross the border and miss out on what the rest of the nation can offer.

In the end, we are talking about transport, but we are also talking about the genuine need to grow as a nation, because, ultimately,

we had a nation to keep and maintain—a piece of land that bore witness to the fact that we insisted on living.

Thank you.

As Chair of the newly elected cross-party group on cross-border issues I would like to focus my contribution and remarks today on the challenges and opportunities of cross-border collaboration and the necessity for improved connectivity between north Wales and the emerging Northern Powerhouse in north England. Through cementing north Wales as an important part of this new economic region, we have, I think, the potential for seeing significant growth in north Wales and rebalancing the Welsh economy away from an over-reliance on Cardiff and south Wales.

I don’t attempt to take away or disagree with the comments made by Dai Lloyd at all in regard to better north-south links, but, Presiding Officer, cross-border movement is a routine fact, I think, for people living in many parts of Wales. In north Wales it’s absolutely crucial to the north Wales economy; a combined economy along the M56 and A55 corridor is worth £31 billion—that’s according to a Hansard report. The fact of the matter is that, rather than looking south to Cardiff, the people and businesses of mid and north Wales tend to look towards Liverpool, Manchester and the midlands, and, as a result, the border should not be an economic barrier. I know the Minister will surely agree with me on that point, living in the part of Wales that he does as well.

But the north Wales economy will undoubtedly continue to benefit heavily from the prosperity and growth in the north of England, offering employment and business opportunities for people in the north Wales region. This close economic alignment makes it increasingly important to ensure that cross-border collaboration takes place on the delivery of infrastructure projects. Now, many people living near the north of the border commute across the border each day. I note from some research that 85 per cent of these routes going across the border take place by road. So, I think this can partly be attributed to our poor and slow and often unreliable train services, so transport infrastructure must be able to adequately facilitate the cross-border flow of people, and goods for that matter as well, if people in north Wales are to alter their transport habits.

Now, it’s right, I think, that the Welsh Government works to strengthen the transport infrastructure surrounding the A55 corridor to ensure that communities can connect with the industry and investment opportunities in the north of England, which will, in turn, boost the social and economic prosperity and growth in north Wales. Furthermore, the transport network in northern England is currently benefitting from a series of UK Government investments, and these improvements in the English transport network will have considerable benefits, I think, for people living in north Wales. So, the Welsh Government has to, of course, engage effectively with those developments.

In my view and experience, as somebody who lives and represents a cross-border constituency myself, or a constituency on the border, the Welsh Government and UK Government must go further in building stronger relationships with each other. I would be interested to hear the Cabinet Secretary’s views on how he’s strengthened this relationship following concerns raised by the previous Enterprise and Business Committee that the Welsh Government’s relationship with Transport for the North does not resemble the close working relationship that Transport Scotland has with the body as well. I hope the Minister would comment on that.

I would say as well that I have recently written, Cabinet Secretary, to two of your officials to ask them whether they would attend the cross-party group on cross-border issues to understand some of the challenges of working cross-border. I haven’t had a reply yet; it’s only been a week or so. But I’d be grateful if you could indicate your willingness for them to attend that cross-party group, if that’s acceptable, Cabinet Secretary.

In conclusion, Presiding Officer, north Wales has an ambitious business community and infrastructure improvements are needed to help achieve the ambition set out by the north Wales economic ambition board. The programme for government, yesterday outlined by the First Minister, had very little meat on the bones beyond a loose commitment to developing a north Wales metro system. But I hope that the Cabinet Secretary will use the opportunity in his response to our debate today to flesh out some of his plans.

As a proud north Walian—I’m not sure I’ve ever mentioned that here before—I welcome today’s debate and the chance to be able to contribute. As others have said, north Wales is not simply, literally, physically connected to our near neighbours in the north-west of England, we’re also economically connected, too. Upgrades and investment in our region’s transport infrastructure is a key part of any strategy to grow and enhance our economy and ultimately to unlock the economic potential of north Wales.

The Welsh Labour north Wales manifesto outlined a vision to link our region in a more strategic way and to assist in delivering stronger economic growth for the area. The manifesto said—don’t worry, I’m not going to read it out verbatim now—that within 100 days of a new Welsh Labour Government, we would convene a summit of leaders from the Mersey Dee area and the Northern Powerhouse to establish a route map on how best to create a dynamic economy that benefits both sides of the border. And I look forward to seeing the progression of the route map to our economic prosperity.

And on the topic of routes—or roads, more to the point—as he said, and as other speakers before me have said, upgrades to roads like the A55 and the A494 are a crucial part of enabling this dynamic economy. We know that the east-west link, and vice versa, is a key route for travel to and from work in the area. Looking more to public transport, I understand that a rail taskforce was established to seek solutions to those well-known and well-rehearsed problems and challenges we face in north Wales, whether that be with regard to infrastructure or to the services themselves. I’d ask the Cabinet Secretary today, if this taskforce is fully operational, if we could have an update on its progress.

In addition, as a consequence of the ongoing long-term fragmentation of bus services, bus connections can often be challenging, to say the least. Constituents I speak to—many constituents don’t necessarily have a problem with having to take two buses, what they do have a problem with is when the bus that they’re arriving on arrives 10 minutes after the next bus they wanted to get on. So, we also need to look at better connections, not between bus services, but also links to those train services in the region as well. So, I’d urge that this is also addressed as part of an overarching transport and economic strategy for north Wales. Diolch.

Of course, many of the promises prior to devolution and one of the core tenets of devolution was to shorten the divide between north and south Wales. Indeed, the 1999 Welsh Labour manifesto stated:

‘We believe that improved north/south links essential to the future economic, social and cultural cohesion of Wales.’

And it promised to address the need, then, for improved road links and to introduce a new, faster rail service. Their coalition partners, the Lib Dems, promised the improvement of the quality of the strategic north-south road network. And the Plaid Cymru manifesto of the same year featured as a key objective the improvement of links within Wales and between north and south, promising a fast rail service from the north-west to Cardiff as an urgent priority, along with

‘a decent “figure-of-eight” road network giving north-south links to the four corners of Wales and connections with the main east-west routes such as the A40, the A55 and the M4.’

Here we are, 17 years on—17 years of broken promises from Labour, Plaid Cymru and the Lib Dems. The Wales Audit Office has recently criticised the Welsh Government for not doing enough to evaluate the benefits of its investment in Welsh railways. Arriva Trains Wales has the oldest rolling stock in the UK, with each train on average 27 years old, and the Cardiff-Anglesey air-link subsidy has now risen 27 per cent again in a year, costing taxpayers over £1 million annually. And whilst the Welsh Government has reduced spending on motorways, trunk roads, rail and air combined in its 2016-17 budget by 1.7 per cent, the UK Government has increased its transport budget by 3.6 per cent, and the Scottish Government has increased spending on motorways, trunk roads and rail services by 4.6 per cent.

Now, in 2016, Labour promised to unlock the potential for north Wales through the development of a north Wales metro system, and to deliver upgrades of the A55, yet there remains no detail, no plan and no vision whatsoever in the current programme for government for this. Meanwhile, the UK Conservative Government are actively exploring the electrification of the north Wales line, whilst continuing their £70 billion investment into UK transport to include the £10.7 million investment for the Halton Curve, trebling the annual investment in roads, and committing £300 million earlier this year for major projects, such as high speed 3 and the Trans-Pennine tunnel. Furthermore, they have also awarded the Welsh Government £900 million in borrowing powers, to be used over five years, to deliver much-needed improvements to infrastructure, including the A55. Yet, so far, the Welsh Labour Government has failed to utilise these powers to bring about any improvements in the North Wales region.

Llywydd, BBC Wales recently ran an article about north to south Wales travel, entitled ‘A jigsaw piece missing’. For those of us—and I mean myself as an Assembly Member travelling weekly, people wanting to do business here in the capital, and visitors to the home of devolution, here in Cardiff Bay—who undertake, or try to, this journey on a regular basis, we might just argue that there is more than one piece missing.

North Wales has the assets, it has the people and it has the entrepreneurship, businesses and ideas. It’s the Welsh Government that must recognise now that it does hold responsibility far wider than the Cardiff Bay bubble, and that it must take real action, using the borrowing powers from the UK Government to improve and upgrade transport links within, to and from our glorious north Wales.

Some years ago, it was decided that there should be an additional junction at Broughton off the A55 to serve Airbus and the newly built retail park. The new junction, in conjunction with the old one, results in the traffic being taken off the A55 at the top of Broughton village and then through the village. There’s no way to travel west from the retail park at Broughton and Airbus without going through the village. The poor planning of that junction is now causing real congestion in and around Broughton. Looking along the A55, you’ll see other examples of very, very poor planning: placing roundabouts at Penmaenmawr and other places was, as far as I’m concerned, just daft. It resulted in creating a point at which there’s an increased risk of accidents and congestion, which is now necessitating their removal.

The motion mentions that there’s a lack of hard shoulder in places. I struggle to think, actually, of a stretch along the A55 that does actually have a proper hard shoulder. Most of it doesn’t, meaning that broken-down vehicles have nowhere to go. The volume of wagons on the A55 essentially reduces the A55 to a single carriageway. The lack of forward planning at the Britannia bridge at Anglesey resulted in a dual carriageway either side of the bridge, but the bridge has a single carriageway, causing congestion on both sides. These and many other issues have been well known to the people of north Wales and those who visit there for many, many years. It’s high time that we heard some solid plans and concrete proposals from the Welsh Government as to precisely what improvements are going to be made to the A55 and when they’re going to be actually made. Thank you.

I’m pleased to contribute to this Welsh Conservatives debate on transport connections within north Wales today. Many of the points I was going to make have been made, so I won’t go over old ground. I would say, unlike Hannah Blythyn, I have the disadvantage of not being a proud north Wales Member—I’m a proud south Wales Member—and nor do I have some of the more detailed local knowledge that Michelle Brown just expressed. So, I will be a little more general in my comments.

I would say, however, that I do think that, having been in this Chamber now for nine getting on 10 years, we’ve had many debates about north Wales and I do feel that too often the people of the north do feel left out, left behind, excluded, however you want to put it—isolated maybe—from this Assembly and the decisions that are often taken here. That may be a question of perception and it may not be the right view, but it is too often the view of people in the north, and we have to do what we can to bridge that gap. As I say, I say that as a south Wales AM, who lives just up the road and finds it pretty straightforward to get home, whether that be by road, rail, bus, car—whatever the means of transport might be.

So, too often north Wales feels left out. We need to make sure that they feel that the Welsh Government is looking out for them, and that’s why bringing on major projects such as the A55 improvements that have been mentioned and future electrification of the north Wales main line are so important.

You cannot deny that a large chunk of the population do live in the south-west and the south-east, and south Wales AMs will always—I see David Rowlands nodding—make the case for infrastructure spend to be spent here, and of course we need improvements to the M4, of course we need electrification of the south Wales main line, but the north needs to feel included and needs to feel that projects are being advanced there. As Mark Isherwood said, we need to capitalise on the opportunities of the north, and there are opportunities there and growing opportunities. We need to link the north into the north of England powerhouse as that develops, and perhaps develop our own north Wales powerhouse as well.

Transport improvements are, of course, key to this, and I completely agree with the comments made by Dr Dai Lloyd earlier, and the concept, as I said in intervention, of a single integrated ticketing system across north Wales is a great one. It’s one that we’ve got in our motion, and it’s one that Plaid Cymru and other parties clearly agree with. The problem is, to coin a phrase from the previous report of the Enterprise and Business Committee from the last Assembly, it is a devilishly difficult thing to achieve. So, yes, let’s have it as an ambition, but let’s not put all our eggs in that basket in the short term. Let’s work on developing things that are immediately easier to do, such as better timetabling and better reliability of the services we have. But, yes, you’re quite right, Dai: let’s make sure that over the medium and longer term, we do have it as an ambition to connect the north and the south and mid Wales, and to make it easy to go online and book your ticket from here to Ynys Môn—as easy as we can make it.

A north Wales metro: well, that’s part of this. It’s still clearly some way off and it’s understandable at the moment that the focus of the Welsh Government is on the south Wales metro. I understand that the transport infrastructure Cabinet Secretary—let’s get the terminology right—can’t do everything at once—you’re not Superman yet, Ken, so you have to prioritise—but that does not mean that we can’t start developing a business plan at this point for a north Wales metro. I think that the people of the north would look to that as a sign that this Assembly does have the interests of the north at heart.

Finally, Presiding Officer, it is important that we develop those east-west links and the Cabinet Secretary for transport and infrastructure has made these points over the summer. Yes, we all want to develop the links between the north and the south, but being realistic, many of those vital economic links are, and for the immediate future will be, east-west. In the south, they’ll be across to Bristol and London. In the north, they’re going to be to the major cities of the north, particularly as that Northern Powerhouse develops. So, let’s not take our eye off the ball on this. I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, to take this motion in the spirit that it was meant. As I said, you can’t do everything at once, but can we have a little bit more focus on the economy of north Wales, on developing those vital transport links, capitalising on the opportunities that north Wales does provide us? Let’s look to a future Wales where the north and the south can play an equal part in developing the Welsh economy, and the population of the whole of Wales feels included.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure to respond to the debate. Ken Skates.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I’d like to thank all Members for their contributions today. I realise that, from some opposition Members, there was a little cynicism; I will forgive them for that and say that, generally, I think we are all on the same page insofar as the need to grow our economy in north Wales is concerned.

Creating a strong internal economy within Wales and growing the cross-border economy from north Wales across into the north-west of England is not mutually exclusive, but in my view, complementary. I made it clear that I see north Wales playing a full and active role in the Northern Powerhouse and creating an arc of economic activity that stretches from Holyhead to Manchester and beyond.

In answer to Hannah Blythyn’s question, I did indeed start the summer within the first 100 days of this Government with a summit in north Wales, with key cross-border stakeholders. That took place, as I say, within the first 100 days and it resulted in an agreement on a coherent regional vision, which aligns with the flagship Northern Powerhouse plan, and which will also contribute towards the potential growth deal, as it is developed.

But there is already a great deal happening here. We’re taking forward major road improvements, including a business case for the Menai third crossing; for the construction of the Caernarfon bypass; for the river Dee bridge; and, of course, we’re also assessing options to tackle congestion on the A494-A55 Deeside corridor. While funding of investment in rail infrastructure is reserved, we have used our powers to invest in rail enhancements on the Cambrian line and the network between Saltney and Wrexham.

The Member referred in his motion to ‘A Growth Vision for the Economy of North Wales’. This document was submitted to both Welsh and UK Ministers in August by local authorities and it outlines an agreed strategic direction for the north Wales economy. I received the document, as did the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. It’s an important document, and, allied to other good pieces of work, such as the Growth Track 360 report, it gives us a strong basis on which to work with the UK Government and stakeholders in north Wales to take forward economic priorities for the region.

But to progress discussion on a specific jointly funded growth deal, we await a formal announcement from the UK Government that they will open negotiations, and I sincerely hope that they do so. It’s an exciting piece of work that could—could—dovetail perfectly with a potential growth deal for the Cheshire and Warrington local enterprise partnership, as the Member identified.

I’d like to put on record my thanks to AMs across the Chamber and to MPs, including the Secretary of State and other Ministers in the Wales Office, for supporting a dynamic, cross-border growth bid and the creation of a stronger economy in north Wales.

Russell George and Nick Ramsay both made very compelling cases for pursuing investment in cross-border infrastructure, and it would be hard to disagree with either. Russell George also talked about rebalancing the economy across Wales. I fully concur and for that reason, I decided that the headquarters for Transport for Wales should be based in the Valleys, and it’s the same reason why I believe that the headquarters for the development bank in Wales should be headquartered in north Wales.

It’s also my view that we have to build a stronger relationship, as the Member rightly identified, with Transport for the North. In answer to Hannah Blythyn, I attended the latest meeting of the rail taskforce, earlier this week, brilliantly chaired by the leader of Cheshire West and Chester Council, Samantha Dixon, where we spoke about the need to ensure that there is better communication between partners and across borders. I would gladly attend the cross-party group on cross-border activity, and I’d say that, in terms of making sure that we create strong, economic ties across borders, it’s my vision that we create three arcs of prosperity and economic activity: one, as I say, that stems from Holyhead across to Manchester; another that crosses from the coast of Wales through mid Wales and into the midlands; and a third that goes from south-west Wales right along the M4 and into the south-west—

Yes, I’ll accept.

How do you respond—maybe you’re going to get to this, but you haven’t mentioned it yet—to the central tenet of the north Wales growth vision document, which is the call for responsibility for some economic and growth levers to be internally devolved to the board?

Yes, absolutely. The Member may or may not be aware that we put it our manifesto, the Welsh Labour manifesto. We actually said that we would be looking and ensuring that there is responsibility devolved to regions such as north Wales, but what we need to have is the clear go-ahead for the growth deal, because if there isn’t to be a growth deal, then we will have to look at other means of devolving responsibility and of generating economic growth in that area.

I can share with Members that I will be meeting, in the coming months, with Lord O’Neill to discuss the growth deal and to discuss other matters, and I will keep Members informed of progress. But I’ve also decided, because I think it would be valuable, to meet with the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, because I’ve said on a number of occasions my fear at his leaving the Treasury is that the Northern Powerhouse project could stall. For that reason, I think, in spite of the many differences that I may have with him over the economy and society in general, he could be an ally of north Wales in pursuing the Northern Powerhouse agenda.

Turning to point 3 of the motion, I would firstly like to clarify that we have already published our plans for improvements to the A55. They are in the form of the national transport finance plan, and it was published in July 2015. We’ve already invested significantly in key routes across north Wales, including, on the A55, a programme of improvements to increase resilience, including hardened verges as well as emergency crossovers and, of course, a £42 million programme of work to bring the A55 tunnels up to standard.

I note what the Member said about Broughton and the need to address concerns around the interchange and the junction, which currently means that traffic from the A55 in an eastern direction has to go through the village. It’s something that my officials are discussing with councillors and officials of Flintshire County Council. We are also investing around £32 million to upgrade junctions 15 and 16 on the A55 to improve safety and journey time reliability. An advanced drainage works contract is being accelerated now, and that will be operating between junctions 12 and 13 of the A55 to, again, help to reduce flood risk and improve, therefore, traffic flow.

I’ve already stated that the summit took place in July, well ahead of the 100-day deadline, that the rail taskforce met just this week and I published a five-point plan. In response to the question about the bus network, I published a five-point action plan just last week, which I think is being recognised around the UK as something that the UK Government should follow. I must say that when we do have regulation, I do not believe that we should use those powers to simply evolve a deregulated network, but we should have major change in the way that our bus network operates.

I’ll move on to rail, and I think it’s absolutely essential that the economic case for investment in electrification in control period 6 is acknowledged, and I would urge the UK Government to support this. The Member is right in saying that 12 million journeys take place across the north Wales and north-west border every year and only 1 per cent of those journeys is undertaken on a train. As we plan the next stages of the rail enhancement needs in north Wales and the Mersey-Dee area, we also need to push the UK Government to ensure that a fair share of its investment to improve connectivity within and between north Wales and other regions is realised, because, quite frankly, traditionally, Network Rail investment has been far below what we would have received had it been Barnettised for Wales.

Again, in response to the questions raised by Hannah Blythyn, the Member for Delyn, the integration of public transport services, including multimodal and multi-operator ticketing arrangements, will be the underlying principle of the north-east Wales metro. I’ll be pursuing that when better considering rail and bus services. We’re also developing proposals in the Conwy valley that will integrate bus and rail services with shared ticketing arrangements, better service coverage and reduced bus subsidy level.

To maximise the opportunities of cross-border connectivity, metro north-east will spread north and east into north England and the midlands to create a reliable, efficient and quality integrated transport network across the sub-region and beyond. Delivery of an outline business case for north Wales transport modernisation and metro north-east, setting out preferred solutions for modernising transport across the region, is an early priority. I look forward to being able to share details with Members before Christmas. The reason that that did not appear in Growth Track 360 is because Growth Track 360 was prepared ahead of the Welsh Labour manifesto where the metro was first published.

Mark Isherwood rightly identified many challenges for people who are trying to access work, but simply cannot get into work because of the lack of availability of buses or trains or because they cost too much. For that reason—and he identified Deeside Industrial Park—we are looking, as a priority project for metro north-east, at the availability of new stations within Deeside Industrial Park and upgrades to Shotton as well.

I hope that Members will join me in preparing the case for a stronger economy and a better transport network across north Wales that recognises the reality that many, many people on a daily basis cross the border but wish to live or work in north Wales.

I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Lywydd, and thank you to everyone who has participated in this debate today. I’m very pleased to hear some of the announcements that have been made by the Cabinet Secretary this afternoon in terms of a little bit more information about some of the proposed improvements to the A55, and, indeed, an update on where things are at with the metro. We look forward to receiving further information, of course, before Christmas. We’ll hold you to account for that statement now. I’m a little bit disappointed, though, that he seems now to be tying the devolution of powers and responsibility to north Wales to funding coming with a growth deal. The reality is I’ve just checked your manifesto online and there’s absolutely nothing in there about having to wait for a growth deal before any further powers are devolved to those authorities in the north. I think it is incumbent upon you as a Government, collectively—all of you as Cabinet Ministers, and the First Minister—to think about where those levers are best placed. Because the people of north Wales have come together, the stakeholders have produced what is an exciting vision for the region, which I really do believe will lead to significant investment and significant growth in the economy if they are allowed to simply get on with it, but having sticky hands with powers in Cardiff Bay isn’t going to change that situation.

But surely the Member would also recognise that what businesses are telling us, what people are telling us, is that the UK and Welsh Governments should work together in the interests of the people of north Wales, and it would be far better to integrate our policies with UK Government policies where economic growth is concerned. That means that we should seek to dovetail our approach to devolution of any power with what a UK Government initiative, such as the growth deal, would seek to achieve.

Of course it’s important that Governments work together, from Cardiff Bay to Westminster and London, and indeed local government and town halls working with you too. But, at the end of the day, it’s those stakeholders in north Wales—the local authorities, the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, the universities, the further education sector, the third sector and everybody around that table—that’s produced a plan that they believe is achievable and can be implemented if more powers are devolved to the region. So, I do think that you need to give serious consideration to that, not just reject it and try and pass the buck to the UK Government. At the end of the day, the UK Government’s making significant progress in devolving powers to regions. We’ve all seen what’s been going on across England with the local enterprise partnerships, which, of course, are given significant economic powers over their local economies in order to bring improvements. I’m pleased that you recognise the importance of working with the Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership, in particular, in terms of bringing them on-board to subscribe to a vision for the north Wales economy. Their input, of course, is very, very important.

In terms of the rail infrastructure, of course we would all like to see electrification of that north Wales line. It’s important that the UK Government work with the Welsh Government and others to look at the business case for that and to work it up. But, of course, it’s also important that the local authorities and others in north Wales do everything that they can in order to shout up the cause and sing it from the rooftops, really, about the possibilities that that could create within the region. Those cross-border connectivities are extremely important to the region. We know that the east-west economy is far more important to north Wales than the north-south economy. I take on board what you’re saying, Dai. I know you’d love to draw a slate curtain across the border, but, at the end of the day, it’s incredibly important that north Wales has access to what is north Wales’s biggest market, which is the north-west of England. It’s exactly the same for mid Wales with parts of the Midlands, as Russell George quite rightly said. [Interruption.] So, you’ve heard from—

I’ll happily—.

I’m sorry to intervene, because I haven’t followed all of the debate—I’m sure it’s out of order for me even to stand up—but why do we keep referring to borders? There hasn’t been a border between England and Wales for 1,500 years, to my knowledge.

And long may that situation continue—long may that situation continue. But, of course, there are administrative borders, and, of course, many members of your group would like those borders to be more important, shall we say, in economic terms than they currently are.

But it is important that we give north Wales the opportunity to grow, that we devolve the powers, that we make the finance available. I’m very pleased to hear that you’re going to ensure that the development bank is based in north Wales. As I said earlier on during questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, there must be a fair share of investment from that development bank into the region. And I’d just ask, Minister, that you do consider the plan that’s on the table from the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, and the other stakeholders that have contributed to shape that, because that, I believe, holds the key to unlocking the potential of north Wales, and we, certainly on these benches, will be supporting that vision for the region every step of the way.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion without amendment is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The next item on the agenda is the United Kingdom Independence Party debate on grammar schools. I call on Michelle Brown to move the motion.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Who could have predicted 20 years ago that team GB would go on to win 27 gold medals in the Olympics? Probably no-one in the Labour Party. Why? Because the name ‘Labour’ has become synonymous with failure, and because they lack ambition for their own country and people. Instead, they choose to do down the people who have entrusted them with power. In the same way that this Labour Government choose not to bid for the Commonwealth Games, it appears they are also happy to stand in the way of future generations benefiting from an education system that many of them themselves have benefited from. Bit by bit, the ladder is being pulled up from young people. First it was the effective abolition of grammar schools, which, for many young people, especially those from working class families, offered the only hope of a solid career and a good future. Then there was the introduction of tuition fees, which has saddled generations of young people with debt, simply as a punishment for academic success. It is time this Labour Government followed the lead of the UK Government and introduced legislation in this Chamber to allow local authorities to offer a more diverse mix of educational options according to the needs of the area and the desires of the parents. I therefore use this opportunity to call on the Government to do so. To continue to do otherwise disadvantages young people, especially from working-class backgrounds, who will never have the opportunity to attend a top-quality school, while those children born to parents with money can benefit from a private education.

Will you take an intervention?

No, thank you.

Will you take an intervention?

No.

I also call upon my Conservative colleagues to join me in applying pressure on the Government to improve the prospects of future generations of young people throughout Wales, regardless of their financial background.

To those who believe grammar schools are a relic of some sepia-tinted bygone era, I would offer one word: PISA. This December, the latest PISA results will be published, and there are early signs in the corridors of this place that the Welsh Government is already preparing its excuses. Since 2007, Wales has slipped down the PISA rankings. As more countries have joined, Wales has slumped from twenty-second in science to joint thirty-sixth, dropped 10 places in maths, and fallen from twenty-ninth in reading to forty-first. What surprises will PISA bring this time? In 2012, Wales performed worse on average in science, maths and English than did England, Northern Ireland and Scotland. At the time, Welsh Liberal Democrat leader, Kirsty Williams, tweeted:

‘Really sad and angry that 14 years of Welsh Labour Education Policy has led us to these #PISA results.’

Now, as education Secretary, will Kirsty Williams stand firm behind this statement and drive forward a policy that delivers real change?

The time has come for a bold new vision for education in Wales, and at the centre of this vision should be the principle of diversity—diversity of teaching styles, school aims and priorities. In 2006, according to the National Grammar Schools Association, pupils in England’s 164 grammar schools produced more than half the total number of A-grade A-levels in the more robust A-level subjects than those produced by in up to 2,000 comprehensive schools. It is clear that selective state schools produced some of the best performances in examinations, based on league tables. From this experience—[Interruption.] From this experience, as the UK Government’s most senior civil servant responsible for education quality, the previous chief inspector of schools, Chris Woodhead, states, unequivocally,

‘grammar schools have contributed more to social mobility than any other institution this country has known’.

In his statement Chris Woodhead went further and said abolishing grammar schools may also be seen as attempting to impose a one-size-fits-all education system on an area.

Thankfully for children in England, the Government have heeded the advice of the experts and backtracked on the earlier catastrophic decision to prevent the establishment of new grammar schools. But what about Wales? Will the Government—[Interruption.] Will the Government put political dogma to one side and place young people ahead of ideology? Will you do that? When the PISA results were last published the First Minister was quoted as saying to all three opposition parties, ‘If you don’t like it, what would you change?’ So, to Carwyn Jones, on behalf of the disenfranchised and passed-over schoolchildren everywhere, I say, ‘choice’.

Grammar schools provide an opportunity for students from low-income families to escape poverty and gain a high standard of education without recourse to the fee-paying sector.

Will the Member take an intervention?

No.

Oxbridge intake from state schools has decreased since grammar schools were largely abolished and studies have shown social mobility has decreased. [Interruption.] Listen again: social mobility has decreased since the abolition of grammar schools. If you don’t care about working-class kids, carry on with your policy. To those who say grammar schools are for the elite, we say, ‘Yes, they’re for the academically elite, not the financial elite’. In the same way that grammar schools are, for those academically bright children, an opportunity, we should be developing vocational colleges to offer children who have other aspirations the right opportunities.

Ms Williams’s predecessor, Mr Lewis, previously admitted there could be questions about us taking our eye off the ball in the mid-2000s around the basics in education. He still, nevertheless, insisted Welsh Ministers took heed of previous poor PISA readings in 2009 and instituted one of the most radical and ambitious reform programmes that Welsh education has ever seen. The reality is, though, that there was nothing radical about these reforms. This Government continues to tinker around the edges, akin to rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. The idea that another mild policy initiative or bureaucratic reorganisation could achieve the scale of change necessary is a complete nonsense. We need better education for all, but achieving that requires bold steps. As the former chief inspector of schools makes clear, one size does not fit all—it’s still relevant. And the idea that children should be disadvantaged for political reasons is morally wrong and indefensible. Young people need their Government to represent their interests and fight for their future. Denying them choice deprives them of opportunity.

The UK Government’s announcement that they have adopted UKIP policy is welcome, but now, here in this Chamber, we need to work together to create a system that works for all. We need to give local people a chance to have a say over what school systems work in their area for their children. We call on this Chamber to support this motion and on the Welsh Government to introduce legislation to allow local people, where practicable and desirable, to create new grammar schools. Thank you.

I have selected the six amendments to the motion. I call on Darren Millar to move the six amendments tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Darren Millar.

Diolch, Lywydd. I move all the amendments tabled in the name of my colleague, Paul Davies AM. I have to say that, unfortunately, we will not be supporting the UKIP motion this afternoon because the Welsh Conservatives, frankly, recognise that Wales is different to England. We believe that the education landscape is different, and, as a result of that, we are not currently persuaded—[Interruption.] We are not currently persuaded that selection in our education system is the right way forward for schools here. Instead, we believe that the education system should be one that thrives on choice—pupil choice, learner choice, and, indeed, parental choice—and one thing that is absolutely woeful at the moment is that many people are denied the choice of school that they want to attend. There are hundreds of pupils, each year in some schools, who are turned away from those schools simply because there are insufficient numbers of places in them. There are barriers at the moment to those schools being allowed to create more places to accommodate the pupils who want to attend those schools. That is wrong. We want to see the Welsh Government take action to remove those barriers so that good, successful schools can thrive, so that they can grow where there is demand for places within them.

Now, we recognise that the Welsh Government has a surplus places policy here in Wales, which is causing local authorities to look at the provision within their areas in order to try and address some of these problems. But, unfortunately, the pace of change in terms of being able to provide for the demand for extra places in successful schools is not currently being met. We want to see an acceleration of the ability of those schools to expand. I hope very much that the Cabinet Secretary will be charitable in her response to our contribution to this debate this afternoon because, like her, I want to see the schools of Wales being amongst the best in the world. I really do believe that we have some schools that are amongst the best in the world on our doorsteps. But, unfortunately, not every school is a great school in Wales. We have to accept that that is a fact and we need to ensure that we have all schools raising their game so that every young person gets the best possible chance in life that their school can prepare them for.

Now, I’m a politician who’ll never say never to any idea. If there is a time in the future where the evidence suggests that social mobility is enhanced by grammar schools or by selection in the system, then I’ll be prepared to look at that. But, at the moment, we’re not persuaded that the evidence is there.

I’ve looked interestingly at the situation in Northern Ireland where, of course, there are more grammar schools within the state system. Their performance in terms of GCSE and A-level attainment is very, very good. But, of course, the other big difference in Northern Ireland is that there are a huge number of faith schools. So, what is it about Northern Ireland that makes the difference in terms of educational attainment and school performance? No one can really put their finger on the button and say it’s absolutely down to grammar schools. I don’t believe that it’s just about selection either. So, I want to see more evidence about this.

I’m not persuaded that the situation in Wales merits a switch to selection in our education system. But, I do believe that the best driver of improved performance in schools is catering for parental choice and extending more parental and pupil choice in its entirety. I wonder, Minister, whether today, in response to this debate, you’ll be able to tell us what your plans are to allow good, successful schools, where there’s extra demand, to expand. I think it’s wrong that many thousands of children each year are not getting access to the schools that they want to be able to attend.

At the risk of offending certain AMs with regard to anecdotal evidence—I see that Lee Waters has just left the Chamber—I would like to say that I may indeed be the only AM present who actually experienced both a secondary modern and a grammar school education, in that I first attended—[Interruption.] I’ll give a pass to my colleague there, who may also have done that. I first attended the former before going on to the latter. I say that because there was also an ability to go from the latter to the former. So, perhaps I have a unique insight into this debate. I can assure this Chamber that, during my time in the secondary modern school, I was taught that I was to be a productive and valued member of society and, indeed, if I obtained my apprenticeship, the world was my oyster.

So, failure of an exam at 11 years old was not the ghastly spectre that some commentators seek to portray, with poor souls being condemned to the dustbin of humanity. Indeed, any pupils who showed distinct academic qualities were transferred to the grammar school as a matter of course.

Would you take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

What I’d like to do, and I recognise that you’ve had your experiences, is ask you: when you were in the secondary school and they were setting you up with apprenticeships, which I wholeheartedly support, were they actually encouraging you also to become the teachers of those apprenticeships?

Absolutely. This was all about your abilities, and taking each and every pupil by his distinct abilities.

The advent, unfortunately, of comprehensive schools with as many as 1,500 pupils has seen an abandonment of those pupils who are given practical skills rather than academic. Apart from an over-concentration of IT education, practical subjects have all but disappeared from the school curriculum. This has the inevitable result of a huge deficit in skilled electricians, plumbers, toolmakers, et cetera, which we have experienced over the last few years, together with a whole generation of disenchanted youngsters who believe that their worth to society is negligible. By separating the truly academic pupils from those with more practical skills, we can concentrate on bringing out the potential of every pupil, irrespective of their academic abilities. There should, of course, be a transfer of pupils, as in my day, but perhaps on an expanded format. An examination at around 11 years of age should not be seen as a system of segregating the achievers from the non-achievers, but simply a method of identifying individual pupils’ abilities, preferences and proclivities.

The UK Independence Party are notoriously allergic to facts and expert opinion. So, let’s give UKIP a few facts on grammar schools. Firstly, grammar schools do not promote social mobility. They didn’t in the 1950s and they don’t now. The Institute of Education has shown that social division, as measured by wages, is greater in selective areas of England than in comprehensive areas. Simply put, grammar schools entrench social division.

Secondly, grammar schools do not give kids from poorer backgrounds access to a first-class education, because those kids simply don’t get into grammar schools in the first place. Only 2.6 per cent of free-school-meal pupils in England make it through the door of a grammar school. That’s compared with about 15 per cent in comprehensives. It was true in the 1950s and it’s true today.

Thirdly, there was no golden age of grammar school education that we could return to, even if we wanted. In 1959, the heyday of selective education, when grammar schools educated the brightest 20 per cent, nearly 40 per cent of grammar school pupils failed to get more than three O-levels. Only 0.3 per cent of working-class kids managed to get two A-levels—0.3 per cent. Any school in Wales turning out results like that would be put in special measures pretty quickly. There was no golden age. Grammar schools trampled on the life chances of poorer kids in the 1950s and they trample on them now. That’s why we don’t want them in Wales. But, as I said, UKIP don’t do facts, do they? So, let’s ask them a few questions instead.

The first question: who will decide which school in an area becomes the new grammar? On what criteria will that decision be based? Your motion makes it sound as if all those that want to can convert to a grammar school. ‘Give children the right to a grammar school’, you say. You do realise grammar schools work precisely by denying that right to the majority, don’t you?

The second question: when that decision is made, what will you say to all the governors, teachers, parents and pupils of all the other schools in the area in order to convince them that their school would be better off as a secondary modern? And don’t give us the snake oil about the enhanced status of technical and vocational education—a secondary modern is what they will be.

The third question: how does UKIP intend to shoehorn the Welsh-medium sector into this new system that they want to import from England? In many places, Welsh-medium schools are fewer and farther between. How far will UKIP expect kids to travel each day to access a Welsh-medium grammar? Will it be 20 miles, 50 miles, more? The truth is you haven’t given Welsh-medium education a single thought.

The fourth question: how do you propose to impose this imported system on local authorities who have tertiary systems? Are you proposing the sidelining of our FE colleges? How much is it going to cost to reverse those carefully planned reforms in those areas?

It’s depressing to stand here today and make counter arguments to a zombie schools policy that should have been long dead and buried by now. But if we have to fight for the future of our children to be protected from UKIP’s policies beyond the grave, then we will. Welsh Labour remains committed to a twenty-first century schools policy which is grounded in facts and evidence. We seek to learn from the best. The best-performing schools system in Britain is not found in the selective system of the county of Kent; you find it in Scotland, where there is not a single grammar school. Consistently, the best-performing system in Europe and the world is found in Finland—100 per cent comprehensive.

The policies that will lift our schools system are not to be found through time travelling to the past. They are with us now: promoting excellence through our consortia and through Schools Challenge Cymru, raising the expectations of teachers through the new deal, addressing the gap between the least well-off and the rest through the pupil deprivation grant and Flying Start. We demand and are working for a system that delivers greater rigour and better standards for all, not just a few, because every child deserves that. UKIP can say what they say in this motion only because of one thing: it’s because they believe this—that only some are deserving; only some schools, only some teachers, only some children, and for the rest a secondary modern will suffice. We have all seen how UKIP’s evidence-free rhetoric can damage the consensual work of decades. It’s time for everyone who cares about social cohesion and social justice to make a stand—reject this vacuous motion.

I applaud the contribution of the Chair of the education committee. She’s perfectly right to underline the fact that the proponents of grammar schools for reasons of enhanced social mobility seem to be stubbornly resistant to the facts. You seem obsessed with the situation in England. Let’s look at the facts in England, because there less than 3 per cent of all pupils who go into grammar schools are entitled to free school meals against the average of 18 per cent in other schools in the areas where they’re located. In Kent, where we have the greatest concentration of grammar schools, they reported that just 2.8 per cent of pupils attending grammar schools were eligible for free school meals, compared to 13.4 per cent in non-selective Kent secondary schools. Socio-economically disadvantaged students who are eligible for free school meals or who live in poor neighbourhoods are much less likely to enrol in grammar schools, even if they score highly on key stage 2 tests. Those are the statistics from Kent.

I have to say, you know, that all the top education systems in the world are comprehensive. We heard of Finland in the previous contribution—Korea, Canada and others. We no longer live in a world where it makes sense for just 20 per cent of the population to have access to high-quality academic education. The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission report from last year concludes that income inequality in the UK between different social class groups has increased significantly since 1979, but it concludes that those are based on three common social and economic drivers: firstly, structural changes in the jobs market; secondly, the enduring and increasing impact of background on adult outcomes; and thirdly, an unequal access to higher education and professional jobs—no mention at all of the cut in grammar schools as a factor. Indeed, the report goes on to say that the old 11-plus created a social divide at the end of primary school. It was rightly criticised for the advantages it conferred on some children over others.

I have to say that I am surprised that the Tories, at a UK level particularly, are aping UKIP on this particular issue, and they have no mandate, clearly. David Cameron categorically ruled it out when he was Prime Minister. He said that it isn’t a good idea, it isn’t a sellable idea and it isn’t the right idea. But that means that I’m even more confused now by the Welsh Conservative attitude, because we have an education spokesperson who a matter of days ago was saying we shouldn’t rule it out. The previous education spokesperson said that grammar schools should be introduced in Wales when David Cameron was actually ruling them out. Now Theresa May is ruling them in, and you’re bringing forward amendments contradicting your own party policy. I mean, you couldn’t make it up.

There’s a thing called devolution; perhaps you haven’t recognised it. We have different policies in Wales than what our party has in England, because our education system’s different; Wales has different needs. Now, what I did say the other day is that we should never say never and never completely shut the door on any ideas. We’re not prepared to do that. You appear to be able to forecast what the future might have to say in terms of evidence, but, frankly, stop ranting on about England; tell us what your policy is on these things here in Wales.

We can forget the 11-plus exam, we’ve got 11-plus different attitudes towards grammar schools just on these Conservative benches here, right. You know, you can call yourselves an opposition party—you’re an imitation party, I have to say, aping and imitating UKIP on too many policies as far as I’m concerned. Let’s be clear on this one, right. Research shows that, where there are grammar schools today, access to them is limited to the most well off. And attainment for those who fail to get into grammar schools is below the national average. They encourage educational inequalities and that’s why Plaid Cymru wants to ensure that all children have access to the same opportunities, no matter what their background, and that’s why Plaid Cymru will be voting against the proposal this afternoon.

When I first entered teacher training college, the education landscape was very different to that we see today. The academically inclined did go to grammar schools, but those who were more suited to a vocation went to a secondary modern school. State grammar schools were educating hundreds of thousands of pupils, offering a free education comparable to that of fee-paying schools. Unfortunately, those who were ideologically opposed to any form of selection launched a campaign to destroy every grammar school in the country and introduced the comprehensive system. The comprehensive system put an end to academic selection and forced all pupils to go to their local school, even if that meant larger class sizes and inferior education. Under the comprehensive system, we have seen a levelling down, I feel, of pupil attainment. Larger class sizes have meant that there is less one-to-one contact between teacher and pupil, and in many instances, the role of the teacher has been reduced to that of a facilitator rather than an instructor.

Study after study has shown the social engineering project that is the comprehensive system is failing. We have had an accelerating decline in standards and we are falling behind our peers in international league tables.

Will you take an intervention?

No, sorry, Llyr, I won’t.

The demand for grammar schools in those few pockets where they still exist has skyrocketed. So, we are not looking at what people want again, we’re looking at imposing something that they may not want. Unfortunately, those grammar schools only exist in the wealthier parts of southern England and, together with rising house prices, this has seen fewer and fewer pupils from poorer backgrounds attending grammar schools.

This has been seized upon and taken as evidence that grammar schools limit social mobility and should therefore be opposed. Excellent education shouldn’t be the proviso of the rich—those who can afford to pay for private education or move to an area with excellent schools. Excellent education should be available to all and should challenge our brightest children as well. Excellent education is the true path to social mobility.

This is what the UKIP motion before you today proposes. We want to see the reintroduction of grammar schools in Wales to produce an education system that provides the best opportunities for children of all abilities and from all backgrounds. Why should children from poorer backgrounds be denied a first-class education? Why should children who are not academically gifted be denied a top-class education, which is focused on technical and vocational subjects? And why should politics continue to hamper our children’s future?

If we were really committed to removing privilege, we would have abolished private education rather than waging a war on grammar schools. But, given that many politicians went to private school, this was never going to happen. Grammar schools will offer parents a choice: a choice to send their children to a school that offers an education on a par with that of the private sector; a choice to send their children to a school that will challenge them and maximise their potential; and a choice to send their children to a school that doesn’t care about their social background, but offers them social mobility.

I urge Members to support our motion, but I would like to say I am not a person who went to a grammar school. I failed the 11-plus, but it doesn’t hold you back, because you go to a secondary modern school and then there’s something in between that I went to: Y Pant School. It offered me the same opportunities as a grammar school, educationally. If you really want to pursue education, you can bring that to the attention of teachers. But on coming out of teacher training college, it was extremely disheartening to see that, all of a sudden, you didn’t know who pupils were—you had a photograph in front of you to remind you of them. That’s not conducive to learning. That’s not conducive to the vulnerable in society—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly.

I thank you for taking the intervention. You went to have teacher training, I did teacher training, and believe you me, I knew every single pupil I taught. I didn’t need photographs—

In comprehensive schools?

In comprehensive schools. I went to a comprehensive—

With 3,000 pupils—

I taught in a comprehensive, I knew the pupils and, what’s more, the education they received was second to none. It’s not about grammar school education, it’s about the delivery of education.

I totally disagree with you on that point. I think that smaller class sizes and smaller schools—you help the most vulnerable in those schools, but you lose them in the comprehensive system. Thank you.

This motion truly does go to the heart of what UKIP is really about, which is selection and segregation. Circular 10/65 is an important landmark that shaped education in this country in the second half of the twentieth century. Fifty-one years later, it still stands as one of the defining progressive achievements of the radical 1964-1970 Wilson Labour Government, and we will talk about a few experts and a few people who have got merit in my speech. Anthony Crosland was the education Secretary who sent an important memorandum to local authorities. The document instructed local officials to commence converting grammar schools into comprehensives. Anthony Crosland was a giant of the Labour movement and was unashamed in his determination to abolish regressive and retrospective grammar schools, and I share Crosland’s viewpoint. I am very proud to rise in this debate to oppose this UKIP motion that seems to have been dusted down from the Conservative Party HQ cupboards from the 1950s, although I take it they don’t actually agree.

It is important to remind us of the text of this memorandum, one of the most beautiful, I think, ever written, and it goes like this:

‘It is the Government’s declared objective to end selection at eleven plus and to eliminate separatism in secondary education. The Government’s policy has been endorsed by the House of Commons in a motion passed on 21 January 1965’.

And this is important:

‘this House, conscious of the need to raise educational standards at all levels, and regretting that the realisation of this objective is impeded by the separation of children into different types of secondary schools, notes with approval the efforts of local authorities to reorganise secondary education on comprehensive lines which will preserve all that is valuable in grammar school education for those children who now receive it and make it available to more children; recognises that the method and timing of such reorganisation should vary to meet local needs; and believes that the time is now ripe for a declaration of national policy.’

The need to, as the memo says,

‘raise educational standards at all levels’

is as vital today as it was 51 years ago and as has been pointed out by other Members in this Chamber. It is absolutely lamentable that members of UKIP in the National Assembly for Wales not only want to banish their national leader in Wales, the newly independent AM, Nathan Gill, they want to banish the children of Wales back over half a century to an era of short trousers, class divides and a world of limited opportunities.

Who was responsible for replacing this circular? Let me guess: one Margaret Thatcher, on a par with Theresa May, who currently still supports that, when she became education Secretary in 1970, and this is contextually important. You have all you need to know when UKIP are cheerleading for Margaret Thatcher, and they have the cheek to portray themselves as the heirs to Labour in the south Wales Valleys. Post Brexit, they have nothing to offer the people of Wales but Tory policies and the notion of a Maggie Thatcher airport, but I digress. As President Obama once famously said, you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.

We all know of independents who sit on councils who are too afraid to run under the banner of the Tories. Now, we have UKIP Wales—a home for reject Tory politicians whose leader in Wales sits as an independent—with the Tories, their friends, in the Chamber, opposite. So, what is inspiring—[Interruption.] I didn’t catch that. What is inspiring this regressive flight of fancy from the UK Prime Minister? Let’s ask a serious, serious question. What is inspiring her now that UKIP members are up with her?

It’s certainly not a popular desire amongst the people. Only one in three people in England thinks that the UK Government is right to increase the number of grammar schools and select more pupils by academic ability. We have heard here this afternoon why, because as far as education pedagogy goes, it is outdated, it is regressive and it does not work. Let us look to Finland for answers; let us not look across the border to England. If you respect and understand, there’s a YouGov poll for ‘The Times’, and it says that the policy was backed—which is to get rid of grammar schools—by a mere 34 per cent of those polled, with the remainder not signing up to it.

So, social segregation by education is varied. It’s only those in denial who remain. They’re sort of trying to exhume the corpse, like a desperate Heathcliff raging for his Catherine in ‘Wuthering Heights’, although the Member for Mid and West Wales is an unlikely Byronic hero.

So, what are the views of the education experts? I said I’d speak to those. On this issue, the proposer, Theresa May, has managed to actually unite, in opposition, former Labour and Conservative education Secretaries, the teaching unions and the parliamentary Labour Party. So, Prime Minister May was actually unable to quote during Prime Minister’s question time last week a single expert who backed the extension of grammar schools. Let’s take a look at the esteemed and lauded, then, Sir Michael Wilshaw, head of England’s education watchdog, Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills. Sir Michael has stated that the selective model of schooling is, and I quote, ‘a profoundly retrograde step’. This is the head of England’s watchdog.

Will you take an intervention?

I’m sorry, I won’t. And further, that its record of admitting children from non-middle-class backgrounds was ‘pretty woeful’. We’ve heard those words already—pretty woeful. I know that the members of UKIP would like us to live in Michael Gove’s world and his parallel universe. That former Tory education Secretary declared earlier this year,

‘I think people in this country have had enough of experts.’

Well, let me tell this Chamber that the people of Wales who are passionate about the well-being of education for future generations still believe in experts, and, in particular, they believe in educational experts and they believe in headteachers. So, when the head of Ofsted in England tells a gathering of London councils’ education summit—

You do need to bring your contribution to a close now.

Okay. The question that I would put to those clamouring for a return to selection is: do you really want to segregate the pupils of Wales? The answer is clear: you wish to segregate and separate the children of Wales. I strongly oppose this motion.

Some interesting turns of phrase then. I think the Labour Party did abolish grammar schools when the Labour Party was a Labour Party. I’m not sure what it is now. In terms of the debate, grammar schools are clearly a bad idea. They’re divisive; you write people off at the age of 11. The evidence is there that the system didn’t work, but that’s not to say that what we have today is working. I think it was the First Minister who said in the last term that the Government had taken its eye off the ball. I would agree with that because I think the education that many of our children get now just isn’t good enough. The buildings are not in good enough condition, there are too many cuts, there are too many redundancies, out-of-classroom activities are limited—and I speak as a teacher with 23 years’ experience. The biggest problem in education is the market, which was introduced by the Conservatives and continued by the Labour Party. If you look at the market of qualifications, they simply don’t work. What we need are some gold standards that everybody can aspire to, because, at the minute, there’s a plethora of qualifications and some private companies making a shedful of money on that.

I look at the target-driven culture—[Interruption.] I’m not giving way. The target-driven culture is a bad thing. It’s a deprofessionalisation of teaching, and I think that’s common across the board.

Just some ideas, really. If you look at Estyn, I think the value is questionable. I think we’d be far better off having very experienced teachers on sabbaticals inspecting, but more in a mentoring sense, rather than trying to catch people out. I think the whole—

Will you take an intervention?

No, I won’t. No. The whole thing about education in Wales is that, for me, it’s too politicised, and I think what I would like to see, really, is an all-party commission for education that is looking 20 years ahead, because everything in Wales today is very, very short term. If you look at Finland—. Well, the education Secretary is shaking her head; I don’t know why. Everything is short term. If you look at Finland, they’ve got class sizes of 15. So, if you’re going to introduce smaller class sizes, in essence, great, but by one or two? You know, what is the point? I think the expenditure there needs to be questioned, because, if you’re going to reduce class sizes by a dozen, fantastic; let’s get on with it, let’s be radical.

Modern languages: we’ve got a great opportunity in Wales to bring everybody up bilingually from the age of three onwards. Why not? Every child should learn Welsh from the age of three. They should learn a European language as well—Spanish, French. When they get to the age of, maybe, teen years, why not learn a language from an emerging economy? They do it in Holland; why can’t we do it here? But, to get the skills needed, again, you need, roughly, I’d say, a 20-year plan.

I’ll draw my remarks to a close now, but I just want to say one thing, because everybody is talking about education. I’ve heard it all round the Chamber, including from me, but I’ll pose a question rather than answer. And the question is: what we actually want from our education system? Until we know that—. And I don’t just mean higher standards and, you know, political rhetoric. What do we actually want in terms of education? What do we want from those children coming out the other end? And until we answer that question, until we know exactly what we want and where we’re going, I don’t think we’re going to be successful.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to contribute to the debate. Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I have listened with interest and, at times, despair to all that has been said this afternoon. Now, whilst undoubtedly the motion is in order, this is a debate that we should not be having. The debate should not be whether we should reintroduce grammar schools in Wales—part of an outmoded, divisive system of education that was abandoned in our country nearly 50 years ago. The debate should be on how we make sure that all—and I mean all—of our children have a first-class education. My focus is on improving education in all of our classrooms, in all of our schools, for all of our pupils. And, frankly, I am less than interested in structures. That is not my priority. It is the quality of education that makes a difference to young people’s lives, and not what type of school they go to. And I certainly, Presiding Officer, don’t think that looking backwards to a highly rose-tinted past is in Wales’s best interests.

The motion proposed by Michelle Brown flies in the face of international evidence. Two weeks ago, I visited the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development—the OECD. I met with world-leading experts such as Andreas Schleicher, and the international evidence from the OECD is clear: selection in schools systems is not—and I repeat, not—linked to improving scores. And neither is it linked to increasing social mobility. This has been reinforced by evidence from the Sutton Trust that has already been referred to today by Lynne Neagle, the Chair of the education committee, and Llyr Huws Gruffydd. They found that less than 3 per cent of grammar school children were on free school meals, compared with 20 per cent across the rest of the country. And even the current OFSTED chief has held his head in despair at proposals across the border and has said that they do nothing—and I repeat, grammar schools do nothing—to improve social mobility.

Presiding Officer, when the OECD undertook their review of education in Wales in 2013, they did not pull any punches. They were very clear and very direct about the challenges facing our education system, and they are challenges that I am up for tackling. They identified very clearly what needed to change, but they also identified that our comprehensive system here in Wales is one of our strengths. Why would we want to change that? That is why I will support Paul Davies’s first amendment to the motion here this afternoon. But, just like Llyr Huws Gruffydd, I am slightly confused, because it was only a fortnight ago that the Tory education spokesperson was saying that there was plenty of evidence to support grammar schools in terms of social mobility, and, I quote,

‘Parents and young people should not be denied the opportunity to choose a grammar school’.

Now, I am putting that down to a very enthusiastic press officer who maybe got the line out before Darren had seen it. [Interruption.] But I welcome very much indeed today the very clear statement that the Conservatives will not support a return to selective education.

Our drive to improve standards is evidence based, from the curriculum reform—. And I would say to Mr McEvoy, if you want to know what this Welsh Government wants out of its education system, then read Donaldson. It is quite clear—quite clear. From curriculum reform to improving pedagogical practices, that’s what we are about, and I am keen to ensure that we are making the right progress. That is why, when I did meet the OECD, I asked them to return to Wales and advise me on whether we do have the right strategies in place to respond to their review published in 2014, and they will be doing that this very autumn.

I am serious about learning from the best around the world in the interests of Wales, and that is why I do oppose Paul Davies’s second amendment to the motion. Our policies are about raising standards in all of our schools, so that every child, no matter where they live, has the best possible learning experience. [Interruption.] No, Darren.

Parental choice shouldn’t just be about who can clamour the loudest to get into the best schools. Every school in Wales should be outstanding, and the OECD again, Darren, recognises that high-performing schools systems have at their heart systems of co-operation, and not the competition that is implicit in your amendment.

I do, however, support Paul Davies’s third and fourth amendments this afternoon. It is right that secondary education should be diverse. It is right that secondary education should have a rich academic and vocational offer. It’s right that we should have an education that provides the best opportunities for all young people.

Will the Member give way?

If I could make some progress, please. As well as focusing on quality of teaching and learning, Wales actually has a very positive story to tell on the vocational offer. For some years we’ve had a very strong policy in the 14-19 learning pathway, which provides learners with a broad-based curriculum. I’ll give way.

Thank you. If the comprehensive system has been so wonderful, and has worked so well, why are we now talking—? Every time I hear anybody talking about education in this Chamber, it’s to change things, to alter things; that things have to be done better. Why is it now, after 50 years of the comprehensive system, you are suddenly waking up to the fact that vocational and academic qualifications are two different things, and there are different pupils who have to be used on those two different academic abilities?

And those pupils have access to a broad-based curriculum in our schools at the moment. But I for one am not prepared to rest on my laurels, Mr Rowlands. I want even better schools in Wales—for my kids, and for all the children of this country. We’ve got some great examples of schools collaborating with FE colleges, which, as Lynne Neagle says, seems to be completely forgotten in the diatribe that we’ve had from UKIP this afternoon. We have engineering and manufacturing being offered at Coleg Menai. Cardiff and Vale College is working really closely with the capital city’s local authority to deliver vocational courses in the east of the city. Bridgend College offers twilight courses for all learners between 14 and 19, and they’re helping to deliver A-levels on behalf of Pencoed Comprehensive. We have really strong relationships, and I want to see those developed.

Turning to Paul Davies’s fifth amendment, I emphasise that we again are working hard to raise standards in all schools. We have an ambitious reform programme. We’re working with international experts and engaging in key OECD projects, such as the international early learning schools and schools as learning organisations, and assessing progress in creative and critical thinking. And we’re working with the teaching profession. I want every school to be outstanding and no pupil and no school left behind.

Paul Davies’s sixth amendment calls for the introduction of free schools and academies, and I believe that’s just another form of selection. I strongly oppose this policy. I’m committed to a comprehensive education system that serves every learner in Wales. Again, I will reiterate, that we have to follow the evidence. There simply isn’t any evidence that free schools or academies are a panacea to raising standards. The Policy Exchange 2015 report states that the claims of free schools pushing up standards is simply not backed up by evidence, and a House of Commons education committee report stated that there was no convincing evidence of the impact on attainment. Indeed, the committee recommended that the UK Government should stop exaggerating the success of these schools.

The best of Wales is a tradition of self-improvement, democratising knowledge and educational leadership. Our education reforms takes inspiration from those values. The next few years are crucial in achieving the ambitions that are shared and demanded across Wales: introducing a new curriculum made in Wales, but shaped by the best from around the world; one that will ensure our young people are able to lead fulfilling, personal, civic and professional lives in a modern democracy.

I want every parent to be confident that their child goes to a school that helps them grow as capable, healthy and well-rounded citizens. To achieve this, teachers must be supported to be the best that they can be, raising the standard of the profession as a whole. Teachers share an individual, professional and national mission to help our children succeed. Working closely with the profession, we will raise teaching standards and opportunities for development. I, Presiding Officer, will not be diverted from this course and neither will this Government. I’m afraid that this call for grammar schools is nothing more than a diversion.

I call on Neil Hamilton to reply to the debate.

We’ve had, I think we can all agree, a spirited and entertaining debate. I’m disappointed that Rhianon Passmore doesn’t see me as a Byronic hero, but that of course is only today. If she’d known me 40 years ago, she might have come to a different conclusion. But, I’m very happy to swap nineteenth-century literary allusions with her: she has reminded me, from the passion with which she delivered her speech today, of a character in ‘A Tale of Two Cities’, Madame Defarge, the tricoteuse who sat at the bottom of the guillotine and who sent in coded messages to the committee of public safety by the speed of her knitting to identify those who were to be condemned to the guillotine. So, it shows at least that she has had a decent education that she understands the point of my barb.

But, we started the debate with the entertaining spectacle of my friend, Darren Millar, standing on his head. It is difficult to see why the Conservative Party in Wales should differ so markedly in its policy on education from the new regime in England, because Theresa May has justified the change in policy fundamentally on the basis of parental choice. That is something that I think ought not to be denied to the people of Wales. About seven in 10 Britons, according to the UK Government’s press release, want to see the ban on new grammar schools lifted and eight in 10 believe that grammar schools can boost social mobility when undecided voters are removed from the mix.

Of course, we have had from various contributors to the debate—Llyr Gruffydd and Lynne Neagle; both of whom I greatly respect as parliamentarians—we have had from them various allegations that the system of grammar schools is to be condemned because they deny the children of relatively poor parents access, and that is true in England because there are only 163 of them left. In England, what you get is selection by wealth rather than selection by ability, because people move into the catchment areas of the best schools. That is something that cannot be supported. Of course, we don’t have that problem in Wales because we don’t have grammar schools. But, that also means that we have a system that is one size fits all.

We’ve had, from Lynne Neagle and from Rhianon Passmore, a blast from the past about the enforcement of comprehensivisation. Anthony Crosland was mentioned by Rhianon and, of course, he was famous for his declaration that he wouldn’t be satisfied until he had destroyed every effing grammar school in the country. His policy was one of enforcement and the removal of choice from parents. That’s not something that I think, in the modern world, we ought to support.

We’re not proposing in this motion to go back to the situation as it was in the 1950s and 1960s. I went to a grammar school, the Amman Valley Grammar School, in the 1960s and it was a world of grammar schools and secondary moderns. David Rowlands and Caroline Jones showed that maybe it wasn’t quite as inflexible in their areas as it might have been in others. All that this motion is doing, it’s not a call to go back to grammar schools and secondary moderns as they were, but to introduce a much more flexible structure to the education system, like, for example, in Germany, where you’ve got four different types of secondary school, according, basically, to ability or whether you want a more academic or technical and vocational education. That’s what it’s all about. It’s not about dividing children at the age of 11 into sheep and goats; we want a system of flexibility because children develop at different speeds at different ages, of course. The big problem with the grammar and secondary modern system in my day was that it didn’t have enough flexibility, and the secondary modern schools were indeed the cinderella of the education system. Nobody is asking to go back to that. What we want is an upgraded and modernised version of the system of parental choice, which, in other countries, is uncontroversial.

The big problem with Kirsty Williams’s approach to education is that she insists on having a straitjacket in the education system, whereby even if you live within the catchment area of a school that does not provide children with a decent education, they’re forced to accept that outcome and they can’t move between them. What this motion tries to do—and some of the Conservative amendments we approve of—. What this motion attempts to do is to say that it’s parents, ultimately, who should be the drivers of education policy, rather than politicians and bureaucrats. That, in a modern and democratic world—[Interruption.] Well, I’m not sure we’ve got time to do that. We have, have we?

Yes, you have.

Could you clarify your position through this motion in terms of Welsh-medium grammar schools?

Well, there is a problem, obviously, with Welsh-medium schools—[Interruption.] Of course there is, simply because, at the moment, and this goes back to the earlier debate that we had on the Welsh language—maybe, in certain parts of Wales, it wouldn’t be such a problem, but, in other parts of Wales it certainly would, being able to provide this provision. So, ultimately, it can’t be the same kind of choice that you have in the private sector, such as that Kirsty Williams enjoyed, where parents have absolute freedom of choice to send their children to wherever they want.

Mr Hamilton, I read with interest your comments on my parents’ choice. I think it’s very remiss of you to attack my parents, who are no longer alive and therefore can’t answer for their decisions. Surely, what would be much more relevant, Mr Hamilton, are the choices that I’ve made for my children, and I’m very proud that they attend comprehensive schools in my constituency.

Kirsty Williams miss-takes the purport of my comment. I was in no way attacking her parents—I applaud them, actually, for the choices that they made. It obviously worked. But what I want to say is that all parents ought to have that kind of choice. They are the ones who should decide for themselves, as she does for her children, the kind of education that she wants for them. That’s what this is all about. Of course, we can’t replicate that in a state education system. There has to be some kind of administrative decision-taking system, but we ought to maximise the ability of parents to be the real drivers of the way the system works. It’s taxpayers’ money that provides the education system. Ultimately, taxpayers ought to have a bigger say in the system of decision making and the policies that are carried out.

So, this is, perhaps, the first of many debates that we shall have on education. Many caricatures of UKIP’s opinions have been given today by a variety of Members, but we’ll have the opportunity, perhaps, to allow the scales to fall from their eyes by greater experience of us in future debates. So, I shall regard this as merely an exploratory debate on the subject, and I hope that we’ll be able to explore further highways and byways in due course. But, ultimately, this is all about parental choice and maximising the freedom of parents to decide for themselves what policies in education are best for their children, and the outcomes that flow from that, I think, unambiguously will be an improvement on the current system.

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

It was agreed that voting time should take place before the short debate. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.

We will first of all vote on the Plaid Cymru debate. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Simon Thomas. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 22, one abstention, and 24 against. The motion is therefore not agreed.

I therefore call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 24, 12 abstentions and 11 against. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

Amendment 2. I call for a vote on amendment 2 in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 46, no abstentions, no-one against. The amendment is therefore agreed.

Amendment 3. I call for a vote on amendment 3 tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 47, no abstentions, and no-one against. And therefore the amendment is agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 4 tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 47, no abstentions, no-one against. The amendment is therefore agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For 46, one abstention and none against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

The next vote is on the Plaid Cymru debate on membership of the European single market. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Simon Thomas. Open the vote. Close the vote. For seven, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I therefore move to amendment 1 and I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 41, no abstentions, six against. And therefore the amendment is agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. For 40, no abstentions, seven against. And therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

I now move to a vote on the UKIP debate on grammar schools, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Neil Hamilton. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 6, no abstentions, 41 against. The motion is therefore not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 1 tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 41, no abstentions, six against. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 10, no abstentions, and 37 against. And therefore the amendment falls.

I now call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 41, no abstentions, six against. And therefore the amendment is agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 4, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 41, no abstentions, six against. The amendment is therefore agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 5, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 36 against. And therefore amendment 5 is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 6, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. For 11, no abstentions, 36 against. Therefore amendment 6 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 10, no abstentions, 36 against and therefore the motion as amended is not agreed.

As the Assembly has not agreed the motion without amendment and has not agreed the amendments tabled to the motion, the motion is therefore not agreed.

We now move to our next item, which is the short debate. I therefore call Vikki Howells to speak on the topic that she has chosen on unlocking children’s natural potential and the role of outdoor education in the learning process. If Members who are leaving the Chamber—. The Assembly is still in session.

Os caf ofyn i Aelodau’r Cynulliad os ydynt yn gadael i wneud hynny’n dawel ac yn barchus. A gofynnaf i Vikki Howells gyflwyno ei dadl.

Diolch, Lywydd. Many colleagues here in this Chamber will be aware that, until March of this year, I was a full-time practising teacher. I certainly enjoyed my 16 years in the classroom, but my best memories of the job are the times spent outside of the classroom. By this, I’m not referring to the supposedly long holidays teachers receive, which, I can confirm, incidentally, are filled with marking, planning and numerous other roles, but to the times I spent with my classes engaging in learning opportunities outside of the confines of four walls. This will be the focus of my short debate today.

I would like to thank the Members’ Research Service and Marc Withers of Ignite Up for their help in suggesting resources I could draw on for my contribution. I’m also glad to offer Rhianon Passmore and Julie Morgan a minute each of my speaking time.

It has long been recognised that time spent outside the classroom can be highly beneficial to pupils’ learning. From my own experiences of teaching history and geography in a secondary school, I always found there was something truly magical about learning that took place outside of the classroom, whether that was a hands-on investigation of a castle, a competitive, team-based geocaching lesson, a field trip to a river where pupils would actually get in the water and measure the width, depth and water flow, or even a simple half-hour out in the school grounds investigating microclimates by measuring wind speed, temperature and so on.

Natural Resources Wales, in their evidence to the Children, Young People and Education Committee inquiry into their priorities for this Assembly term, succinctly list the benefits to a young person’s education from this contact with the great outdoors. I won’t repeat the list, but I do want to mention some examples that reinforce my own understanding of the benefits that this type of learning brings. Outdoor education creates memorable experiences, develops leadership, communication, confidence and teamwork through experiential learning. It broadens horizons of students, empowers those who may do better in less formal learning environments and enables the development and embedding of a range of vital learning and practical skills.

It also promotes health and well-being, both in terms of physical activity and in terms of the benefits to mental health that these experiences can garner. When we look at areas such as my own constituency, Cynon Valley, with high levels of obesity, mental health issues and smoking, we see the benefits that the promotion of greater contact with the outdoors could bring. Indeed, these health benefits may operate on an even more fundamental basis. US academics Drs Finlay and Arrietta recently wrote in the ‘Wall Street Journal’ about the generation of children shielded from the microbial exposure that is essential for the development of a healthy immune system. If we prevent our children playing and learning outdoors, their education and health may suffer.

This can also generate disconnection from nature, with serious consequences for our approach to the natural world around us. Eleven to 15-year-olds spend half of their waking lives in front of some screen or other, impacting on their ability to connect with the natural world. In addition, recent studies have shown that three quarters of children in the UK spend less time outdoors than prison inmates. Naturalist Stephen Moss has talked about a ‘nature-deficit disorder’. Research from the RSPB showed that just 13 per cent of Welsh children considered themselves to have a close connection to the natural world. That’s lower than Scotland, Northern Ireland, or, indeed, London. This statistic is perhaps even more shocking when we consider the unique proximity that all of Wales’s urban areas have to our rural landscape.

Outdoor learning promotes environmental understanding and responsibility, and is key to creating citizens who are committed to principles of sustainability, and those are the citizens that we need in the twenty-first century world if we are to meet the environmental challenges that lie before us. Teachers and formal schooling have an important role to play in achieving this, and school inspectorates in England and Northern Ireland have challenged schools to ensure pupils can access out-of-class learning both for the benefits to learners and for the environmental sensitivity it fosters.

But we must do more to change habits, opportunities and lifestyles than just hope that schools can fill the gaps by adding outdoor learning to the occasional lesson. I believe we can draw important lessons from outstanding practice in other countries. Some of these countries have been promoting outdoor education in a consistent way for a lot longer. For example, the Swedish Outdoor Association set up Skogsmulle schools that provided five to six-year-olds with outdoor education on the weekends. By the time of their half-century in 2007, one in five Swedish children—that’s some 2 million children—had, in fact, attended a Skogsmulle school. Children in Sweden spend part of every school day outdoors, regardless of the weather, and the Skogsmulle approach led to the foundation of in-rain-or-shine preschools, where the institution is based entirely on the concept of outdoors education. Researchers found that children who attended these schools can concentrate twice as well as their peers and have better motor skills and more advanced well-being.

The ethos and model of Skogsmulle spread much further afield to other European countries, but also to South Korea and Lebanon. Indeed, there are over 2,000 Skogsmulle teachers in Japan alone. I firmly believe that the Welsh Government has worked to rectify this and more fundamentally integrate outdoor learning into the way we teach our children. Active, experiential learning is key to our groundbreaking foundation phase and underpins several of the phase’s statutory areas of learning. Many schools in Wales now benefit from outdoor classroom areas as a result of the Welsh Government’s drive. These can be used to provide outdoor activities that include first-hand experience of solving real-life problems and learning about conservation and sustainability.

This approach is already bearing fruit as the foundation phase is leading to reductions in the attainment gap between pupils eligible for free school meals and those who are not, suggesting some of the vitally important ways in which outdoor education can help unlock our children’s potential. Similarly, Professor Donaldson has spoken of the immense value that outdoor education can play in the learning process. I would suggest that we will not succeed in achieving the four purposes he sets out for the curriculum in Wales without the development of significant opportunities for worthwhile outdoor activities and learning.

I would also suggest that there are possibilities to do something creative to achieve this transformation, in the south Wales Valleys in particular. I mentioned the health challenges earlier. People who are not from the Valleys may well have an inaccurate perception of grim, post-industrial landscapes. But, in reality, the renaissance of the natural environment throughout the area provides countless opportunities, as recognised, for example, by a recent NRW paper exploring opportunities for managing the Rhondda’s natural resources.

Dare Valley Country Park, one of the jewels in the crown of Cynon Valley, is home to the Ladybird nature-based parent and toddler group that has imbibed from the Scandinavian model and also learned from positive outcomes of similar groups in Scotland. This initiative has further led to local employment and economic opportunities within my constituency. The venture has been so successful that the team behind it are now on course to open Wales’s first nature-based kindergarten for children aged two to five at the Dare Valley Country Park next spring. Ninety per cent of classes will be in the outdoors, and the organisers believe that children who attend will be healthier, have improved well-being, develop better skills and possess a keener understanding of the natural world. The work being done at Dare Valley Country Park has gained international attention. So much so that the venue has now been chosen to provide the setting for the 2017 international Skogsmulle symposia, bringing together outdoor educators from around the globe.

I’m immensely proud that an education provider within my own constituency is leading the way with regard to the provision of outdoor education in Wales. There is no doubt about the wide array of benefits that outdoor education brings. It improves concentration, assists with cognitive learning, enhances social skills, allows children to connect with the beautiful natural surroundings we have on offer and, most importantly, it helps unlock our children’s potential. Thank you.

I call on Julie Morgan to make her contribution.

Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer. I’d like to congratulate Vikki Howells on choosing such a vitally important subject for this debate. I just wanted to refer to a visit I made to Denmark some years ago, with a delegation, looking at education provision. I visited a preschool, such as she referred to in Sweden, I think, for two and three-year-olds. The two and three-year-olds were playing outside in the snow. It was bitterly cold. They were crawling on a great tree that had fallen over, it was an old, sort of, rotten tree, and they were scrambling all over it and they had bright red jumpsuits that covered them all over and they were having an absolutely wonderful time. I really felt, when I saw those children, that probably for the same aged children at home we’d probably have them in over-heated rooms, carefully cosseted, at that time.

So, that’s why I think it’s so good—and I’m glad that Vikki Howells has mentioned this—that we are making such progress in the foundation phase, making sure that there are outdoor classrooms and that there are opportunities for children to connect with nature at a very, very early age. And I also want to applaud the forest school movement and the fact that children have all the great excitement at being able to light fires and to be out in natural surroundings, and I hope that this is something that Wales will be able to take further and that the education Cabinet Secretary will be able to even further extend the opportunities for outdoor activities. So, thank you very much.

I now call on Rhianon Passmore to make her contribution.

Thank you—I won’t say ‘Llywydd’—Deputy Presiding—?

Acting.

Acting—okay, thank you. Firstly, I’d also like to thank you, Vikki. As a former teacher, I’m grateful to the Member for Cynon Valley for raising this important issue, and I fully support the Welsh Government’s commitment to promoting outdoor education throughout the foundation phase. In my constituency, it’s amazing facilities such as the Cwmcarn Forest Drive and Ynys Hywel Outdoor Activity Centre that enable school groups to explore the natural environment around their schools and homes, and we’re very fortunate in south-east Wales to have access to the fantastic woodland areas of the Valleys, in which children and young people can learn about nature and encounter wildlife.

Outdoor education is essential in ensuring that children and young people from all backgrounds, as Vikki has said, can benefit physically and emotionally from being outdoors, and it is vital that we continue to recognise the role of outdoor education in aiding children’s ability, as has been said in terms of forest schools, to focus and develop inside the classroom. It is essential that, with the innovative foundation phase that we’ve actually led on, and now the increased PDG, and Donaldson access has been referenced, we have a wider push to access experiential learning, as has been mentioned. This is an important plank, in my view, of Welsh Labour Government’s enriched curriculum, and I thank Vikki Howells again for raising this as a topic, and I know it’s a matter that Wales will continue to champion. Thank you.

Thank you. I’d now like to call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to reply to the debate—Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, acting Presiding Officer. Could I begin by thanking Vikki, Julie and Rhianon for the contribution to this important debate this afternoon? I’m very pleased to have this opportunity to reinforce our commitment to the importance and the unique value of outdoor learning for children and young people the length and breadth of Wales. The evidence, as Vikki has said, is clear: outdoor learning has major benefits in helping children to understand how things work, and using a variety of indoor and outdoor activities helps them to develop different ways to solve problems. That is why the foundation phase for our three to seven-year-olds places such a strong emphasis on experiential learning. Learning by doing is at the heart of our foundation phase approach, and great importance is placed on using the outdoors to extend learning beyond the classroom boundaries.

Professor Donaldson highlighted in ‘Successful Futures’ the importance of learning beyond classroom boundaries for learners of all ages. He makes a clear case that learners need to understand the relevance of what they learn and to be able to make connections with the world beyond the school gates. Schools and nurseries need to encourage children to make sense of the world around them. We know that if children are stimulated and inspired, and enjoy a varied set of experiences, then their learning and their development will be enhanced, and I’m very proud that we have a curriculum with that focus.

Outdoor learning remains an important part of our school and teaches everyday teaching and learning experiences. Activities that I’ve seen recently in schools included mud kitchens, nature trails, forest classrooms, construction sites—they all consolidate children’s learning and allow teachers and parents to support their understanding of the world around them. And Estyn has urged schools in Wales to take greater advantage of the benefits of teaching young children outdoors, most notably in the sciences.

Estyn emphasises that the outdoor learning experience generally improved children’s well-being, it improved their behaviour, their physical development, knowledge and understanding of the world and stated that children under five learn better and develop quicker with outdoor lessons. Only last week, I experienced a teacher teaching grammar to children in the playground as they ran around, identifying certain types of word that had been laid on coloured pieces of paper. They were learning really, really quickly. In fact, they didn’t realise they were learning at all; they were just really enjoying being in school for that lesson. So, it is this ambition that these approaches to experiential and outdoor learning are used throughout the school and in the delivery of the curriculum. Children and young people should have opportunities to learn from expertise and experience from outside of their schools.

Welsh Government published its guidance on outdoor learning, ‘First Steps Outdoors’, and additional guidance, ‘Further Steps Outdoors’, in 2014. I will shortly be publishing and putting in place an action plan that will focus on the consistency of delivery of the foundation phase across Wales, including attitudes and approaches to outdoor learning. One such way in which we can provide outdoor learning experience is through the forest school approach that Julie Morgan referenced, which involves the regular use of a woodland or other outdoor area as a learning resource. There is a history of outdoor nurseries, as we’ve also heard, in other countries such as Sweden, which has led to the forest school movement here in the UK and elsewhere. It is indeed encouraging to see that Wales’s first nature kindergarten will open next year in woods in Rhondda Cynon Taf, and it will cater for up to 30 children aged 2 to 5, spending the majority of their time learning outdoors. This will be, as Vikki said, the UK’s first Skogsmulle-inspired kindergarten. A Swedish early years philosophy based on the benefits of learning outside, it’s already embedded itself, as Vikki said, in countries such as Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany and Japan. It’ll be great to have one here in Wales.

As Julie said, the experience of those children is such a positive thing, and it reminds me of the saying that my grandma used to have: that a little bit of dirt never hurt anyone, and there was no such thing as bad weather, just really poor clothes choices. The benefits of outdoor learning for children are clear. It enhances their physical and motor skills as well as their social and cognitive ones, and improves their general health and physical fitness, something that we cannot ignore in our country. I am committed to promoting the benefits and increased use of outdoor learning, which we know can help ensure that the children and young people of Wales are confident, healthy, and above all, ambitious learners. Thank you.

That brings today’s proceedings to a close.