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 Environment and Rural Affairs. Under Standing Order 12.58, I have received notification that the leader of the house, Jane Hutt, will answer questions today on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary. Question 1, Simon Thomas.

The welfare of all kept animals is covered by the Animal Welfare Act 2006, which has been in place for 10 years. The codes of practice on companion animals and livestock are under review, and the introduction of any new codes, including for exotic animals, will be considered in 2017-18.

Thank you for that response, Minister, but the problem with the current situation is that it allows people, for example, to keep monkeys in ordinary houses, and it also allows circuses with live exotic animals, and which perform with those animals, to visit Wales. We have been waiting for some months, if not a year or two, for the Government to take action in this area. So, can you give us an assurance that steps will now be taken by Government to deal with the health and welfare problems of exotic animals in Wales?

I thank Simon Thomas for that question. Officials have met with representatives from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Cymru to discuss the briefing document calling for a ban on exotic pets, and further meetings are going to take place on that. We’re talking about mobile animal exhibits as well, and a scoping exercise under the partnership delivery project is also being undertaken to gather information from local authorities on MAEs currently active in the area. And the results of that exercise are due to be presented very shortly, this month in fact. And, also, there’s going to be a consultation that officials are working on, on establishing a licensing or registration scheme in Wales, and this is due to be launched before the summer recess.

I remain unconvinced of the merits of people keeping exotic animals as pets, especially primates, or those animals who have to eat other live animals in order to feed. Many people are unable to effectively look after these animals, and either let them loose into the wild, which causes problems, or end up banned from keeping pets. Will the Minister consider setting up a task and finish group to look into the creation of a register of people banned from keeping pets?

It’s interesting and important to record as well that the keeping of certain species of wild animals is controlled by the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976, and the owners of these species are required to be licensed by their local authority under the Act. The creation of an animal abuse register is being considered, but the effectiveness of its existence as a deterrent in either future, further abusive actions taking place, or in terms of prevention of animals being owned by a former abuser, will require mechanisms, and a clear, cross-sector agency approach. So, officials are exploring what engagement with others would be required and have noted the RSPCA’s call for the establishment of a task and finish group.

Well, as you indicated, leader of the house, it isn’t just exotic animals, but wildlife that comes into this, including our domestic wildlife that find themselves sometimes being cared for by people whose interventions come with the best interests, but perhaps not the best welfare information. I know that Welsh Government has started to look at this, but I’m wondering whether there is any progress on the regulation of wildlife sanctuaries and wildlife hospitals, and whether there’s any indication of whether you might be looking at the courses that are run for vets, or continuing professional development for vets actually, to upskill them to have a wider range of knowledge, not just in exotic species, but in our own domestic wildlife species as well?

That is another extension of the concerns that are raised, particularly in relation to animal welfare. I will certainly ask the Cabinet Secretary to respond to you, particularly in relation to those wildlife hospitals and other settings that you describe.

The Welsh Government’s small business research initiative, supporting health and nutrition projects, is further seeking to develop innovative projects that will significantly improve the nutritional composition of food and drink available to children. Projects can compete for a share of up to £1 million for these developments.

I thank you for that answer, and this is really, really good news, because we all know that, by the age of 11, 40 per cent of children are obese in Wales, or they’re overweight, and that is a very, very unhealthy state for children to arrive at in such an early age. You did mention the £1 million funding from Welsh Government and Innovate UK, and that it will be open to companies and research organisations, to help them find that innovation in producing this food. But, I will ask, leader of the house, how do food innovators in Wales apply for that funding, and what is the criteria that will be needed to meet and qualify for that funding?

Well, tackling obesity, as Joyce Watson says, is a key priority—a key priority for the Welsh Government—and supporting people to access a healthy, balanced diet is crucial to this. And, last month, I spoke on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary at the Blas Cymru/Taste Wales event. That was the first ever national and international trade event and conference for the food and drink industry. And it was at that event that we invited businesses and organisations across the industry to submit proposals for this £1 million development. And, of course, this was encouraging them to develop innovative solutions to improve the nutritional composition, for example, of school meals, whilst driving down costs.

So, just a couple more words on the criteria. We’re suggesting innovative solutions could improve nutritional composition of food and drink available to children, drive down the cost of nutritious food and drink for families, schools and local authorities across Wales, increase the variety of healthy and nutritious food and drink available to children in all settings, reduce the prevalence of obese children and adults in Wales, and improve the health and well-being of children through to adult. And this small business research initiative is there to support and enable the responses from the food and drink industry to meet this challenge.

Is the leader of the house aware of the report of the Mental Health Foundation, ‘Food for thought’, which looks at the link between nutrition and mental health? Now, I believe that the kind of strategy on obesity that we’re calling for through the public health Bill—.

Am I okay to continue? I will start again.

Thank you. No, please move on.

I believe that the kind of obesity strategy that we’re calling for through the public health Bill could promote mental health, as well as physical health. But, does the leader of the house believe that that should be a consideration as part of the Government’s food strategy, in addition to being part of strategies in the sphere of health?

Diolch yn fawr, Rhun ap Iorwerth. As you’re aware, and you’ve drawn attention to these links, in terms of the evidence, in terms of mental health needs and impacts. As you know, at the Stage 2 scrutiny of the Public Health (Wales) Bill, amendments were tabled to place a duty on the Welsh Ministers to prepare and publish a national obesity strategy. And, although those amendments fell, the Minister for Social Services and Public Health gave a commitment to consider a national obesity strategy further, with a view to bringing forward amendments at Stage 3 on this issue. It’s also important to recognise that the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 places a well-being duty on public bodies, and the importance of health impact assessments, to consider how, systematically, we can ensure decisions and plans can contribute to reducing obesity and increasing physical activity levels.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Welsh Conservatives spokesperson, David Melding.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, yesterday, the Institute of Welsh Affairs published its report on funding renewable energy projects in Wales—here in the Neuadd, I’m pleased to say—and it identified the difficulty in raising capital, or particular difficulty in Wales. And I’d like to ask you will the Welsh Government be taking note of the recommendations of this report and responding to them positively.

We certainly welcome the IWA’s contribution to what is the transformation of Wales’s energy system. We’re already delivering on many of the areas that were highlighted in the report, and we look forward to working with the IWA to further develop their ideas to benefit Wales.

Cabinet Secretary, the report urges the Welsh Government to use its levers ambitiously right across the scope of its activity to develop a sustainable energy strategy and, although the UK Government has a role to play as well, to focus on what the Welsh Government can do in terms of business rates, but also the public sector, which is a big purchaser of energy, and that we need to use our levers very, very effectively. Will you be urging your Cabinet colleagues to look at this in a holistic way?

We will, of course, and this is a cross-Government issue. We have begun to explore options providing further access, for example, to low-cost finance and equity solutions, using Welsh Government funds to leverage any further financial investment in order to remove barriers to capital, which you mentioned earlier on. I will say though, of course, that the greatest barrier to further deployment of renewable energy is the lack of a suitable funding support mechanism at the UK level.

I’ve been nice to you so far, but I note that barb. [Laughter.] In an attempt to move us back on to consensus, or a consensus, the report says that, to encourage more community-owned schemes, we need to look at greater use of co-operatives to attract funding. The Welsh Government talks big in this area and has a lot of support across the Assembly in doing that, but I hope that you will pick up that part of the report most enthusiastically because there is a great degree of empowerment that could go on, and using that model in terms of its general ability for regeneration and not just for renewable energy is a key way of perhaps addressing some of the shortfall in attracting funding that we’ve traditionally suffered from.

Yes, and, David Melding, of course, you are acknowledging that that’s within the grain of the direction in which the Welsh Government would want to take us, and we’ll look with interest at those recommendations around the co-operative model. We invested £35 million by the end of the last financial year on energy projects and, indeed, £5 million in the local energy fund, separately providing direct loans to some of the community projects most at risk. So, it’s clearly important to look at that recommendation in terms of the way forward.

UKIP spokesperson, Neil Hamilton.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m sure the leader of the house is aware that the biggest headache for many farmers in Wales at the minute is the vexed issue of bovine TB. This is a vitally important issue in the context of the Brexit negotiations because it’s possible that the EU might use the TB situation in Wales as some kind of justification for banning exports of beef and other meats. I wonder if, therefore, she can give us any idea of when the current consideration of the result of the consultation on the refreshed TB eradication consultation will be published.

The consultation on the TB eradication programme—the refreshed programme—closed on 10 January. The Cabinet Secretary is currently considering the responses, and I’m sure that Neil Hamilton will be as pleased as the Cabinet Secretary to hear that there were a significant number of representations—993—a large number of which were from farmers.

Indeed. I was wondering though whether we could have any idea of how long the Cabinet Secretary is likely to take before she’s able to announce what proposals the Government might have. There are a number of relatively uncontroversial things that it would be helpful to have some advance indication on. For example, many farmers are worried that, whatever testing regime emerges from this, it is practical and takes account of the facts of life of being a livestock farmer. Tests that fall at inconvenient times, such as when the harvests are occurring or when cattle are calving, would be very, very difficult. Also, there’s another issue that ought to be borne in mind, namely that there is currently a county parish holding rationalisation programme going on, and many farmers are concerned that this would add further complications to what’s already a very complicated situation, if that’s not taken account of in the Cabinet Secretary’s decisions.

A statement on the refreshed TB eradication programme will be made in early May, but I think it’s also important and relevant to note that new incidences of bovine TB in Wales are at a 10-year low. Progress has been made, with over 95 per cent of Wales’s herds now being TB free.

Perhaps unrelated to the consultation that is going on at the moment, can I draw attention to a problem with the testing regime as it is at the minute? A strict liability regime is applied to the testing of cattle. If you fail to test within the 60-day window, then you automatically are fined, in effect. But very often we find cases—it’s possible that the leader of the house may have had constituency cases in her postbag along these lines—where a test has had to be abandoned because cattle become agitated, or even violent, and it’s unsafe in health and safety terms for the testing to continue. In those circumstances it’s possible, indeed highly likely, that the retesting can’t take place within the window and the farmer will automatically therefore attract penalties, even though it will be for something that is actually beyond his control. So, what I’m asking is: can there be some flexibility introduced into the testing regime, so that where events beyond the farmer’s control prevent compliance, he will not then attract penalties or there will be some mitigation?

Well, the controls and testing regimes are a crucial part of the TB eradication programme in preventing onward transmission of disease, but of course now, as part of the project to examine the TB situation at a more local level, we have a dedicated TB epidemiologist and a team of vets looking at the disease across the country and working through that in terms of the issues that are raised, of course, in terms of those affected.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Leader of the house, yesterday the National Assembly agreed that one of the responses to the decision to leave the European Union should be the introduction of a continuation Wales Bill in order to uphold Wales’s constitution and convert into Welsh law all European legislation related to devolved policy areas. It’s true we voted 9-6, which is more like a rugby score than a vote of the Assembly, but nevertheless it was a majority. What is the Government’s view now on this proposal, and does the Government recognise the importance in particular of enshrining EU environmental law into Welsh law in order to protect public health and the economy as well as the environment?

Well, I’m glad to have the opportunity to follow up from that debate, Simon Thomas, to say we’ve been absolutely clear that we will not tolerate a power grab from Whitehall, and it’s unacceptable for the UK Government to take powers currently exercised by the EU over devolved areas. Of course, this is crucial to the point you raise in terms of agriculture and the environment.

I thank the Minister for that statement and I look forward to seeing very firm proposals from the Welsh Government to ensure that that does indeed take place. In particular, I want us not to rely on the UK Government to represent our interests here in Wales, and looking at air pollution in particular as an area, we are already hearing of some extreme measures—some would say ‘extreme measures’, some would say ‘necessary measures’—for dealing with air pollution. Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, is introducing a higher rate of congestion charge for very polluting vehicles; the Prime Minister has hinted at a scrappage scheme to ensure that diesel car owners are not blamed for the previous Labour Government’s mistake over promoting diesel cars, to declare an interest. So, what input now is the Welsh Government having into ensuring that the interests of the people of Wales are represented in terms of public health and social justice in UK Government proposals around a UK-wide pollution plan, bearing in mind there are 6,000 premature deaths from air pollution in Wales a year?

We are firmly committed as a Welsh Government to improving air quality across Wales. We support and provide guidance to help local authorities fulfil their responsibilities, particularly in terms of reviewing local air quality, with regular assessments and monitoring. But you will be aware, of course, that the Cabinet Secretary undertook a public consultation in Wales on how local air quality and noise management can be improved, and, in fact, in response to that the Cabinet Secretary published a written statement on 30 March. Our next steps have to be taken forward in terms of issuing new statutory guidance to local authorities, new guidance to local health boards, and launching by 24 April—and this is important to your question—a joint consultation with the other UK administrations on a new air quality plan to achieve the EU nitrogen dioxide limit values for Wales and the rest of the UK within the shortest possible time.

I thank her for referring to that consultation, due to begin on 24 April. I look forward to seeing how that works out between the different devolved administrations. There is, however, as we are talking about nitrogen oxide emissions, one very big polluter here in Wales—Aberthaw power station—which has already been found to be in breach of EU law and putting out double the amount of toxic nitrogen oxides from 2008 to 2011. We are still awaiting a programme to set out how emissions will be reduced at Aberthaw, and this is the responsibility of the licensing authority, Natural Resources Wales.

On 8 March, the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs responded to me on questions around Aberthaw, saying that she expected to meet with Natural Resources Wales on 15 March to discuss whether there had been a proper proposal from the owners of Aberthaw setting out how they will reduce the emissions from that power station. She also said she’d be happy to provide an update after that meeting. I appreciate, of course, she can’t be here, but are you, standing in for the Cabinet Secretary, in a position to inform us and the public of Wales now whether there is a programme in place for Aberthaw power station to reduce these harmful emissions?

I’m pleased to report an update on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary that, on 1 April, Natural Resources Wales concluded the Aberthaw environmental permit modification exercise, with the issue of a new environmental permit for Aberthaw. This new permit contains a lower nitrogen oxide emissions limit, in line with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU. Aberthaw must now comply with the new nitrogen oxide emissions limit. Officials will continue to monitor the situation. Any changes to Aberthaw’s coal supplies and operational regime, of course, are commercial matters for RWE.

Our key programme for tackling fuel poverty, Welsh Government Warm Homes, includes the Nest and Arbed schemes. Since 2011, we have invested over £217 million to improve the energy efficiency of over 39,000 homes across Wales. Over 9,000 of these homes were in north Wales.

Thank you for that. It takes me back to a decade when we were convincing your previous colleagues in Welsh Government that a fuel poverty strategy includes energy efficiency but is a social justice issue. Age Cymru have said that many of the mechanisms and measures combined within the Welsh Government’s 2010 fuel poverty strategy are out of date and no longer applicable, saying that the time is right for the Welsh Government to refresh its fuel poverty strategy.

At both the Fuel Poverty Awareness Day cross-border north Wales conference in February and the Wales annual fuel poverty conference, we heard that, whilst the Welsh Government’s investment in energy efficiency schemes through its Warm Homes programme is commendable, we need a step change in ambition and the scale of resources earmarked. How, therefore, will the Welsh Government engage with the Wales Fuel Poverty Coalition, most of whose members you already work with in different contexts, over their statement that we drastically need a new fuel poverty strategy in Wales?

Since 2011, we’ve invested over £217 million in Welsh Government Warm Homes to improve over 39,000 homes. The important point about this, Mark Isherwood, is that, in households on low incomes or living in the most deprived areas of Wales, improving the energy efficiency of low-income homes delivers multiple benefits. It helps to tackle and prevent ill health, reduces carbon emissions, creates jobs and energy and improves educational attainment. A recent report by Public Health Wales estimated that investing in insulation and heating also, to address cold and damp housing, can have a huge impact. We know that the most effective way in which we can tackle fuel poverty in the long term is to improve the energy efficiency of homes, and we’re doing this effectively through Welsh Government Warm Homes.

Welsh households in fuel poverty are currently being asked to pay from their own pocket to subsidise windfarms and solar parks so that landowners can profit—£300 on an annual bill may not sound much to you on a Cabinet Secretary’s salary, but it’s a great deal of money for a low-income family. When are you going to give poor households a break and abandon subsidising these white elephants?

In terms of our Warm Homes programme, the most important scheme that you should draw your constituents on low incomes’ attention to is the Nest scheme, which actually delivered estimated average energy bill savings of over £400 per household. Let me go back to the issue of how we tackle fuel poverty. The most recent data indicate that fuel poverty in all households has reduced from 29 per cent in 2012 to 23 per cent in 2016—a reduction of 6 per cent in just four years—and we’re levering in up to £24 million of EU funding. Now, I wonder if you’re going to be supporting us in trying to ensure that we get that funding replaced when we Brexit, because it is quite clear that EU funding has also helped tackle fuel poverty in Wales.

Agriculture is a vital industry to Wales and a crucial backbone of the Welsh rural economy and environment. We’re working in partnership with stakeholders to secure a prosperous and resilient agricultural sector.

Thank you, leader of the house. In answer to Neil Hamilton’s question earlier, you said that a large percentage of herds are currently TB free. This is little consolation for farmers I met with recently in Dingestow, a TB hotspot in my constituency. They’re concerned that whilst the statistics point to a decline in the number of herds affected by the disease over time, this can be attributed to a falling number of herds and, consequently, larger herds, thus masking the true extent of the TB problem in Wales. Will the Welsh Government look again at the way these data are collected so we can gain a true picture of the number of animals affected by TB in Wales, and then we can get on with the job of tackling the dreadful disease that is afflicting wildlife and livestock across Wales?

Yes, well, I’m sure Nick Ramsay would also have been pleased to hear the significant number of representations to the consultation, particularly from farmers, and I’m sure from the farmers in your constituency as well.

If I can just, perhaps, say a bit more about the project that is being undertaken, including the TB epidemiologist and team of vets looking at disease across the country, because you may be aware that we’ve identified areas in Wales that fall into three categories based on the level of disease in each area—high, intermediate and low—so that we can have a more targeted approach to tackling disease in different areas. With that more regional approach it does enable us to apply different controls in different areas, depending on the disease situation and the risk in those areas, which, of course, does start to address some of those issues. And you know, we have to look at—. When the measures that we’re consulting on are put in place, the low TB area could be the first TB-free area of Wales, and then one of the immediate benefits, of course, to the families in the low TB areas would be that pre-movement testing would no longer be required. So, there is, you know—. I think, wait until the response from the Cabinet Secretary comes out, because many of those points might be answered.

Mae Bil diddymu arfaethedig Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig yn bygwth datgymalu setliad cyfansoddiadol Cymru yn llwyr, gan gynnwys pwerau Llywodraeth Cymru dros faterion sydd wedi eu datganoli, fel amaethyddiaeth. Yn dilyn y bleidlais ddoe, yma, ar y ddadl ar danio erthygl 50, mae’r ffordd yn glir ar gyfer Bil parhad yr Undeb Ewropeaidd i Gymru. A ydych yn cytuno bod Bil parhad yn angenrheidiol er mwyn sicrhau mai Llywodraeth Cymru fydd efo’r pwerau i ddatblygu’r sector amaethyddiaeth yng Nghymru, fel sy’n gallu digwydd ar hyn o bryd o dan ein setliad datganoledig? A ydych chi hefyd yn cytuno y byddai Bil parhad yn rhwystro’r Torïaid yn San Steffan rhag dwyn pwerau oddi wrth ein Senedd cenedlaethol ni?

Well, I’m glad I had the opportunity to respond earlier on to Simon Thomas that we’re absolutely clear: we won’t tolerate that power grab from Whitehall. Also, I feel we have, between us, with our ‘Securing Wales’ Future’, put forward a very clear and workable approach to developing any, for example, UK- wide frameworks that might be needed in terms of devolved areas. We have said, and I think the First Minister said yesterday, that our preferred option remains a UK repeal Bill that properly recognises and protects the devolution settlement. We will forcefully argue this in bilateral discussions with the UK Government and in the Joint Ministerial Committee, but we have also been considering the issue: we abstained yesterday on your amendment and we continue to give it consideration in terms of the continuation Bill proposal.

The Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs has met with Severn Trent Water, following the acquisition of Dee Valley Water, to discuss the Welsh Government’s expectations regarding the new licence, job security, customer bills, and how the process will move forward now that the acquisition is complete.

Thank you for that response, because previously, of course, the Cabinet Secretary refused to respond, perhaps because she was concerned that she would be involved with some future decision on the future of the water industry. You referred to jobs—can I ask you what assurances she’s received in her negotiations that the level of jobs that were once in Dee Valley Water will be maintained in the new arrangements?

The Cabinet Secretary has met, and did meet, with Severn Trent Water twice, and I recall that she reported on this to press the need for a transition that runs smoothly and benefits Wales, because we recognise the uncertainty for those affected by the acquisition of Dee Valley Water. She’s met with them to discuss how to align the Welsh Government’s policy in relation to the water industry, but also to look at implications in terms of how to protect the local workforce, local jobs, the community and customers.

Leader of the house, a constituent has raised an issue with me in regard to damage to properties in the Llandinam area of my constituency, which they believe is caused by Severn Trent’s abstraction operations in the area. Can I ask you what role Natural Resources Wales has in ensuring that Severn Trent take responsibility for their actions in regard to ensuring that the activities they undertake aren’t affecting the environment?

Can I also ask, taking into account the reports that a number of properties have raised with me in regard to significant sinkage to fields and cracking and subsidence of properties, if I supplied either you or the Cabinet Secretary with that relevant information, would you commit to raising this matter with Natural Resources Wales?

I think that example—. The Cabinet Secretary, her officials and Natural Resources Wales need all examples, as, indeed, the one that you cite this afternoon. It is important to note that Severn Trent have been active members of the Wales water forum since its establishment, and do engage regularly, through that forum, with Welsh Government and, indeed, the regulators.

The Welsh Government recognises live animal exports for slaughter are of concern. We have legislation to protect animal welfare during transport and would prefer animals to be slaughtered close to their point of production, and consider a trade in meat to be preferable to the long-distance transport of animals.

It’s a pity that I didn’t hear a clear proposal or support to ban live exports there, leader of the house. Thousands of live animals are being exported to the European Union and beyond, sometimes to countries where animal welfare standards are very low or non-existent. I also note that your Government has chosen not to make it mandatory for slaughterhouses to install closed-circuit television to ensure compliance with welfare standards. How can you claim that animal welfare in Wales is safe in Labour’s hands if profit means more to you than welfare, which I presume is what lies at the basis of your answer?

The Welsh Government is—. If you want Government to actually listen to you, I think you listen to the answers that are given you, and also look at the law as well. The Welsh Government would prefer for animals, as I said, to be slaughtered as close as practicable to their point of production, and, as I said, consider a trade in meat and meat products to be preferable to the long-distance transport of animals to slaughter, but the live export trade is, however, a lawful trade. Now, how do we address that? The Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs has agreed a new partnership structure between the Welsh Government and heads of trading standards, with more effective enforcement actions on key animal health and welfare matters, which will include welfare during transport.

Leader of the house, obviously, as you just pointed out, the export of live animals under very specific conditions and stringent animal health protections is a lawful practice, but one thing that would help add value to livestock here in Wales would be to have a very strong processing sector. The cattle sector, for example, has very limited capacity and is concentrated in very few hands. In particular, we’ve already seen redundancies at the large site in Merthyr. What assessment has the Welsh Government made of the strength of the processing sector here in Wales and how potentially it could support the agricultural community in adding value to livestock here in Wales, rather than having to export the primary product for others to add value to it?

That is a helpful question, because I think it follows up my point about what the Cabinet Secretary is doing in terms of establishing that new partnership structure with those who are responsible for effective enforcement actions, the heads of trading standards. And also to recognise that the Animal and Plant Health Agency undertakes risk-based inspections of livestock destined for export at their point of departure, and local authorities conduct inspections under the Welfare of Animals (Transport) (Wales) Order 2007, and they’re responsible, as I said, for enforcement and prosecution where breaches are identified—but, clearly, strengthening the process is vital in terms of addressing this issue.

There’s a clear need for the UK Government to provide the long-term commitment to replace the vital EU funding that currently comes to Wales. However, we are working with stakeholders on possible post-Brexit scenarios, and our engagement with the round table is a critical part of this work.

I’m sure the leader of the house will be aware that this is a major food security issue, that any Government needs to be able to guarantee everybody access to fresh, unadulterated food. There are many issues involved here, not just the food miles that might be required to deliver food if we saw the collapse of our agricultural industry—the well-being of citizens, which would have a huge impact on NHS budgets. So, I just wondered what specifically is being done to ensure the resilience of rural communities in light of the fact that most farmers rely on up to 80 per cent of their income from the current basic payments.

I thank Jenny Rathbone for that question, because it is important, food security is important to us in Wales, and I think I’ve mentioned that round table discussions are a key engagement—key stakeholders working together to submit a proposal to the rural development plan as part of the co-operation and supply chain development scheme, which will build on, for example, the work of Horticulture Wales, which is very important. I think the recognition that diversification opportunities can allow additional family members to engage in the farming business, providing greater security for the future of family businesses, which, of course, is going to come as a result of that approach—. But it is important, I think, to recognise that the Cabinet Secretary has given a boost to rural communities with the £223 million boost in terms of the opportunities for the rural development programme, which will help to address those issues.

Plaid Cymru’s entire approach to the exiting of the European Union is to make sure that no-one in Wales is worse off than they were before. Now, the agricultural industry could be one of the big losers in any post-Brexit settlement. In 2014-15, direct payments from EU funding accounted for an average of 81 per cent of net farm profit for all farm types in Wales. The UK Government has confirmed that funding for agriculture will continue at its current level until 2020 and, following that, farmers in Wales will have no certainty that there will be a replacement of EU farming subsidies. Plaid Cymru believes that the UK Government owes the agricultural sector the same level of funding, post leaving the EU, as is currently delivered under the common agricultural policy, as was promised by those people who campaigned to leave the European Union. Future funding must be delivered through the block grant, and the Welsh Government must also commit to using this funding to support agriculture and the rural economy. Can the Cabinet Secretary give assurances that, as well as representing the interests of Wales’s farmers as strongly as possible in negotiations with her Westminster counterparts, the department has begun working on a comprehensive plan covering the various eventualities regarding funding to ensure that we have a secure future for farming in Wales?

I thank Leanne Wood for that question, because it also brings us back to important points of discussion in recent days and weeks. The First Minister, indeed, has also expressed his significant concern that we still have no long-term commitment from the UK Government to replace the vital funding that currently comes to Wales from the EU. Can I also say that it was good to see Paul Davies, the Conservative shadow agriculture secretary, fighting to get the best Brexit deal for farming? So, we can work together on this.

But it is very important, in terms of the leader of Plaid Cymru’s points, and very much expressed in our White Paper, that we not only fight for assurance about the funding that will follow 2020, but also that we are working, as I said, to ensure that we have future prospects for our agriculture sector in Wales. That is where we are getting a great deal of support, and I think that’s been very clearly recognised from farming unions and other stakeholders.

I’m grateful to the leader of the house for those very kind comments. Now, farming subsidies are, of course, essential to support farmers, and are crucial for the sustainability of the agricultural industry. And, Llywydd, I should declare an interest, given that my parents-in-law run a dairy farm. Now, given the importance of these payments, can you therefore tell us what specific research the Welsh Government has carried out since the referendum result regarding the current levels of subsidies received by farmers across Wales?

Well, clarity on future funding arrangements is a key issue that’s been raised at the Brexit round table meetings and workshops, which started straight after the outcome of the referendum. I think, in terms of resilience for the post-EU transition period, this is crucial for farmers, food producers, landowners and all those who live in our communities. The schemes that we’re looking at, of course, are farm business grants, Glastir Advanced, the food business investment scheme, co-operation and supply chain development, Glastir Woodland Creation, and the rural community development fund. That’s why, also, in terms of resilience and this period of transition, the Cabinet Secretary has fully committed the remaining EU element of the rural development fund. But what we need is more than the guarantee, and that’s where I now challenge you, the Welsh Conservatives and the shadow agriculture Secretary, to ensure that your voice, as well as our voice, is heard very clearly, and that that voice is clearly heard in the UK Government and we get those commitments for our farmers in Wales.

Illegal and irresponsible vehicular use off-road can have a detrimental impact on the natural environment, as well as on the enjoyment and safety of other users, land managers, and local communities in Wales.

Yes. Thank you for the answer and your acknowledgement of the problem. Is there anything—? Given that the problem seems to be getting worse in some areas, are there any measures that the Welsh Government could take to assist in tackling it?

A joint operation between Natural Resources Wales and South Wales Police in November resulted in 22 motorcyclists being pulled up in the operation across known hotspots across Wales. The police, in partnership with Natural Resources Wales, are working closely to target people illegally riding scrambler bikes on publicly accessible land.

And, finally, question 9, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

The Environment (Wales) Act 2016 sets a legal target of reducing emissions by at least 80 per cent by 2050. We’re currently developing regulations to establish interim targets and initial carbon budgets, which will to help to drive the transition to a low-carbon economy.

Thank you. I believe that there’s real scope to create an international image for Wales as a nation that is truly promoting electric cars and vehicles, and one area where I believe the Welsh Government can encourage this is through a strategy to exchange the current fleet of public vehicles to one that is zero emissions—from council vans to health board vans to public transport, even. The British navy has just announced an investment in a fleet of electric vans and the charging infrastructure required to support that. It’s only 48 vehicles initially, but it is a start. I intend to resubmit a legislative proposal to this end, and I hope we’ll have an opportunity to discuss this. But does the leader of the house agree with me that there is scope for the Welsh Government to be innovative here in terms of driving this change towards zero-emissions vehicles?

Well, I think this is a very interesting legislative proposal that we may see exhumed in a debate in due course. I would want to make a very positive response at this stage to what you are proposing, and particularly look at how others have achieved this—others in the public sector, particularly—not just across UK, but further afield.

Thank you, leader of the house.

The next item on our agenda is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children, and the first question is from Rhun ap Iorwerth.

I thank the Member for Ynys Môn for his question. The Welsh Government is committed to supporting people to live independently and safely in their own homes. The commitment is supported by funding for equipment and adaptations where appropriate.

At a recent meeting with Action on Hearing Loss, I heard a story about a deaf woman who had a sign on her front door saying, ‘I’m sorry but as I can’t hear the bell I am keeping the door open, so do come in’. Now, clearly that’s not acceptable. What she needed, of course, was assistance in getting the necessary technology to inform her when someone was at the door, to keep her safe. The charity notes that the expenditure on equipment to support people who have lost their hearing has more than halved over the four years up to 2014-15 and there is a huge difference in what’s spent from one area to another. As this is within your portfolio, do you agree that we need a strategy to try to ensure, in future, that funding is provided to those people who need it, to help people such as this woman who are at risk because of a lack on investment in the necessary equipment?

I think it’s irrelevant where the funding stream comes from, whether that be through social services or through the disabled facilities grant or otherwise in this portfolio. I think what’s really important is that we focus on the individual and their needs, and it’s something that, if the Member would wish to write to me on this specifically, I’d be happy to take up on his behalf.

Can I declare an interest, as my sister is profoundly deaf? Can I just follow on from the point that Rhun ap Iorwerth made? For someone who is deaf, light fulfils the same role as sound does for those of us who can hear. What is being done to ensure that deaf people have a flashing light fire alarm—as a sound fire alarm will have no use to them whatsoever—and, leading on from what Rhun ap Iorwerth said, flashing light doorbells so that they can press the doorbell and it flashes in the house? Because, again, sound makes no difference, and I agree with Rhun ap Iorwerth entirely, we can’t have people leaving their front door open because they can’t hear people knocking it.

These are very simple technological opportunities that we can roll out across Wales. A new health and social services integrated framework for action for people who are deaf or are living with hearing loss was published in February, building on our continued investment in assistive equipment and technology. My colleague Rebecca Evans, the Minister for social services, has responded for the integrated care fund. It is something that I’ve taken note of in terms of the comments made by Members today.

I’ll just declare that close family members have received local authority funded adaptations to their homes, and it’s enabled independent living and it’s actually reduced costs on statutory services. In the context of the budget cuts to equipment for deaf people made by some local authorities, and some even indicating they’re moving away from funding equipment despite the fact it does actually save funding for statutory services, what guidance does or will the Welsh Government issue to local authorities on what adaptations or equipment they should be providing as a minimum?

There is already guidance issued to authorities. I will have a conversation with my ministerial colleague on this very specific issue. This Government is very keen that we move into an early intervention and prevention opportunity, which saves issues, as the Member alludes to, such as long-term health impacts and moving people into adapted properties that actually wouldn’t be necessary if we were to do some small interventions early on. It could save lots of money for the services in the long term. I will have a conversation with my colleague.

Question 2 [OAQ(5)0138(CC)] is withdrawn.

I thank the Member for Newport West for her question. We have comprehensively assessed the impact of the UK Government’s welfare reforms, including universal credit. This assessment covers a range of impacts, including the number of households affected, impacts on income and work incentives and wider impacts associated with a single monthly household payment paid directly to claimants.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Universal credit has huge implications for families across Wales, pushing more children into poverty and hitting 18 to 21-year-olds hard. Recently, I hosted an event to launch the innovative research by Cardiff Metropolitan University in partnership with Community Housing Cymru and the Oak Foundation on the implications of the universal credit. The research was undertaken by tenants and is the first of its kind in Wales. One of the findings highlighted the complex, jargon-filled written communications from Government departments and housing associations, which often can be difficult to read and understand. What steps can the Welsh Government take to ensure housing associations, local authorities and others explain coherently and clearly at all times to their tenants?

I thank the Member for a very serious question. Generally, single 18 to 21-year-olds with no children will not be entitled to help with their housing costs when universal credit, from 1 April—this week—comes into force. There are a number of exemptions, including those who are disabled or unable to live at home with their parents. There are approximately 1,000 people affected in Wales, but this does not take into account the extensive exemptions that may apply. This is a very harsh implementation of the credit reform. We do not support this; this is a UK Government intervention. We are very concerned that the number of young people displaced in our communities will increase through this, and I have asked my team to look at this with some urgency.

Cabinet Secretary, a Department for Work and Pensions study found that those on universal credit were 8 per cent more likely to have found a job within 270 days than those who had claimed under jobseeker’s allowance. So, there are aspects of this new scheme that really are working. I do hope you have the grace to acknowledge that.

Statistics, statistics, statistics. What worries me is what’s actually happening on the ground in our communities, when I and you will see your postbag filled with people experiencing difficulty with universal credit and the credit reform. It was rolled out first of all in Flintshire in my own constituency, actually, so I’ve seen an increase in pressures there. But I can’t see anybody in this room, irrespective of politics—. The fact that 18 to 21-year-olds now will be having the removal of any housing benefit claim—what happens to those young people? Where do they go for their housing solutions? People will be put on the streets. A thousand young people in Wales are being committed to things that shouldn’t be happening to very young people in our communities.

I’m very pleased to hear your strong words on the awfulness, really, of what the UK Government is trying to do to 18 to 21-year-olds, and it’s something that, as you know, lots of organisations supporting young people are absolutely up in arms about and are campaigning against. I welcome what you’ve said about talking to your officials, but will you, working across Government, make the most forceful possible representations to the UK Government to tell them that they’ve made a mistake on this, that it will lead to homelessness for young people, and ask them to think again?

Indeed, and the Member is right to raise this issue, as many others have. I’ve already met with Shelter Cymru this morning on this very issue. This is of grave concern to us, and we’re looking at some very quick responses to the potential issue of homelessness for young people. We cannot allow young people to be introduced to the streets of Wales. It is fundamentally wrong by the UK Government.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Bethan Jenkins.

I recently met with ‘The Big Issue’ and street vendors in Cardiff, and, as politicians and citizens alike, we can do more to help those who are sleeping rough, such as promoting the StreetLink scheme, which allows anyone to call or send an online alert about the location of someone they see sleeping rough, so authorities will then locate them and offer them that support. The expansion of schemes like this, however, illustrates that the number of people sleeping rough in Wales has jumped significantly, and Shelter Cymru has recorded a 63 per cent rise in people needing their service, and this is something that I think we need to tackle and to understand. I want to try and learn about those experiences myself, so I agreed, when I was there—. I don’t know how they managed to influence me, but I said that I would go out and become a ‘The Big Issue’ street vendor so that I could see how many I could sell, in competition with some of the ‘The Big Issue’ sellers. And I wondered, Cabinet Secretary, if you would like to join me one day—anywhere in Wales; it doesn’t have to be Cardiff, in the spirit of the all-Wales approach that we have—to come and sell ‘The Big Issue’ with me, to see how they operate and to see how they are making a living on the streets.

Well, the Member may be very surprised, but I would be delighted to join the Member in Cardiff or wherever, to come along with you. I think it’s really important that we experience the real living experience of people who are working or have found themselves on the streets. The other evening, the Member might be pleased to know that I spent 10 minutes sitting in ‘Chippy Alley’ in Cardiff, talking to a young person who was homeless. They were stark conversations we had, about the influence of what is happening to her life, and the vulnerability of her. I think I would be more than happy to come out with you and talk to people in the communities in the area you represent, too.

Thank you very much, and I look forward to going undercover and seeing how many we sell and how many we can—. Well, we’ll have a competition, shall we? Let’s see. But to go back to the serious issue, there are of course other ways in which you and your Government can help solve this particular problem, as opposed to just selling ‘The Big Issue’. Placing duties on local authorities to prevent homelessness has improved matters, but has not stemmed the growth in rough sleepers. Is it now time, do you think, to update your homelessness strategy to include a national approach to tackling rough sleeping, getting people off the street and into accommodation, so if there are other issues—such as mental health problems—that can be addressed, we can make sure that they are, and that we don’t have a propensity of people rough sleeping in Wales?

I think when we introduced the legislation around homelessness, we had a fantastic response in terms of a reduction in the numbers, and I pay tribute to local authorities who have been dealing with that. I spoke to Shelter Cymru this morning, and they are very impressed at the pace of the success we’ve had, but I also acknowledge the fact that there have been some other interventions that have happened here that have caused a different dynamic of street homelessness and rough sleepers out there. If you walk through the cities now, you’ll see a younger cohort of individuals being there. The implementation of the 18 to 21-year-old housing benefit cuts this week will increase that. So, there is some work, and I met with the First Minister, also, yesterday, to talk about youth homelessness and the fact that we have to have some urgent pieces of work looking at how we get direct intervention, and it might be by working from the non-traditional way that we provide support. But I’ve already visited some areas where there are some clever interventions about supporting people and housing solutions as well, which I’m really interested in.

I certainly concur with the questions earlier about the housing cap. I think that’s a ticking time bomb and something that we have to be campaigning against. But one of the many problems people face when forced into rough sleeping is that, currently, they’re not considered to be in priority need. In the past you’ve rejected phasing out priority need, and defended that decision. And I quote, you’ve stated:

The right balance must be struck between the rights of the applicant and the duties and the burdens that we place on local authorities.’

But as you will know, all the research shows that homelessness itself imposes a bigger cost to public services than preventing homelessness in the first place. Even conservative states in the US have grasped this, and here in the UK, Crisis have modelled the financial impact of homelessness and found that in every scenario, the savings for public services outweighed the cost of preventing homelessness by a magnitude of 3:1 over just one year. And for some scenarios where you assume additional costs, such as frequent arrests and use of mental health services and their facilities, the savings could be as high as 20:1. So, would you, therefore, accept that ending priority need and adopting a housing first policy would save public funding in the long term, and agree to look at this matter again as a matter of urgency?

As I said earlier on, I think when we introduced the legislation, we were at a point in time where we believed it was the right thing to do. We’ve seen those interventions being very positive. I think now is the time to refresh policy and have a review about what we’re doing in terms of intervention. The evidence is on our streets. We can see people that are homeless and rough sleeping, and, therefore, there must be something out of kilter between the legislation and the implementation. I’m very happy to look at that, and, in addition to Shelter, I met with Crisis as well yesterday. So, I’ve met with a host of organisations that deal with homelessness, because I think this should be a priority for the Government.

Welsh Conservative spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. I previously highlighted to you the Young Foundation’s ‘Valuing Places’ report, funded by Welsh Government, and based on research in three areas, including your own home town, and they said that establishing local networks should be a priority. In your foreword to the Welsh Government’s information advice action plan, you say that strong and well-integrated advice services have an important role to play in promoting the well-being and prosperity essential to building resilient communities, and, of course, that’s absolutely correct. Based on the recommendations received from the National Advice Network, your plan states that local and regional networks will be key contributors to both the Welsh Government publication of its independent advice needs analysis and the national advice network, although the first was published in March 2017, and the second working group established in 2017-18. How, therefore, will you accommodate this when your plan also says that working with and encouraging the development of local regional networks won’t happen until 2018 onwards?

Well, we’ve already started engaging with communities with regard to our longer term vision on the way to have resilient communities. My team have been talking to all the Communities First clusters and their team managers, and with local authorities. We’ve already started work with some organisations around Children First zones, and looking at what that looks like for making sure we get feedback from the communities, as opposed to directly down from organisations like ourselves. So, while the proposals may suggest 2018 in terms of timeline, actually, we’ve started that process already.

Okay. Well, one of the local organisations I’ve referred to you, which is delivering an internationally developed, world-class service, is the Eagle House Youth Development Community Interest Company, working in Snowdonia, based on Anglesey, and their young achievers programme, helping to tackle offending by supporting young people upfront. They’ve run two successful contracts with job centres, and continue to deliver across north Wales for them. They’ve also been contacted by local education authorities across north Wales to provide residential behavioural development courses for schools, but they’re still fighting to get their work with prolific offenders, and reducing the offending, off the ground, even with the support of the police offender management unit and probation, and they ask for a meeting with you. Now, I fully appreciate your response, when you said that you provide funding directly to the youth offending teams via local authorities, and it’s for them to commission that service directly from Eagle House. But I ask you again: will you engage directly with them to see for yourself how effective this sort of local network intervention is? And I know you can’t force local authorities, but you can certainly highlight good practice that they may wish to consider. Will you do so?

Well, I would hope that local authorities were able to get into that space of intervention and support for businesses that can demonstrate they’re having a positive impact. I actually visited Flintshire, who are working with the Youth Justice Board on an enhanced case management programme, which has a massive impact on the reduction of reoffending in a very prolific area of reoffenders. We’ve had some great success there. I’m sure that my team will have heard your question and will talk to the Youth Justice Board accordingly to see if they are able to meet with, I think you say, the Eagle House organisation.

Eagle House, yes. Thank you. I would emphasise that they’re a company, but they’re non-profit and are a community interest organisation.

My final question relates to the National Citizen Service operating in England and Northern Ireland, benefiting the personal development of young people, their life experiences and the strengths that employers look for in young people. Three hundred thousand young people have taken part in this programme across England and Northern Ireland, with excellent outcomes. You wrote to the MP for the Vale of Clwyd, Dr James Davies, highlighting the fact that the Welsh Government was receiving £60 million of consequential moneys to include running a National Citizen Service, that a previous pilot project was positive in some respects, and that you promised to work with the UK Government Minister to see what might be developed, based on the National Citizen Service and existing Welsh schemes. Could you provide us with an update on where the Welsh Government are up to with that?

We’re still in discussions with the UK Government. I’ve had several conversations, and many exchanges, with the UK Government Ministers on this very issue, about the principles of a scheme here in Wales. Now, we already run a volunteering scheme, and much other support, for young people in Wales. And my question to the Minister in the UK was how this would add value to our contribution already. What will that additionality bring to it? The Minister was positive. He said that he would seek to address some of the issues financially. To date, he hasn’t been able to secure any additional funding for us. But my team are in correspondence; I saw a note this week from interventions between the two departments.

UKIP spokesperson, Gareth Bennett.

Diolch, Llywydd. I was going to ask you today, Minister, some questions relating to housing and, in particular, the Welsh Government’s involvement in stimulating housing supply. I know that there have been efforts to increase the use of publicly owned land for housing supply. Could you update us on these efforts, also on the operation of the housing supply taskforce, which was set up in 2013?

I think we’ve had great success in delivering more homes for communities across Wales. We exceeded our target in the last term of Government, with over 11,000, working in partnership with the housing sector. This year, we’ve just signed a compact between the housing sector and local authorities. Our proposals to introduce the end of the right to buy will help ensure that investment made by these organisations will be planning for the long term, with more delivery—20,000 more units over this term of Government, supported, very kindly, by the finance Minister.

Yes, thanks for your answer, Minister. I know that you have the Bill going through to safeguard the social housing stock, as you see it, which is your approach. But I’m looking at the other end of it today—increasing the actual supply, which you are enlightening me as to the efforts that you’re making. Now, another possible area where this could be improved is by the release of brownfield sites. Is your department involved in this area, and are there any initiatives to help release brownfield sites, such as the compilation of toxicology reports?

Well, there are two areas. My team are already in discussion with Ken Skates, and his department, looking at what land we own as Government. We are also having discussions with the health portfolio, to see, again, whether there is any potential for land usage and stock to be installed there. We’ve just launched a £20 million innovation programme for housing schemes. We’re not short of innovation in Wales, and there are many schemes going through that look at land use, and not just ours, but registered social landlords and others, to use as a catalyst for growth.

So, I think, over the next 12 months, Wales is an exciting place to do business in the housing field. And what we’re seeking to do is something new. If you do the same, you get the same. We’re looking at innovation and doing something different. And things like the universal credit, tackling issues for 18 to 21-year-olds, which we talked about earlier on, are things we’re going to have to address and mitigate with our housing solutions here in Wales.

Yes, I appreciate there are problems in that area. If we keep to the housing supply angle, which you’ve been articulating, another area is bringing into the housing supply empty homes. I know you’ve had some success with the Houses into Homes scheme. The latest figures I’ve seen indicate that there are around 23,000 empty houses currently in Wales. That’s your figure, by the way. So, is the Government’s Houses into Homes scheme likely to release many more of these empty properties and assist in converting them into residences?

There are two parts, again, where they will continue with that programme—very successful—but there’s still more to do. I think, again, rather than always building new properties, what we could do is make some interventions of using older properties, if we’re able to make sure that they’re energy efficient and they’re suitable for accommodation. It’s something I’ve asked my team to look at in terms of direct intervention around homes that are empty in our communities that we see.

I thank the Member for his question. We are currently developing proposals for a new capital regeneration programme. This will complement other strategic investments already under way and build on the success of earlier schemes.

Thank you very much for that answer. The high street in Swansea is clearly a key gateway to the city for visitors as they arrive by train at Swansea’s high street station—the clue’s in the title. It’s benefited from Vibrant and Viable Places funding, over recent years, however not every building in the high street is in pristine condition. The Palace Theatre is a grade II listed building, which has been empty for years and is falling into disrepair. People have been waiting many years for any sign of action. Can I ask you, Cabinet Secretary, what actions you are taking in conjunction with the City and County of Swansea to try and resolve this frustrating situation?

I think that Swansea city council has done a fantastic job in terms of the way that they’re starting to regenerate their community, and £11.76 million has been issued to Swansea council from the Welsh Government in terms of partnership. Public and private investment, totalling around £69 million up to 2017, will be invested in that community, and we are actually seeing a difference in the high street vista. I know where the train station is because, when you come out of the train station and turn right, my plaque is on the side of the wall, when I opened it with regard to Vibrant and Viable Places, so I am familiar with the area.

What’s important here is that we have community intervention, looking at what’s good for the community and how we can make sure that that involvement is continued, but well done, Swansea council.

Cabinet Secretary, Vibrant and Viable Places, as projects in Port Talbot, has seen the regeneration of areas of my town, and you’ve seen for yourself some of the work in the Green Park area. These have been an attractive vision for the local people and for future investors. The announcement two weeks ago by the Ministry of Justice of the siting of a new prison in Baglan, which is less than a mile away from these targeted regeneration projects, could—and I say ‘could’—reverse the positive impact of these projects. I understand that the land being considered by the Ministry of Justice is Welsh Government-owned land. When asked by the MoJ if it would sell the land, will the Welsh Government say, ‘No’ and keep its focus on targeted regeneration in Port Talbot?

I’m grateful for the Member’s acknowledgment of the investment that we’ve made in his constituency, and I’ve been around with him on some of those visits. Again, that is another area that has been dramatically turned around by the Government’s investment.

The matter of the prison is a matter for the MoJ. The planning system is as appropriate as it is for any other system, whether that be a prison or a high-street shop. The land is open to offers by any organisation, and if the MoJ wishes to pursue that, it will be a matter for the MoJ and we will treat that accordingly, under the planning terms and conditions.

Cabinet Secretary, I’m familiar with ‘buddleia towers’ as well and I can’t say that I’m over-impressed by Swansea council’s intervention there. But the city deal is better news for Swansea. Perhaps regrettably, it doesn’t address traditional infrastructure or metros, focusing instead on digital highways as drivers for innovation and regeneration. As a result, I’m wondering whether it might not be for Welsh Government, at a strategic level, to kick start an examination of how to improve Swansea’s air quality, examining it within a regional transport plan compatible with the aims of the city deal. Would the Welsh Government look at this so that ideas like monorails and trams and electric taxis and LPG buses don’t disappear from your line of sight just because no-one can agree whether it’s the transport portfolio, the regeneration portfolio or the communities portfolio that takes responsibility for this?

We’ve got a very joined-up Government and we’ve got a very joined-up community in terms of our interventions with local authorities too. I think the Swansea bay city deal is fantastic for that area and, again, it will be about integrated transport solutions and opportunities of employment. The metro concept is a principle of how communities can be joined up even if they’re not directly affected by the metro. And there is the new franchise condition: how do we make sure that buses or trams, or whatever that may look like for the future, are planned for? I’m sure that the Swansea bay city deal will have that vision as we move forward. It’s got a great team around that provision, with all authorities signed up to that. I hope that that will go from strength to strength post May.

The Welsh Government has commissioned the Travelling Ahead project at Tros Gynnal Plant to deliver a new pan-Wales advice and advocacy service. This service will support Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities to better understand their rights, get good-quality advice and advocacy support, address inequalities, and tackle discrimination.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his reply and can I particularly thank him for his officials who attended a meeting with me on the Gypsy site in Kingsmoor near Kilgettty on Friday. My thanks also to Ruby Price who hosted us in her home for a couple of hours where we discussed Tros Gynnal Plant, the Travelling Ahead project and other needs to support Gypsy and Traveller sites in Pembrokeshire. Can I ask two particular questions arising from that? One of the things that was clear from that discussion is that Gypsy and Traveller communities do build up trust with those who are able to speak on their behalf or intervene or work with them, and the Unity project has done a lot to achieve that in Pembrokeshire. How can we achieve and ensure that what’s been learnt in the Unity project, and the skills that have been built up with individuals there, are transferred in some way to the new project of Travelling Ahead, Tros Gynnal Plant as well, so that there isn’t a loss of confidence? Because, as he will know, in community development that can take two or three years to build back up if you lose it at that stage.

The second question is around the facilities at Kingsmoor in particular. I understand that Pembrokeshire County Council are looking to have a planning application and come to the Welsh Government for a capital fund to expand that site. I hope that he will work with Pembrokeshire, or his officials at least, to ensure that the people on that site do get a fair deal and the best possible opportunity to bid through Pembrokeshire for the money that might be available from Welsh Government.

I thank the Member for his question. I am aware of the Unity project and I’m grateful for the acknowledgement of my official. I did say that he would come with you and he did, and I’m pleased that it was a successful meeting. I too am concerned about the sharing of good practice and the community cohesion that is built up through a programme like this. It is disappointing to say that while, long term, the Big Lottery was coming to an end, the local authority were aware of that programme coming to an end and could have submitted a bid to Welsh Government to carry on the good work of the Unity project, but failed to do so, which is regrettable. In terms of the capital spend that the Member alludes to, I’m not aware of a bid coming through, but of course I heard the Member’s comments.

Can I add my voice to Simon Thomas’s expressions about the Unity project? It was indeed an excellent project and it did work to help bring young Gypsies and Travellers here to the Senedd for the cross-party group on Gypsies and Travellers. They’re uncertain how they’ll be able to come in the future. So, can I ask the Cabinet Secretary if he can think of something that can replace the Unity project in giving the support to enable the young people to come here to see where their democracy is?

Of course. Julie Morgan has championed the rights of the Gypsy/Traveller community for a long time. Welsh Government has funded a Travelling Ahead advice and advocacy service, operating from 1 April to March 2020. The staff who run the programme will be well known to many mid and west Wales community members, which should support the effectiveness of the service. I will give some further thought to that. I’ve also met with the younger community here at the Assembly, and it was a great visionary opportunity to understand what the impacts are for this community. I will give that some further thought.

Thank you for the question. Local authorities have committed to deliver 1,000 new council homes under our new housing pact with the Welsh Local Government Association and Community Housing Cymru.

Thank you for that response, Cabinet Secretary. In the period between 1945 and 1979—the social-democrat period of British history—a large number of council homes were built. When Britain was governed by those well-known left-wing politicians, Winston Churchill, Harold MacMillan and Stanley Baldwin, Britain built millions of council houses and flats. In the period since then virtually no houses have been built and the actual number has reduced due to the right to buy. Will the Minister join me in congratulating Swansea council on commencing to build council houses at Milford Way and Birchgrove in Swansea?

Twice in a day, Mike Hedges. Congratulations to Swansea. It’s great to see the local authority building new council properties. Indeed, in my own authority also in Flintshire, with Hannah Blythyn, we’ve got some successful council properties and people living in there already. We are now starting to see the benefit of the housing revenue account subsidy exit with new council homes being built. I’m pleased that Swansea and other authorities are using their vision to ensure that we can make a long-term investment for the social housing stock that’s needed for the future.

Plaid Cymru supports all efforts to increase the social housing stock too and, of course, Carmarthenshire has been a council that’s been in the vanguard in this area. One restriction that could impact on the ability to build more social housing is the decision of the Office for National Statistics to re-allocate housing associations as public bodies, thereby restricting the availability of funding for the future. So, can you give us an update on what the Government is doing in order to resolve this problem?

We are in discussions with the housing associations in terms of how we will manage this process. I am confident that we will be able to resolve the issue either through legislation or otherwise.

Twice for Suzy Davies as well, Cabinet Secretary. Swansea council’s local development plan has already been delayed, and the new date of March has passed and we’re still no nearer being absolutely sure about what this vision that you mentioned looks like, and the innovation that the council can bring to its plan to bring new rental properties into the housing stock. Now, I’ve raised the point a number of times—with you, as it happens—so now I feel entitled to ask: what progress has Welsh Government made in speaking to the houses in multiple occupation sector about converting excess capacity into new, longer term homes? And can I ask, therefore, what advice Welsh Government has given to councils about acquiring those centrally located properties themselves to bring them into the councils’ social housing stock to complement new build?

Well, I think this, from an earlier question, is about what housing solutions are fit for the future and what their needs are. I haven’t got an issue with using HMOs if they’re appropriate for new housing solutions. I did visit, with Julie James and Mike Hedges actually, in Swansea, looking at HMO provision. Suzy, you would have been more than welcome, but I wasn’t familiar with your diary engagements. The fact of the matter is, what we’ve got to do is be innovative and look at all options for Wales. I think the HMO sector—. Because there have been developments of more student accommodation in block form, HMOs now are moving out of that system; therefore, there is an opportunity for us to use them.

Our childcare offer aims to provide working parents of three and four-year-olds with 30 hours of Government-funded education and childcare for up to 48 weeks a year. We will begin piloting the offer in specific areas of seven local authorities from September of this year.

I’m well aware of the pilots, and I want to thank the Government for making the statement about those very recently, but I am concerned—very concerned indeed—at the National Day Nurseries Association’s comments this week regarding the capacity of the private sector who want to work with the Government, as you will know, to achieve the delivery of this very important commitment. I am concerned about the capacity of the sector to meet those demands, and the fact that there’s no plan currently between the private sector and the Government in order to work that capacity up over the next few years so that you can meet this challenging commitment. What work are you doing behind the scenes in order to make sure that there is capacity so that you can deliver on this important promise?

Well, I also read your press release, and I also read the comments in the newspaper. The comment says,

30 hours of free childcare scheme may not be possible’

which doesn’t mean it isn’t possible. The fact is that the NDNA are part of the working group moving this forward. It surprised me also that they made comments in the media as opposed to coming to talk to us.

May I say that the working group is working well? The private sector is not the only option in terms of the delivery of this model, and therefore we have many options moving forward. The pilots will give us a better sense of delivery, but I’m confident that we’ll be able to deliver the most comprehensive childcare programme in the UK by this Government by the end of this term of government.

The Welsh Government’s commitment to extend entitlements to free childcare will, of necessity, lead to an increase in the number of childcare providers across Wales. This creates an opportunity for us to consider the positive community impacts that could arise from the growth in employment within this sector. What consideration has the Cabinet Secretary given to embedding the principles of the foundational economy into the childcare delivery offer and raising the social ask of providers in order to further benefit communities?

This is a great question in terms of the childcare plus agenda, making sure that this is not just about childcare and warehousing of children in some shape or form, but actually building an economy and the opportunity for the childcare sector to grow, but also the issues of procurement, food processing, retail distribution, transport—all of those things that feature around this one specific piece of work. It is something I’m working with my Cabinet colleagues on, and indeed the sector, which surprised me even more when I read the comments in the newspapers this week.

Of course, quality is as important as quantity, and we know that falling behind early, particularly in cognitive development, can have long-lasting effects for children, particularly in later childhood, and indeed in later life. I’ve pressed you previously about the early years childcare and play workforce plan, and you indicated it would be available in the spring. Well, here we are, and I was just wondering whether you could give us an update as to when we’re likely to see it, and whether its publication is now, in fact, imminent.

That work plan is being worked upon by ourselves, but also the commissioners as well. We’ve asked them to come in to talk to us about future planning. I think it’s only right that we do that.

We shouldn’t not acknowledge that this is going to be a huge challenge for the sector as a whole—to make sure we’ve got capacity within the system to deal with all these young people coming through. I agree—on the total childcare programme that we’ve been running, the two areas that have been most prominent are quality and flexibility, and it’s very wide ranging in that context, but we are working towards that. Delivery will be started in September, but I will give a more definitive answer to the Member when I’ve got some more details that I can give him.

I thank the Member for her question. My officials meet regularly with colleagues in Northern Ireland, Scotland and England to discuss children’s rights and the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. These discussions include taking forward the 2016 recommendations made by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in full.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that response. Is he aware of the survey commissioned by the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People that showed that 63 per cent of people in Northern Ireland now support children being legally protected from hitting, smacking, and indeed any type of assault? Is he also aware that Scottish MSP John Finnie is due to lodge a Member Bill in the Scottish Parliament in the next few weeks to abolish the defence of justifiable assault in relation to the physical punishment of children in Scotland? Does the Cabinet Secretary agree that it is very useful for us in Wales, and for the Welsh Government, to look at what is happening in other countries in relation to the physical punishment of children and our own proposed plans?

Indeed, and the Member’s right to raise this. Promoting positive parenting in Wales is critically important, and learning from other nations is part of our approach, but we must recognise that solutions introduced by other countries are based on their own specific legal jurisdictions. Any legislation we take forward will be tailored to Wales, but the Member can rest assured that we will be introducing this legislation.

Cabinet Secretary, I think it’s very important in this area that our expectations and ambitions are constantly increasing, and that’s a good thing. Of course, we’ve contributed a children’s commissioner and the first play strategy, and in fairness to the Government here, taken on the foundation phase. But we do need to look at other jurisdictions as well to make sure that we really are still at the cutting edge.

I agree with the Member. Part of my team and some members of the Government support mechanisms have been on a trip to the States only last week to look at interventions that are looking at adverse childhood experiences. I know that other colleagues have been across the world as well, looking at interventions that are very positive for our young people. We shouldn’t be shy of adopting those policies. I only wish there was something closer to home, in England, that could have positive effects here in Wales.

I have announced a 12-month transitional period for Communities First to mitigate some of the impacts of the decision. Transition and strategy guidance has been issued to fully support the lead delivery bodies, who are currently submitting outline transition plans.

The Cabinet Secretary will have received a letter from Caerphilly county borough councillor Ken James, the cabinet member for regeneration. I’d like to just draw his attention to this statement from Councillor James that says that Caerphilly council, as the lead body, are having trouble delivering their detailed plan because we’ve entered the pre-election period, which means they cannot adhere to their formal consultation and decision-making processes in order to develop and agree their proposals. Would therefore the Cabinet Secretary agree to a degree of flexibility for lead bodies when delivering their detailed plans?

As always, as the Member raises it with me, as well as Dawn Bowden and his other colleagues, I’m very interested in your views on this and how we can have a smoother transition for the people employed in the communities on the ground. I’m very interested in making sure that my team work closely with Caerphilly and other associations, and I’ve asked them to have a conversation with them directly to make sure that we can find a way through this proposal.

Cabinet Secretary, in your statement on 14 February on your new approach to building resilient communities, you announced a new £12 million a year grant to support those who live away from the labour market. Could the Cabinet Secretary provide more details on this scheme, when it will be launched, who it will be targeted to or at, what objectives have been set, and how will they be achieved? Thank you.

Well, these aren’t new schemes. Lift and Communities for Work and the PaCE programme weren’t available in all of the clusters. We are making sure Lift and Communities for Work will be available in all the 52 former Communities First clusters, investing £12 million, as the Member said, about taking people who are very hard to reach from the market into employment. That isn’t always about an employability programme, but maybe about confidence building or otherwise giving people confidence to move into that plan. I’m also talking with Julie James in terms of her employability pathway to make sure that these very specific programmes in communities add value to the longer term intervention of lifelong learning. So, I’m more than happy to write to the Member with details of these schemes, but they aren’t new; we’re just increasing the capacity within the sector.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is the 90-second statements. Ann Jones.

Diolch, Llywydd. In just an hour’s time, the Wales women’s football team will walk out onto the pitch to play a friendly against Northern Ireland. As part of that squad, Jess Fishlock will become the first Welsh footballer to receive 100 caps, marking a most memorable milestone for this talented midfielder. No player, man or woman, has ever played a century of games for Wales, and I’m sure it’ll be a special occasion for her, and one, I think, we should recognise here at the Assembly.

Jess made her Wales debut against Switzerland back in 2006. Recently turning 30, Jess has no plans to bring her international career to a close, and retains a burning ambition to represent her country at the finals of a major tournament. I’m sure that the team will do Jess proud today and Jess will play her part, and I hope that Jess can realise her ambitions to lead the Wales women’s football team into a major tournament. I’m sure we wish her well on this remarkable achievement. Diolch.

Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Llywydd. Henry Richard was born in Tregaron on 3 April in 1812. He was an Independent minister and was a prominent figure in the Welsh Liberal movement. In 1868, he was elected Member of Parliament for the constituency of Merthyr and he served there for 20 years. The constituency, at that time, included the town of my birth, Aberdare.

Henry Richard is mainly remembered as a promoter of the cause of peace and arbitration and as secretary of the peace society for 40 years. His main success was working to ensure a declaration in the Paris treaty, which brought the Crimean war to an end, declaring for the first time internationally that arbitration was available instead of war. He was therefore called the apostle of peace.

There is now a statue in his memory on the square in Tregaron, and a new, all-age school is named after him in the area. This is his statement on the statue:

I have always been mindful of three things:—not to forget the language of my country; and the people and cause of my country; and to neglect no opportunity of defending the character and promoting the interests of my country. My hope for the abatement of the war system lies in permanent conviction of the people, rather than the policies of cabinets or the discussions of parliaments.’

We should bear this in mind in our own Senedd today.

Neil McEvoy.

Diolch, Llywydd. Three and a half thousand people have now signed the petition to this Assembly calling for us to protect live music venues in Wales. That petition was started by the conductor and composer, Richard Vaughan. The problem is that there are two proposals to develop in Wales’s most famous live music street, Womanby Street, and the developments pose a threat to the music venues because of the weak planning laws we have in Wales. In England, there is the agent of change principle, which means that new developments need to accommodate existing live music venues and not the other way around. It’s time to think about what we can do, and people from all political parties need to stand up and protect the live music venues in Wales. The proposals for Womanby Street should be rejected unless there are cast-iron guarantees that the existing live music premises will not be affected. Our Senedd needs to listen to the thousands of people who have taken the time to sign the petition, because we need a change in planning law, and I call upon everybody present to ensure that we change the law here in Wales and protect our live music venues. Diolch.

The next item on our agenda is the motion to amend Standing Order 12 in relation to topical questions. I call on a member of the Business Committee to move the motion—Paul Davies.

Formally.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

The next item on our agenda is the debate on a Member’s legislative proposal, and I call on Simon Thomas to move the motion.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I want to propose that the Assembly notes the proposal for a waste reduction Bill in Wales, and the purpose of the proposed legislation would be to reduce waste, and in two particular ways: to address the need for a deposit-return scheme in Wales and to address the need to either ban, or at least have a levy on, polystyrene packaging in Wales.

The context for this proposal is that further waste reduction is needed if we are to reach the Welsh Government’s target to reduce waste by 70 per cent by 2025, and, to reach zero waste by 2050, a significant pace of change is needed. Plaid Cymru would also like to bring the zero-waste target forward to 2030 and, as stated already by the Welsh Government, Wales can, and should, become Europe’s best recycling nation. We are fourth, to be fair, but we can do even better.

Wales’s recycling rate has doubled over the last decade, from just under 30 per cent in 2006-07 to over 60 per cent in 2015-16. However, not everyone recycles, and there are also local authorities that are significantly behind the pace of change. The current 58 per cent target of Welsh Government was not met by Newport, Torfaen, and Blaenau Gwent in 2015 and 2016. I believe, therefore, that a deposit-return scheme, through which customers pay a small additional charge for cans and bottles and are paid back when they return the empties, will incentivise people who do not already recycle and, indeed, will introduce an element of resource saving into our economy. This scheme should be available for plastic cans and bottles as well as metal ones and glass ones. As well as increasing collection rates, deposit schemes provide a higher quality of material, which can then be refilled or recycled. Deposit schemes could also save local authorities money in the long-term through lowering the amount of household waste to be managed, reducing the need for sorting and disposal facilities, such as incinerators and landfill, and reducing the need for street cleaning.

It’s a particular concern that the marine environment around Wales is being very much degraded by the amount of plastics in our environment. The Marine Conservation Society has a petition before the Assembly currently and is supporting a journey by a clipper around the coast of Britain in August, which will be calling in Cardiff sometime in the month of August, called the Sea Dragon, and the purpose of the Sea Dragon is to collate data on plastic in our marine environment. This is citizen science at its very best, in co-ordination with universities. And any of us—

Can I just—[Inaudible.]

Yes, indeed, I would do.

Just as species champion for the grey seals, all 43 of my new friends now in Worm’s Head would surely back such a proposal.

I’m sure they would, but I would say to Dai Lloyd that they’re not necessarily his friends, because I think they travel a long distance, and they’re probably as much Irish and Breton friends as they are Welsh friends. But it just shows the marine environment is there to be protected. And I think if anyone has undertaken a beach clean—and perhaps Dai Lloyd would like to consider a beach clean—they will know how many bits of plastic and returns from bottles are picked up at that stage.

Now, Germany’s deposit-return scheme is the most successful in the world. That’s been in place since 2003. A charge of 25 euro cent is applied to all drink containers apart from milk and fruit and vegetable juices. As a result, 98.5 per cent of refillable bottles are returned by consumers, and this is the point: the quality of recovered material is good enough to guarantee that an old bottle will become a new bottle. So, though we succeed in recycling at the moment, the advantage of a deposit-return scheme is the saving of resource, as well, and less waste. This has also helped to remove 1 billion to 2 billion one-way containers from Germany’s bins and streets.

It’s also the trend that is increasingly growing. I didn’t want to bring rubbish into the Chamber, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I did have to prepare this last night—myself, personally—but, if you buy some trendy beer or hipster ale these days, you’ll find that it often has a 10 cent refund for any state or territory—this is for international sales in Australia and the United States. So, this is the trend that’s already happening—we need only to follow that trend, and, as they say, work with it.

However, not everything can be recycled, and to reach zero waste—or reuse, indeed—we will eventually need to ensure that all packaging used in Wales is recyclable. One of the main causes of litter is, in fact, polystyrene packaging, which is not recyclable and cannot be reused, as it’s often used for food packaging, of course. Whilst other more environmentally friendly materials can be used, many cafes, shops, and fast-food outlets use polystyrene packaging for drinks and takeaways because it’s cheaper. Figures from the Bevan Foundation demonstrated that an online wholesaler offered 500 large polystyrene burger boxes for £21.12, whereas the biodegradable burger boxes are sold at £44.48 for 500.

So, there’s little incentive currently for retailers to use environmentally friendly alternatives, which include biodegradable containers, refillable containers, and even edible containers, which are now possible. It may not be possible or necessary to follow many states and cities in the USA and ban polystyrene packaging in Wales, although I am personally tempted to think along those lines, but we can look closer to home at our own successful single-use carrier bag charge, introduced by the Welsh Government in October 2011. According to a review commissioned by the Welsh Government and published in March 2016, between the introduction of the 5p charge in 2011 and 2014, there was an estimated 70 per cent reduction in the use of single-use carrier bags in Wales. So, a similar charge on polystyrene food and drink containers could be paid by the retailer or passed on to the consumer and lead to a similar decline in use.

It’s very interesting that, when the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government came to the Finance Committee in Newport last week—I think it was last week, or it might have been the week before; I can’t remember exactly when now—he talked about using the new powers in the Wales Act 2017 to introduce innovative taxes. And, of course, one of the proposals from the Bevan Foundation and others is a polystyrene charge in Wales, as just such an innovative tax.

So, many stakeholders, from the marine and environmental sectors to people like the Bevan Foundation, are calling for a tax on polystyrene to reduce its use, or even to drive out its use with more environmentally friendly alternatives. I think such legislation could deal with and help reduce waste enormously in Wales, but, more importantly, put us at the forefront of thinking in a European context.

Thank you very much. Jenny Rathbone.

I support this excellent proposal, and I think there are many other things we might consider doing as well. First, just to correct Simon, we are, I understand, the third best in the world for recycling, after Germany and Taiwan, so we need to celebrate that.

I was wondering whether we would have the competency, for example, to outlaw contracts that the supermarkets are making with some of their farming suppliers to force them to plough vegetables back into the land if they don’t meet the cosmetic appearances that consumers apparently demand in supermarkets, because that seems to me absolutely criminal.

I support your polystyrene tax, but I feel that there’s also more that we need to do to clarify for the citizen what plastics are recyclable and what are not, because I’ve had some debate with constituents about whether the black trays that are used invariably in processed foods—are they recyclable or not? If they’re not, let’s stop using them and use another coloured tray or one that’s made of a slightly different material, because it ought to be perfectly possible to recycle plastics if they’re not adulterated. Therefore, I think that the polystyrene tax should be extended to any plastics that are not recyclable, so that we force companies to recycle, because the cost in terms of the environment is just absolutely huge.

Most plastic packaging material is lost after one use—it’s not recycled. Once it becomes waste, it’s disposed of as municipal waste and about 30 per cent of it gets lost into the oceans, with the impact on Dai Lloyd’s friends but also on the ocean generally. We do face a situation where we could actually have more plastic in the ocean than fish, and that is a pretty scary prospect. So, I think that Europe is beginning to look at this, because, obviously, not all of Europe is doing as well as either Germany or Wales. The European Parliament has recently approved something called the Bonafè report, which is aimed at moving the EU towards a circular economy, with an 80 per cent recycling target for packaging waste. So, we want to be ahead of the curve in that respect, rather than following on.

So, I think that those are particularly good things that we could be doing, but I think it is also about changing behaviour, particularly the fact that a third of all food never actually reaches the table—that tells us that there’s something wrong about the way we respect food. But I think that we should also be thinking of following the excellent example of Germany with the closed substance cycle and waste management Act, which they passed in 1996, as you’ve already referred to, because it really does help to embed the ‘reduce, reuse, recycle’ concept, which we should all be following.

Are you coming to a conclusion, please?

So, I think if we want to be a zero-waste nation by 2050 or by 2030, then we should be really, I hope, considering this legislation.

It’s important that the Assembly continues with the good work of tackling waste. It’s an issue that affects us all. The seas, coastlines and beaches of Wales are habitats that are seriously damaged by waste and, in supporting Simon Thomas today, I want to mention the impact of waste on marine habitats and the impact of polystyrene particularly.

Following the plastic bag tax, introduced in 2011, there was a notable reduction in the number of plastic bags found on beaches around Wales, but according to the beach survey of 2016, when 28 Welsh beaches were surveyed, there was an increase of 16 per cent since the previous year in the number of items of waste found. Plastic and polystyrene are the main items found on beaches in the UK, and as we’ve heard, polystyrene is a huge environmental problem because it isn’t a material that biodegrades over time, and we don’t know how long it takes to biodegrade. In the meantime, landfill sites, as well as our seas, are filling with polystyrene. Polystyrene is worse than plastics, because there is increasing evidence that chemicals in polystyrene can be carcinogenic as well as damaging and being harmful to our wildlife and marine life.

By way of coincidence, yesterday I received a letter from a county councillor living near a school in Arfon, and this is what she says:

In our area, we see pupils visiting food shops at lunchtime and dumping their polystyrene containers in the woods and on riverbanks, on greenfield sites, along paths and on our pavements. It’s terrible and it’s a problem that’s increasing. Certainly, there is work to be done to educate children to dispose of their litter in a responsible way. Of course, it’s an ongoing battle to ensure a sufficient number of bins and so on. Despite that, I am of the view that it would be of great assistance to reduce packaging, particularly food packaging.

She goes on, this councillor, to say:

I wonder whether the Welsh Government would consider taxing polystyrene. The tax on plastic bags has been a sweeping success. So successful, indeed, that other nations in the UK have adopted the same policy. What about Wales leading the way once again, creating a Wales which is free of polystyrene? Thank you for reading my letter. I hope you’ll have an opportunity to speak up on my behalf and ask the Government to consider my request.

Clearly, there’s more discussion to be had: a tax, a levy, a prohibition—which is the best approach of reaching our aim? But certainly, reducing the packaging waste in terms of goods would do a great deal to reduce the waste that is disposed of, with so much inevitably finishing up on our beaches and in our seas, where it can take many, many years to biodegrade. So, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the debate. Thank you to Simon for bringing this issue forward, and on with the attempts to tackle the issue of waste.

Could I just say that the Welsh Conservative group has no objection in principle to what Simon is intending to do, or would do if he got the opportunity to introduce a Bill here? However, we do think the practicalities play very heavily and need to be fully considered, and, in fairness, he did refer to them in his speech.

But we do start from the concept of the circular economy. I think we’re much more aware, now, of the impact we have in terms of how we wrap our products and how we consume the goods that we rely on so much. As many people have said, you’ve only got to walk on a beach anywhere, really, in the world, now, to realise the impact. I think, in the last 20 years or so, there’s been a huge shift, also, in public support and the demand the public have for policies that effectively meet these environmental demands.

I think we should remember that Wales does have a good suite of recycling polices at the moment, and we start from a high base. Whatever we do, we obviously want to preserve those achievements. I think any deposit scheme, in particular, would have to be very carefully thought through, so that we would be convinced that it really would take us a lot further than we can get just with the existing policies.

Some of the issues that have been raised with me—I don’t think they’re insuperable, but they obviously will need to be addressed. The existing infrastructure could be affected by a poorly designed scheme. You can end up with a clumsy policy that encourages people to make extra journeys to the supermarket, or whatever, to return bottles and other items. So, I think that needs to be considered. Also, many people, especially vulnerable people, have their groceries delivered—how that is incorporated into any deposit scheme. As I said, I don’t think they are insuperable, but they are knotty problems and they need to be addressed. I also think that the implications of any radical shift from kerbside, which has been hugely successful, to bring-to-store schemes, or whatever model is suggested, needs careful thought.

On food packaging, I think Wales and the UK need to get our act together, and I think a lot of us have just been depressed, on occasion, by the sheer quantity of material wrapping essential goods. That can’t be a great model and we need to move away from it. I’ve heard stories of outraged German consumers just tearing superfluous packaging off their products before they get to the till. I’m not recommending that, but I do think it shows you that there is a public mood for going even further here. So, we wish him well and we will look at anything that eventually comes to us very seriously.

I congratulate Simon on bringing this legislative proposal forward, aiming to reduce waste through placing additional requirements on food producers and retailers. It builds on the good work already undertaken by the Welsh Government and this Assembly to tackle an issue that affects us all, and we all do have a responsibility to tackle not least the islands of waste now growing in our oceans and choking marine life.

Wales has been at the forefront in the UK of proposing and then implementing legislation to support waste reduction, from the ‘Towards Zero Waste’ strategy, ambitiously aiming for a zero-waste nation by 2050, to the waste Measure, which introduced, as many other Members have remarked upon, the single carrier bag charge, followed, four years subsequently, by England. The carrier bag charge is an example of a great waste reduction success story for beaches here in Wales, with a significant reduction in the number of carrier bags found—lower than any other year since 2011. But even so, packaging waste is still a problem in our oceans and on our shorelines.

Like others here, I’ve joined in with people of all ages at beach clean-ups, and results from the Marine Conservation Society’s Great British Beach Clean 2016 revealed that, of the 28 Welsh beaches surveyed in September 2016, on average 607 pieces of litter were found per 100 metre stretch. That is still an increase of 16 per cent from 2015. Alongside plastic and polystyrene pieces, much of the litter on our beaches is packaging—the packaging of items such as crisps, sandwiches, sweets, lolly wrappers, and so much more. It not only causes an eyesore for residents and those tourists visiting our many fantastic beaches, but it poses a threat to our marine wildlife and to our commercial fisheries as it takes years to degrade.

Wales has made good progress on waste reduction, but should always be more ambitious in looking at how we can reduce waste. Some of Simon Thomas’s proposals, supported by the Marine Conservation Society and many others, are worthy of further consideration, and by extending producers’ responsibilities we could reduce the amount of packaging on food and other items, ensuring a significant step is made in reducing the amount of packaging that gets thrown away—waste that, one way or another, inevitably washes up on our beaches and in our seas. So, there will be many practical issues to work through in the proposal, I’ve got no doubt. David Melding has referred to a few now, and Simon Thomas himself acknowledged that there would be some difficulties to work through, but they are not unsurmountable in any way. So, I do support Simon’s legislative proposal in principle today, and in spirit, and I’m sure we can get the letter right if this were to come forward as well, and I urge other Members to consider doing so as well.

Thank you very much. I now call on the leader of the house, Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you, Simon Thomas, and everyone, for taking part in the debate today. The debate has given the Welsh Government the opportunity to update—in fact, the update has been fed back and expressed by Members today. But I think it is important to remind ourselves and put on the record that we published our waste strategy for Wales, ‘Towards Zero Waste’, back in 2010, outlining the actions we must all take if we are to reach our ambition of becoming a high-recycling nation by 2025 and a zero-waste nation by 2050. Our strategy is a pathway towards a so-called circular economy, which all Members have commented on today. That circular economy is one in which we keep resources in use for as long as possible, extract the maximum value from them whilst in use, then recover and regenerate products and materials at the end of the service life. Welsh Government published its waste prevention programme in December 2013. The waste prevention programme supports ‘Towards Zero Waste’ by describing the outcomes, policies, targets and work programme to address waste prevention in Wales.

Tackling waste is a big success story for Wales, and one that we should all be proud of. We have the highest municipal recycling rates in the UK and, according to an independent study, the second highest rates in Europe, and the third highest in the world. Now, in 2017, the Welsh Government has set its course to be the world leader in municipal recycling. The overall economic benefits to the Welsh economy of our waste strategy are enormous. For example, research carried out by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation projects benefits to Wales of achieving a circular economy of over £2 billion each year.

On food and drink packaging, it’s important to be clear that one of the primary purposes of the packaging is to protect the product from damage and wastage, including extending its shelf life. ‘Towards Zero Waste’ is currently being evaluated and will be refreshed to increase opportunities for the private and public sector to maximise financial, social and environmental benefits as a result of adopting changes in practices under the banner of a circular economy and resource efficiency. We will consult on the revisions to the waste strategy in a formal consultation in 2018. As part of the consultation process, the Welsh Government will have a comprehensive engagement with food producers, retailers and other stakeholders in respect of extended producer responsibility. This means making sure that they take a greater financial responsibility for the collection and management of waste that results from the products and packaging.

Recently there’s been significant interest following the media coverage on litter, plastic bottle recycling and recycling of coffee cups. The Welsh Government has a programme of work in place to tackle specifically these issues. For example, for many years funding has been provided by Welsh Government for the Waste and Resources Action Programme, WRAP, to work with the food industry and grocery retailers to reduce excess packaging. WRAP Cymru has also worked with the food service industry to deliver packaging waste prevention and increase recycling.

We’re about to commission a study to research options in relation to outcomes related to resource efficiency, including waste prevention, reuse and recycling, and to reduce litter under an extended producer responsibility approach. As part of this study, we will consider how a deposit-return scheme might impact on existing local authority schemes used to collect and manage the waste we produce in Wales. We must also take into account the associated environmental, financial, social, cultural and well-being impact on the people of Wales when making our decisions under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. We will examine this research as part of our review and update of our waste strategy, ‘Towards Zero Waste’.

Simon Thomas, in bringing this forward today for debate, and Members, have spoken powerfully about the adverse impacts of waste, particularly on the marine environment, but also about the opportunities for Wales to continue to lead the way in its waste strategy policy. In considering this legislative proposal, as I’ve already said, we have a waste strategy and waste prevention programme in place for Wales, but we’re also committed to delivering approaches to address waste packaging. Any Bill brought forward now would need to be assessed for Assembly legislative competence under the provisions of the Wales Act 2017. Legislation regarding products is a complex area, and until we know in detail what might be proposed under the proposed Bill, we can’t be sure whether it is within the legislative competence of the National Assembly or not. On this basis, the Government will be abstaining on this proposal, but we commend the intentions of the outcomes the proposal for a Bill seeks to address, in relation to waste production, as it resonates with the strides that we’ve made through our waste strategy, ‘Towards Zero Waste’, and in our pathway to achieving a more circular economy in Wales.

Thank you. I call on Simon Thomas to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. May I thank everyone who’s contributed to the debate and particularly thank the Minister, who’s just confirmed that the Government is still keeping in mind the need of a deposit-return scheme in Wales?

At the heart of this debate is the circular economy that David Melding and many other Members have mentioned. We must emphasise, in that context, that recycling something that can be reused is a waste of energy, a waste of resources and a waste of transportation very often. So, in moving towards a waste-free Wales, we should ensure that we reuse as much as possible, and that’s the purpose of this legislative proposal, to reduce that. We should also be collaborating towards an objective where we can’t use packaging in Wales that can’t be reused, recycled or composted. That should be the aim. And although there are some barriers, as Jane Hutt mentioned, in terms of doing that, we can overcome those problems with the right will and with some imagination.

And the final point, if I may, is this: who would have thought, five or 10 years ago, that just 5p would change the way in which people use plastic bags? If recycling were enough in and of itself, we wouldn’t see so much waste in our seas as we do at present, and on our beaches and in our environments. If 5p can do that for plastic bags, then a tax on polystyrene and a deposit-return scheme can also make a difference.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to note the proposal. Does any Member object? [Objection.] You object. Therefore, we will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 6 on our agenda is a statement by the Chair of the Finance Committee on ministerial appointments: pre-appointment hearings by Assembly committees, and I call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Simon Thomas, to move the statement.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is the last time you’ll hear from me this afternoon—before Easter even. Despite that, I am pleased to make this statement here today on behalf of the Finance Committee, talking of our experience of holding a pre-appointment hearing on a ministerial appointment, which we undertook as part of the process for recruiting the chair of the Welsh Revenue Authority. I welcome the opportunity to inform the Assembly, which will hopefully help to improve this procedure in future, and give advice to other committees.

Many of us in the Assembly have been calling for pre-appointment hearings for some time. The suggestion to hold a hearing for this recruitment was made by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government. And, back in 2012, when he was the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, he wrote an article for the Institute of Welsh Affairs, from which I will quote:

un ffordd arwyddocaol y mae’r Senedd yn awr yn llusgo ar ôl datblygiadau mewn mannau eraill o ran atebolrwydd a thryloywder yw’r modd y mae’n penodi swyddogion cyhoeddus allweddol.

It’s worth noting, therefore, that the first hearing of this type, undertaken by a House of Commons committee, took place back in 2008. So, we are nearly 10 years behind Westminster, and I’m not happy about that. I’m pleased that the Cabinet Secretary has taken the first steps to bring the Assembly in line with other parliamentary bodies.

We welcome the opportunity to be involved in the process of appointing the chair of the WRA, and we hope this experience will set a precedent for future recruitment processes. The hearing was held by the committee on 16 February, and its main purpose was to reassure us as Members, and as a committee, of the suitability of the Welsh Government’s preferred candidate for the post. It also gave the candidate exposure to parliamentary scrutiny in a public setting, which is something that an appointee to a post at this level needs to be prepared for.

The committee was well placed to carry out this hearing, given our scrutiny of various pieces of tax legislation, and our interest in the establishment of the WRA. We were pleased with the opportunity to participate in this procedure, although we noted that there is currently no specific guidance in place in the Assembly for this kind of hearing. As time was limited on this occasion, we used the Westminster guidance as a basis, and worked to agree a set of overarching principles that we would adhere to for this particular hearing.

Going forward, based on our experience, I would strongly suggest that a set of formal guidelines be established for future pre-appointment hearings, to provide a more strategic approach. The guidance should set out principles that can be agreed by both the Assembly and the Welsh Government, drawing on best practice procedures in other parliaments. We can see these processes as part of the development of a protocol between the Assembly and Welsh Government. We should consider this as part of the general work being undertaken to agree protocols, as I have just said.

Based on the Finance Committee’s experience, I believe the guidance should cover a number of areas. First of all, how will the appropriate Cabinet Secretary or Minister incorporate the views of the committee? Whilst I am an advocate of holding pre-appointment hearings, we must ensure it does not become a tick-box exercise, and that the committee’s view is given due regard by the Government. This would ensure that committees understand their role in the process.

We did not see the information submitted by the candidate in making her application. And, in my opinion, the information we were given in advance was most insufficient. Committees need to understand why the Minister, or Cabinet Secretary, believes the candidate is preferred, and why they are believed to be suitable for the post. It would be helpful if a statement could be provided for the appropriate committee. With only a short period of time, and limited information available, a statement would facilitate more effective and relevant questioning.

On this occasion, we agreed to report under embargo to the Cabinet Secretary within 24 hours of the hearing, and to publish a bilingual report within 48 hours. In this case, there was time immediately after the meeting for the committee to have a brief discussion, but not necessarily enough time for Members to consider any concerns in any great detail. It was not possible for the committee to reach a unanimous opinion, and the issue of the disagreement was noted in a majority report. It is possible that, with more time and an opportunity to discuss these concerns with the Cabinet Secretary, the committee would have come to a unanimous conclusion.

I would recommend, therefore, that for future hearings, these reporting deadlines should be revised to allow time for proper consideration by the committee, while being mindful of causing delays to the recruitment process. Should pre-appointment hearings become a routine part of the recruitment process, I would suggest that additional reporting time be factored into the timescales. In saying this, I note that the Government did not confirm the appointment until last week, due to high-level security checks.

As we continue to grow as a Parliament, pre-appointment hearings of this nature will enhance our reputation as a mature legislature. At present, such hearings are held in various legislatures, including Westminster, the Scottish and European Parliaments, as well as in the US and Canada. The guidance adhered to in each Parliament varies. However, each institution does have a list of public appointments that are subject to a pre-appointment hearing. I believe that a list of this nature would be a valuable addition to the Assembly’s guidance. This approach shows a clear example of best practice. However, as with any new procedure, there are areas for improvement. If the Welsh Government and the Assembly can work together to make this process efficient and productive, there is no reason why Wales could not become a country that other Parliaments look to as an example of best practice.

By working together on guidelines and establishing effective procedures, we have an opportunity to lead the way in strengthening the transparency and accountability of ministerial appointments. We can learn from best practice in other Parliaments to form our own procedure that gives the public confidence in the decisions made by the Welsh Government and Members in this Chamber. I welcome questions and comments from other Members.

On behalf of Steffan Lewis, who is a member of the committee, may I thank the Finance Committee Chair for his statement today and for discussing the important opportunity we have in terms of improving not only the transparency of ministerial appointments, but also the Assembly’s ability to hold the Government to account? It’s a very timely statement, if truth be told, given that the Assembly is fast maturing as a legislature. There is sufficient evidence of that—the ink is barely dry on the first piece of Welsh taxation legislation passed in this Chamber yesterday.

In my view, introducing pre-appointment hearings would support that broader development and support the maturing of the institution, and, as the Chair said, it would move the National Assembly for Wales towards the same kind of regimes as those adopted in many other legislatures across the world. So, I welcome this proposal of drawing up formal guidelines or a protocol for pre-appointment hearings. I very much hope that the Government will agree to work with the relevant committees in this undertaking, which would develop the Assembly machinery for the benefit of democracy. I look forward to hearing the Government’s views on this.

I agree with the Chair’s comments about ensuring that any arrangements for pre-appointment hearings must be far more than a box-ticking exercise. This is important because the potential of these hearings to enhance the Assembly’s ability to scrutinise Government decisions is reliant on the appropriate committee having the relevant information so that the correct decisions can be made. So, I would like to endorse the Chair’s call that committees should receive information about candidates, including an explanation from Government as to why they were chosen, in good time in order to enable more effective questioning. Of course, we must also ensure that the Government takes the committee’s view on candidates in earnest. I acknowledge that the work is yet to start properly in this area, but has the committee received any proposals on the powers that will be required for committees to ensure that their views are given due attention by Government?

To conclude, I understand that arrangements in Westminster provide a veto for certain committees on specific appointments, whilst, for other appointments, a report is prepared or a consultative vote is taken. Does the Chair believe that it’s worth considering that kind of approach in drawing up guidelines for the Assembly and that we would perhaps need to vary the powers and influence of any committee according to the appointment in question?

I thank Rhun ap Iorwerth for his questions and for his general welcome for this process, the development of the process and the need for more formal guidance, perhaps, so that everyone can understand how committees operate with Government.

May I just say, first of all, that I feel that the committee ultimately did have an opportunity to assess the candidate and an opportunity to hold the candidate to account in a public forum, where she was questioned in a very thorough manner? I think that’s entirely appropriate, and, therefore, that process is clearly one that committees do and one that we could do ourselves.

Rhun ap Iorwerth raised a number of points that we need to understand and which need to be included in formal guidelines. For example, what powers? We had no veto on this occasion, certainly, but if the committee had been unanimous in reporting unfavourably against a candidate, and had done that on a robust basis, explaining why, then I’m sure that the Cabinet Secretary would have had to reconsider just how he was going to proceed with that appointment. But it is a question that arises—whether the guidance should put a specific veto in the hands of some committees. That is something that would need to be negotiated between the Assembly and the Government. It is a discussion in the Assembly, because, although it’s the Finance Committee that had the opportunity to carry out this first pre-appointment hearing, this will be something that other committees will be interested in, and I would suggest that it is something that the Chairs’ forum should look at in this place as we develop that in due time.

I welcome the chairman’s statement this afternoon. This is something that we had in our manifesto at the Assembly election last year—rejected by the people of Wales, hence the Government’s sitting on this bench here. But I do think there’s a wider issue here that, with the increasing number of appointments and the stature that has been highlighted previously by the Plaid Cymru speaker of the increased powers and responsibilities of this institution, a good way for people to actually understand how much of the actions are taken on their behalf—pre-legislative scrutiny and pre-appointment scrutiny are a vital part of the way that the public get informed about the roles people are undertaking on their behalf. You’re quite right, Chair, to point out that, in many legislatures around the globe, this is common practice, and surely we should embrace that and welcome that. In your statement you did touch on the tax authority’s, the revenue authority’s, appointment of a chair and how the individual came before you. Surely, that is something that is welcomed and, ultimately, should be expanded across the areas of public appointments so that Members in this institution and the public at large can really understand what these roles entail, how they’re undertaken, and, ultimately, drive another level of accountability through. That, ultimately, has to be good for public service delivery. So, from these benches, we certainly will be supporting any increase in the ability to bring appointments forward.

It was many years ago when the commissioners—the children’s commissioner and the older people’s commissioner—were appointed and we believed that those shouldn’t be a Government appointment, they should be an Assembly appointment. Surely, that is good practice and, sadly, that hasn’t come to fruition, albeit I do welcome the moves from the Government when they do include other parties in that appointment process. But, surely, we should formalise that more so that it is the institution that makes that appointment. So, I welcome your statement this afternoon, chairman of the Finance Committee, but I do hope that, through your experiences and the points that you make in your statement, they can be taken forward now to expand the opportunity for scrutiny committees in this Assembly to actually—I was going to use the word ‘interrogate’ but that sounds more frightening—scrutinise chairmen and, in my view, special advisers as well, on their appointments because, equally, in the modern Government—and this is not just in this Government here; it’s Governments across the United Kingdom—the role of special advisers is an increasingly important role and has an important bearing on the way Government works, yet how many people actually understand or know the names of those individuals and, surely, that’s an important part of Government and an important part of scrutiny that should come into the public domain as well then. So, I Invite your comments on that particular aspect as well.

The Chair of the Finance Committee.

I thank Andrew R.T. Davies and I was with him all the way until he mentioned special advisers, with my own history there. But it’s a fair point. It’s something that can be explored in that regard. I think the fundamental point that you were making, which I absolutely agree with, is that this is a good way of opening up the issue to the public and to show the public and demonstrate to the public how these appointments are made, who is responsible for what, and, indeed, to give them an opportunity and a flavour of how the scrutiny will be ongoing, because this is a pre-appointment—in this case, a pre-appointment of the chair of the Welsh Revenue Authority. I’m sure that the Finance Committee will have—now that she’s been confirmed as the chair—her back as the chair to give formal scrutiny about the work that she’s undertaken, the governance of the Welsh Revenue Authority, and their, of course, corporate plan and ongoing work on behalf of the Welsh taxpayer. So, it’s an important signal of how we intend to do that work when we do a pre-appointment appointment like this.

I don’t think—to be fair, the Member wasn’t suggesting, and I don’t think we should go to the more partisan approach to some of these appointments. If you’re looking at how Trump’s appointments are being made at the moment, it tends to be very partisan. It does engage the public, however. It’s public and it gets people engaged; there’s no doubt about that. But I hope that in this institution, at least, we can use what we have, which is one of the best things that this institution has, which is our committee work and the cross-party work we do on committees and the ways we work together, to try and explore and scrutinise Government appointments and Government actions. I think that’s the tool that we use to make these public pre-appointment hearings as successful as possible.

If anyone is interested in this, I would strongly recommend that they actually watch the video of the appointment, because I think it’s a far better reflection on the scrutiny and the questioning that was done than the oral transcript of the questions asked and the questions replied, because it is by getting somebody before a committee, by looking them in the eyes, and asking them questions, that you make a judgment—it might be wrong, it might be right, but at least you make a judgment—as to whether they have the right level of skills and have learned from previous experience that they would bring to bear in this regard.

I think Andrew R.T. Davies’s question has just given me an opportunity to say one thing, as well, for clarity for everyone: we have three different ways of making appointments by which committees can be involved at the moment. I think it’s important to say that. So, we have Assembly appointments themselves: so, the Finance Committee, for example, will be, in due time, appointing a new Auditor General for Wales. That’s not a Government appointment; that’s an Assembly appointment through the Finance Committee. The public services ombudsman is handled in a similar way.

Then, as the Member said, we have the commissioners’ appointments, which are Government appointments, but which have Assembly involvement, and representatives of different parties are involved in the appointment process. And then we have this new thing, which is the first time we’ve done this, which is a Government appointment by which the Assembly has a pre-appointment hearing and can give the public verdict on the favoured candidate of the Welsh Government.

I think we’ll need to keep all three going forward, because we need that mix of scrutiny. It’s a bit confusing, sometimes, but I think we’ll need to keep that mix of scrutiny. But what’s very important is that it’s done in public and people have that chance to see that we are exercising our democratic role as a parliament to hold Government appointees to account—and maybe, in time, that may include special advisers.

Thank you very much.

We now move on to item 7, which is a debate by individual Members under Standing Order 11 21, and I call on Lee Waters to move the motion. Lee.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I’m delighted to have tabled this debate today, along with my colleagues Hefin David, Vikki Howells, Jeremy Miles, and my friend David Melding—genuinely delighted. Just as we pressed last month that we must do all that we can to bolster the so-called foundational economy, we must also look at the external trends that are set to change our lives and our economies.

We’re in the early stages of a fourth industrial revolution, marked by our ability to combine digital technologies with physical and biological systems. Just as the first industrial revolution was brought about through our ability to harness steam power, the second by our capacity to generate electrical power, driving mass production, and the third industrial revolution was prompted by the development of electronics and computers, this fourth industrial revolution sees machines, data and algorithms becoming embedded into every aspect of our lives.

Our money is increasingly virtual; our homes are becoming smarter. Technology now controls our kettles, our boilers, even our ability to park. The healthcare we receive is set to be transformed beyond recognition as the ability to know your own personal genome becomes ever more affordable. Whilst we’ve become accustomed to our factories having machines where once there were workers, this automation will continue apace.

Technology has crept into our lives with stealth, to the point that it is now near impossible to imagine a world without it. The pace of change is phenomenal. Things I grew up with—floppy disks, cassettes, video tapes—are now meaningless. And, more so, their replacements—DVDs and CDs—are also already obsolete in a generation. Spotify and Netflix are now intuitive for younger generations, and both are driven by big data, which is not just a high-tech phenomenon; it is everywhere and it is shaping everything.

Our assumptions of what is possible are constantly being challenged. Just this week, we heard of Elon Musk’s ability to reuse a rocket. As he said:

It’s the difference between having airplanes that you threw away after every flight, versus reusing them multiple times’.

If the same implications hold true for space travel as air travel has had in our daily lives, they are huge. How soon before driverless cars, wireless electricity, 3D printing, and even space travel are as mundane as Netflix and e-mail?

There is much going on behind the scenes that we aren’t yet aware of. Change isn’t just happening in one industry, as in previous industrial revolutions, it’s happening simultaneously across multiple sectors, and this poses new challenges. The Bank of England’s own methodology suggests that within 20 years—20 years—as many as 700,000 jobs might be at risk in Wales from automation. Computers and algorithms can gather data from far wider sources to make calculated judgments on anything from tax returns to cancer treatments. I’d recommend listening on iPlayer, which itself didn’t exist 10 years ago, to Radio 4’s ‘The Public Philosopher’, which held an eye-opening debate on this very issue. What was stark was the total disbelief by the vast majority of the audience that any robot could do their job better than them, and the audible shock when they realised the possibility that they could. One example that stood out was the GP who’d listened as half the audience revealed they’d rather receive a diagnosis from a robot than a human, and one in four jobs in Wales is at risk like this.

Let’s be clear: this impact is gendered. The World Bank recently warned that, for every three male jobs lost, one will be gained. For women, the situation is far worse. They will lose five jobs to automation for every one job that is gained. Governments, business, and global institutions are struggling to keep up with the pace of chance, which is hardly surprising—this is unsettling. It’s our role, as policy makers, to prepare for that, and right now we’re doing a terrible job at it. To this end, I’ll be hosting a round table in June with some of Wales’s biggest employers across the public and private sector to discuss how we can brace ourselves for this common challenge, and I am delighted that both the Cabinet Secretary and the future generations commissioner have agreed to join. But, as well as preparing for the challenges, we must also be seizing the opportunities.

At a recent meeting I hosted with the manufacturers’ organisation EEF in my constituency with businesses, one manufacturer revealed to me that automation within his company had not only boosted productivity, it had enabled their company to take on more staff. So, automation needn’t always be seen as a threat to jobs, but as a tool for growth. And technological advances have the potential to create new sectors, which will spur new jobs. This is a hugely exciting time. Julie James, as the Minister responsible for data, recently attended a round table I hosted on the potential for precision agriculture in Wales. Now, precision farming isn’t simply about agriculture, and the fourth industrial revolution will not respect departmental boundaries. A whole new industry is being driven by our ability to collect and analyse data at speeds that were previously unimaginable. But Wales has a short amount of time to capitalise on the generations of knowledge that we’ve built up in farming, and apply these emerging technologies to grow an industry that has global potential. And to understand where these opportunities are—where our domain expertise, our USP, can offer us clear, competitive advantage—an immediate and urgent strategic review is needed.

Robotics and automation, cybersecurity, big data, the codification of money, the financial markets and genomics, are widely predicted as the key industries emerging from the fourth industrial revolution. And that’s what we should focus on. For too long, we’ve focused on conventional approaches, too concerned about not upsetting the apple cart. I still, for the life of me, do not understand how we can have nine priority sectors, because, when everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. And I applaud the focus that has been brought to bear on Wales’s apprenticeship scheme, and we must do the same to our entire economic strategy, enabling the most efficient targeting of scarce resources. And there must be clear guidance on what this new industrial landscape demands in terms of approach, and this will require a deft hand, charting a difficult path through providing patient, goal-orientated finance and support, setting a long-term goal for which we’ll provide long-term support, but combined with an experimental approach to reach that goal. And let us be clear, Dirprwy Lywydd: we will fail along the way, and that’s okay. We must be open about it in order to learn from it. If we think back to many of the inventions I spoke of at the beginning of my speech—the iPhone, space travel, driverless technology—the origins of each of these can be traced back to long-term, patient Government finance.

Ostensibly, this blueprint, this difficult course, is what the ‘Innovation Wales’ strategy has set out to do. But, speaking frankly, this is a strategy that is only remarkable in its lack of ambition, and it urgently needs revision. I don’t want to look back in 20 years’ time and think, ‘I wish we’d done more’. I don’t think any of us do. So, let our challenge be today—and this is a challenge; it’s not a criticism—that we redouble our efforts to address the hurdles and embrace the opportunities, and that we do it fast. Diolch.

I’m pleased to support the motion that has been put forward today. As has been mentioned, the wheels of the fourth industrial revolution are already in motion. Technological developments such as artificial intelligence and driverless cars have the potential to displace traditional jobs, which has considerable significance for jobs in important sectors here in Wales, such as manufacturing and processing, as we’ve just heard.

I concede that the number of jobs that could be displaced through automation is an ostensible cause for concern. As the motion states, 700,000 jobs in Wales are threatened by automation, and those earning less than £30,000 are more likely to lose their jobs than higher earners. As we discussed in the Chamber recently, 40 per cent of people in Wales are employed in the foundational economy—in manufacturing and processing roles for basic materials—and the majority of these jobs are under threat from automation.

As we face the next industrial revolution, we have two options: to fight against it, as the Luddites fought against the cotton machines of the eighteenth century, or we can innovate to survive, and make the Welsh economy one that benefits from these developments. But there are three things that are necessary to do this. Above all, we must ensure that we look to protect workers and ensure that they have the best chance to make the most of these developments. We must ensure that the education system develops a workforce with the necessary skills to work with new machinery. We must also ensure that lifelong learning opportunities are available to support those who are in roles threatened by automation.

Due to the numbers of people we have employed in these sectors, we have the potential to move with these developments and facilitate expertise in these fields. However, to do this, we need investment and support for companies to develop the necessary infrastructure and skills. As the World Economic Forum has already said, governments must work together to develop business and innovation in the private sector through the development of workforce skills and networks for sharing good practice in the field of innovation. Currently, businesses can take advantage of funds such as SMART and SMART Innovation, which offer grants to develop innovation, but these funds are partly funded through the European regional development fund until 2020. As we leave the European Union, we have to look at the continuation of these vital funds to ensure that companies are able to move with the times.

Finally, we must ensure that businesses are aware of these developments and ensure that they have the equipment to move with the times rather than being left behind. As the manufacturing research organisation EEF has said, only 42 per cent of manufacturing companies are aware of the possible changes that may emanate from automation, and only 11 per cent believe that the United Kingdom is ready for them. We must therefore show the way in Wales by investing in workforce skills development, investing in innovation, and ensuring that our businesses are prepared for these changes.

So, as we look towards the horizon of the fourth industrial revolution, we should not fall into the trap of being pessimistic and fearing a dystopian future. By planning and working with these developments, rather than against them, and by working with employees and businesses, Wales can be at the forefront of these changes, and can light the way for the rest of the world. Thank you very much.

Today’s debate marks a change in focus from that on the foundational economy a few weeks ago, but it is an area that we must equally get right if we are to craft the Welsh economy of the future. For my contribution, I’d like to focus on the scale of the challenge automation could represent, the opportunities we have to rise to this challenge, and the skills our workforce will need in order to do so. As the motion reminds us, an estimated 700,000 jobs in Wales are at risk through automation, a figure all the more staggering when set against the fact that the number of people in employment in Wales stood at a little over 1.4 million in December 2016. This means that automation could threaten 1 in every 2 Welsh jobs.

Automation does indeed cast a long shadow. This is particularly true for sectors such as manufacturing; 11.6 per cent of the Welsh workforce works in this sector, higher than England, Scotland or Northern Ireland. The northern Valleys have a disproportionate number of people employed in manufacturing. Automation clearly moulds the shape of any future industrial strategy. An article by academics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University says we may already be too late. Noting the fourfold increase in robots in western Europe and the US over a 15-year period, the article says automation has already impacted on jobs and wages.

Yet secondly, as the motion recognises, here in Wales we have the expertise, skills and resources to enable us to take a lead amongst these emerging industries. Professor Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, has suggested that our management of natural resources will be a key manifestation of the fourth industrial revolution. In a previous debate, we explored the potential of the blue economy provided by the waters all around us, and I spoke about the opportunities to the Welsh economy inherent in the marine renewables sector. The evidence from tidal lagoons is particularly persuasive: six lagoons, many around the Welsh coast, representing a £40 billion investment, creating 6,500 long-term jobs, generating nearly £3 billion of GVA annually; businesses in Wales, and in the northern Valleys in particular, benefiting from an enhanced supply chain.

I have already mentioned the importance of manufacturing as an employer in the Valleys. It is not too great a jump to see that this is an area where productivity, and work, could be enhanced by learning the lessons of the future. Just as our approach must be rapid and more agile, companies succeeding in the fourth industrial revolution may need to be smaller and more flexible. Not only could companies operate more closely to their customer base, for example, here in Wales, but manufacturing could become more sustainable in high-wage countries.

Cheap labour, it has been said, won’t be cheap. Instead of fewer employees, companies will need what have been described as different employees, with different skills. This is the third point I wish to cover. I am glad that education and skills were central to the last ‘Innovation Wales’ strategy. I hope they would retain their place in any refreshed document; in particular, that there would be consideration of adult learning and upskilling. We know these are key to ensuring automation doesn’t lead to job losses.

I had a useful discussion with Colegau Cymru on Monday about skills and apprenticeships. This could be a great chance to strengthen our FE sector. The ‘Innovation Wales’ strategy spoke of integrating innovation into all aspects of the curriculum. We must give our children and young people the skills of the future.

I would like to briefly offer my congratulations to Optimus Primate. This was a team of year 9 students from Ysgol Gyfun Rhydywaun in my constituency, who recently won the Tomorrow’s Engineers EEP Robotics Challenge. They built, programmed and controlled Lego robots. They also developed their own solution to a scientific problem set by NASA and Lego Education. These are the workers of the future, of the fourth industrial revolution, and it is encouraging to see they are developing the skills they will need right now.

To close, I would like to note that the first industrial revolution was marked by significant socioeconomic changes and a staggering increase in poverty. We must ensure that, like the pupils of Ysgol Gyfun Rhydywaun, the current and future Welsh workforce develop the necessary skills so that they can make a success of this fourth industrial revolution.

David Melding.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, for your indulgence in calling me. Can I congratulate Lee Waters in proposing this motion? I think it’s very insightful, and just the sort of thing that we need to discuss more, really, anticipating and allowing ideas to flourish.

I think the period between 1945 and 1980 was probably what will be viewed by historians as the great age of the blue-collar worker, with incredible gains in terms of income and worth and equality. A lot of that started to break down in the 1970s. It was really a remarkably exceptional time, but since then we’ve seen a series of forces affect those who are in what we would perhaps normally call the more traditional parts of the economy.

These factors are well known, but let me just repeat what you’ve heard: the digital revolution, the decline of traditional industries through competition elsewhere, the shift to a less unequal global economy. But this has been achieved largely at the expense of the traditional sectors in the mature economies. The decline in global poverty is absolutely astonishing if you look at the latest figures and see the advances that have been made in Asia, in Africa and in South America in particular.

But it has pressed very hard on our economic situation. Added to that, we obviously have this revolution in automation. I think these trends explain to some extent phenomena like Brexit and even President Trump’s victory, because they’ve been matched by a general loss of faith in the governing classes, post the financial crisis, which is why we really need to earn our own privileged position and justify it by coming up with some answers and anticipating things and perhaps suggesting some key innovations in public policy ourselves.

At the moment, it is definitely the case that our workforce is divided, roughly speaking, between those highly skilled and adaptable who perhaps embrace the challenges of not only possibly having 10 jobs in a working life but three different careers within that working life, and then the other half who look back with nostalgia on the stability of traditional employment. We need to be aware of those people and equip them for the change.

I think this explains why some people have called for universal income, for instance, as a response to this more divided world and also a response to automation. If you can’t get a job, at least you can get the dignity of a working income. But I think we need to be very careful indeed about moving away from seeing work as a central organising force in most people’s lives. I’d much prefer to see a radical reassessment of what’s a reasonable working week than to say that lots of people just won’t be able to work 37.5 hours or more and will not be economically active.

So, I do think there’s going to be some profound changes there. I’m reminded—I think is was Sir Henry Mackworth of the Gnoll in Neath who first came up with the idea of a structured working week. Most industrial workers until then would have most of the time been working in some rural occupation and then increasingly shifted over to that. That was a huge innovation. It had advantages and disadvantages, very certainly—but it’s that sort of imagination.

Skills and innovation are clearly key to generating confidence, entrepreneurship and adaptability. We need to be much better at looking at those who do feel left behind, because they are capable of upskilling and, when they get confidence, they will also get an appetite for doing that. We really need to focus on that.

Finally, we need to recognise, as well as the great innovations that will come—and we could be in a position to take advantage of those gaps and fill them—but also we need to recognise the value of work in the community, volunteering and citizens’ work. I think we need a whole re-examination of what we want from citizens. Just as we expect citizens to work on juries, perhaps we should expect them to do some equivalent political service and help us with our own inquiries here or to look at particularly difficult issues of public policy and pay them for that. I mean, why not?

We need to look at what people can do, what citizens can do, and really think and earn our position in Welsh society at the moment, and come up with some of the answers. Thank you.

Can I thank Lee Waters for bringing forward this important debate today? These debates are a valuable opportunity to look at the bigger picture and also, occasionally, to scan the far horizons of an issue, which I hope to do in these remarks.

The advance of technology presents opportunities for our economy, and that’s doubtless. The city deal for the Swansea bay city region is predicated on supporting my region to become an internet coast with serious investment in our digital capacity. The recent economic forum I hosted in Neath looked forward to some of these economic and work opportunities, and—as we’ve heard this afternoon—how we can equip ourselves for those opportunities. But it also recognised some of the challenges that lie ahead.

One of the challenges—as we’ve heard from many speakers—is the potential that automation has to eliminate jobs in all parts of our economy. And not all people doing the sorts of jobs we will lose are going to be able to take advantage of the new jobs that are created, and that is a reality that we need to address. Generally speaking, technology is cheaper for business than labour. Some of the extra profit which that creates for a business may be passed on in lower costs to the consumer, but much of it, obviously, accrues to the business owner.

The challenge for our society is how we capture some of that surplus value from technology and harness it for the public good, not solely as financial return. Why do we need to do this? Well, because with every job lost to automation we may lose a wage which sustains a household and which is spent in the local economy and, of course, which generates tax revenue. Bill Gates recently advocated a robot tax—a levy on technology to fund public services. This has been, unsurprisingly, attacked as unworkable in some quarters, but it’s not hard to see that even if it did work, this would make up only a fraction of the lost value that we potentially face in the wider economy from lost wages, again, spent in local shops, not to mention the heavy potential individual costs. So, we may need to think bolder, and I think David Melding has acknowledged some of these points already in his contribution and I thank him for pointing out the role of Henry Mackworth from Neath.

But we may need to look again at how work is distributed in a future economy. Previous periods of automation led to a reduction down to a five-day working week. Will there come a time when a three- or four-day working week becomes the norm, or perhaps longer periods spent in statutory education, delaying the start of working life? All of which we should reflect upon. But for many, of course, involuntary early retirement or reluctant part-time work already means this, and their experience will tell you that this means more or less the same outgoings for less pay. Most people need to work for the basics. So, the fundamental challenge is how we harness technology to drive down the cost of everyday basics, for housing, energy, transport and food, which form a large proportion of most people’s monthly outgoings. How do we use technology to help us reuse and maintain our assets, as we heard in an earlier debate, rather than discard or even recycle, so that a decent life is sustainable with less work?

Governments have a major role to incentivise developments in these sectors and in devising an innovation policy that defines high-value activities not just in terms of economic growth, but also in terms of more affordable living. Others—less optimistic of a sustainable model—have called, again, as David Melding mentioned, for a universal basic income, paid to all, regardless of work, to help with the costs of sustenance. At the moment, I can see many more obstacles than opportunities, but it’s right that we should explore and pilot some of these options. In my opinion, any new system of support should reflect the principle of contribution, and yet an expectation of contribution solely through work can no longer apply in that environment. So, maybe the time has come to devise a means of accrediting individuals for the unpaid caring; the civic activity; the volunteering; the charity work that so many people do and upon which our society fundamentally depends. We fail to value that kind of work in our economy, as we fail to value what we might call the economy of personal relations—those jobs where care, empathy, and the human connection are all; jobs in health, well-being, social care and so on; areas where there is ongoing demand and which tackle some of the most enduring features of our modern world—changing family structures, mental ill health, living longer, independence and physical inactivity. So, in a rational world they’d offer growth in employment, and in a compassionate world growth in decent, properly paid employment. Perhaps the main legacy we should hope for from automation will be the rediscovery of time to connect, of a communal impulse, where technology removes back-breaking work, where it’s driven down the cost of living, and where it enables a more mutually supportive sustainable way of living. Perhaps that’s a vision that we can all embrace.

There is, of course, a temptation when addressing this motion to contemplate its—forgive this word—luddite-esque credentials. However, I should declare at the first instance that I believe this debate to have huge merit in seeking to address this important issue in a constructive and thoughtful manner.

It is true to say that the increasing use of robotics, be it in the guise of automated checkouts or the mechanisation of assembly lines, poses a real challenge to those engaged in protecting and even enhancing jobs across the whole of the industrial, retail and, indeed, public sectors. The banking sector is wholeheartedly embracing cyber technology, much to the detriment of counter staff and customer service personnel, and there are myriad other examples across a broad economic base where the effect of automation is beginning to impact on jobs traditionally carried out by humans.

So, are we to react as luddites, or is there an alternative solution? I think the proposals laid out in this debate do give a positive alternative to a bleak future for job opportunities. The fourth industrial revolution is basically a range of new technologies that is impacting all disciplines, economies and industries, and, in extremis, challenging ideas about what it means to be human. The resulting effect is that we live in a time of great promise, but also great peril. With vast digital networks, the world has the potential to connect billions more people, which has the ability to dramatically improve the efficiency of companies and even manage assets in ways that can help to regenerate the natural environment in which we live. It also has the potential to undo much of the damage of previous industrial revolutions.

These are the possible positive effects of this new industrial revolution, but there are also many scenarios where it has a seriously negative effect on global economies and the people who work in them. Amongst these is the ability of organisations to adapt to these changes, and, of course, the impact on the working population, particularly in the semi- and unskilled sectors, where robotic technologies are likely to have the greatest impact. This has the potential to exacerbate inequality amongst the whole of the population and even the breakdown in the structure of society.

So, how do we in Wales prepare ourselves for the fourth industrial revolution? As stated in the motion, it is estimated that as many as 700,000 jobs may be at risk due to many of these roles being undertaken by robots. It is true that these machines are now part of daily life, and it is inevitable that, over time, industries will seek to use them wherever possible to cut down on high-cost human labour. It is extremely important that Wales prepares for these changes and has a strong economic strategy to deal with them. We, therefore, have to identify where Wales has a competitive advantage and how we can capitalise on those skills that we already have in Wales.

Wales is an extremely diverse nation, and we can draw upon this to assist with the changes brought by the fourth industrial revolution. For instance, there is a strong tourism sector in Wales—undoubtedly, more focus and consideration will be needed in this arena. The hospitality sector is one where it is difficult to replace the human element.

I wholly endorse points 3, 4 and 5 in this motion, and would reiterate the call for agile economic strategies to deal with the changing face of technological advances. There is no doubt that our universities and innovation centres will play a pivotal role in helping the industrial sector to cope with these new demands. I call on the Welsh Government to redouble their efforts in this sector. It is important that the Welsh Government revisits the ‘Innovation Wales’ strategy to evaluate the disruption we face. Ultimately, Wales has the potential to increase market dominance upon developing a new economic strategy.

To sum up, Wales, as other countries, will face an ever-increasing demand to keep its people in meaningful employment, but we do have the skills, talent and hard-working ethos of our working population to draw on. We are also a small, manageable economic entity, and so one that should be able to respond to these new demands in an agile and timely fashion, and also one that should be well able to embrace this new technological revolution. Wales missed out on that third industrial revolution. We cannot afford to lose out on the fourth.

I’m glad to rise in this important debate brought by our fellow Assembly Members. All of us here today know how dramatically our lives are changing. Indeed, nobody would bat an eye if I said I’d visited a supermarket this morning and paid for my goods at the self-service counter, and nobody would bat an eye if I said that I’d taken a train to Cardiff, my journey controlled by one signaller sat at a computer terminal at my destination city. Equally, if I said that when I got to my office in the workplace, I did online banking at the click of a button. Yet, these three simple acts, barely believable when the National Assembly for Wales was created in 1999, illustrate both the challenges and the opportunities to Wales’s economy.

Today, life becomes easier for the consumer, but what about the individual who used to be employed at the supermarket, the signaller and their family, and the bank staff who used to work in banks up and down our high streets? Too often, we can read statistics without comprehending the meaning, and I note in this motion under bullet point 2, and I quote,

an estimated 700,000 jobs are at risk in Wales over the next two decades as a result of automation.’

A single job lost can devastate an individual, endanger a family and is corrosive to a community and a society. Never have I quoted the former Lib Dem leader, Nick Clegg, but I was struck by a ‘Newsnight’ report that he recently undertook after visiting Ebbw Vale, and its sentiment. He said, ‘So, having spent some time in Ebbw Vale, I’m much clearer in my own mind about why people voted for Brexit in large numbers, particularly older voters, because how much money was spent by the European Union on that shiny building or that project? All of that paled in significance to the feeling, the longing for a return to past certainties, when the steelworks were open, when everyone had jobs, where people had money in their pockets. And when people had an opportunity to rattle the cage and say, “We want that back”, it wasn’t so much that they are left behind; it was their feeling about what they had left behind.’ And that’s an interesting concept.

Now, the fourth industrial revolution will challenge all our certainties and will require Government invention and intervention, and from us as a Welsh Labour Government because we know other parties in this Chamber will allow the market to take its course, irrespective of the human cost. We all saw in Wales last year the difference an activist Welsh Labour Government can make. Whilst the UK Tory Government did not act to block the dumping of state-subsidised Chinese steel when they could have done, the Welsh steel industry was put at risk, it was put at harm and it was put in jeopardy. We need to seize the moment and match or exceed the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development levels of investment in research and development to ensure Wales is at the forefront of future growth in industry.

So, I support the proposal that we need to revisit the ‘Innovation Wales’ strategy, and continually challenge ourselves to do all we can to ensure Wales is ready to embrace the fourth industrial revolution. Diolch.

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

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I’d like to thank all Members today for their contributions, especially Lee Waters for bringing forward this debate, to Dai Lloyd, Vikki Howells, Jeremy Miles and David Rowlands, and also David Melding and Rhianon Passmore who both offered, I think, a wider political and social context for the challenges and the risks that we face. David Melding’s reference to the central organising force of labour reminded me of studies of Max Weber’s work on the Protestant work ethic, but the specific point that was being made about the nature of a prescriptive working week perhaps offers another subject for an individual Member’s debate, following on from what has been a clear and strong theme of late, which is the nature of work in the twenty-first century—the blue economy, the foundational economy, and today the fourth industrial revolution.

This debate also overlaps with many of the conversations that I’ve been having over the last few months in relation to our current approach to economic development and how that has to change in the years to come.

The motion refers to the Bank of England estimate of the 700,000 jobs that, over the next two decades, could be at risk as a result of automation. Now, the figures quoted are not indicative of job losses, but of employment impacted. In terms of manufacturing, we know that many assembly jobs may be replaced by automation and by robots. However, new jobs will be created in functions such as procurement, such as programming, data analysis, and maintenance, amongst others. But the key for us, as policymakers, is in ensuring that there are sufficient opportunities emerging in the new economy to replace those that could be lost in the old economy and to ensure that people across Wales in all communities are equipped with the skills to exploit them.

But, of course, the impact goes much wider than just manufacturing. The impact is being seen in many sectors, not least the service sector, and, as an example, the recent news of the closure of a number of bank branches, which are being impacted on by the growing number of customers who are now using internet banking. The speed of current technological breakthroughs makes an assessment of the impact on jobs in Wales difficult.

And there are other factors to consider as well, such as the impact that the fourth industrial revolution, with automation, robotics, and digitalisation, will have on productivity and how that will subsequently impact on employment. Now, Lee Waters talked of the potential increase in productivity that could result in companies being more competitive and therefore winning more business and growing market share. As competitiveness rises and costs fall, this has the impact of a long-term employment rise, although there may be jobs lost in the short term, but it does depend entirely on our determination to fully embrace and exploit new and emerging digital technologies and to arm people with the skills to do so, such as Vikki Howells and Rhianon Passmore outlined.

Now, I’ve been receiving reports on the impact of industry 4.0 from Industry Wales, an overarching organisation for the aerospace, automotive and technology industries in Wales. Industry Wales commissioned an independent report on the impact and the possible opportunities of the next generation manufacturing sector and how the Welsh manufacturing industry community needs to prepare. It’s produced the 2016 next generation manufacturing report, which addresses these issues with an in-Wales focus, and the risks and opportunities are very real indeed.

We’re addressing these with the help of expertise provided by Industry Wales, academia and industry bodies to establish a manufacturing vision for Wales. The economic benefits arising from digital technology are increasingly being recognised by industry, with a recent Confederation of British Industry report stating that 94 per cent of businesses agree that digital technologies are a critical driver of increased productivity, economic growth, and job creation. Jobs are becoming centred on digital technology, and embracing this will ensure a prosperous Wales for future generations.

Digital fabrication technologies are already interacting with the biological world. Colleagues, it’s not going to be long before we have 3D printer-produced jelly sweets, and it’s not unreasonable to believe that, during our lifetimes, we could see 3D-printed body organs. So, the need for highly competent and innovative Welsh businesses is higher than ever before. Our innovation strategy, ‘Innovation Wales’, is helping Wales to explore cutting-edge business opportunities in terms of product development, diversification, and new paths to market, and it’s helping to ensure that innovation is a major enabler for Wales. But, given the nature of innovation, as has been outlined by many Members today, inevitably, the strategy needs to evolve rapidly and has been designed to be as flexible as possible, as we move forward.

I’d agree with David Rowlands and Dai Lloyd, who said that, essentially, the innovators must overcome the luddites and that those who are looking to the future must overcome those who cling to the past. But I would also say that we need those who are suspicious about new and emerging digital technologies to be given comfort that they are there to be embraced and to utilise, rather than to fear.

Now, the final point of the motion refers to developing the economic strategy, and, in our economy, we still face major challenges. With lower productivity than the rest of the UK and higher economic inactivity, we face important structural questions of how to get more people into work, as well as the skills to progress into better paid jobs, which will, of course, be essential in avoiding net job losses during industry 4.0. One of the biggest challenges that we face is addressing the regional differences of our economy and ensuring that the benefits of growth fall more fairly across Wales. Another is in futureproofing our economy and our workforce; both will be needed to reduce wealth and well-being inequalities across Wales, whilst also improving both in the aggregate. I do think that achieving both of these objectives will require difficult decisions by Government, and a concerted effort, which will challenge, in many respects, the way that people are used to doing and seeing things. But, as I said yesterday, Governments do have a duty to challenge convention where convention risks undermining the wealth and the well-being of people, and I think Jeremy Miles outlined in his contribution how we need to begin considering different ways of working, different working practices, not only for economic benefits, but also to deliver improvements in our well-being.

I’m keen, as part of the emerging economic strategy, to look at a smaller number of national foundational economic sectors, such as health, care and energy, which the Welsh Government can take the lead on in supporting. And, below them, I’d like to look at our regional economies by empowering each to develop specialised sectors and more distinct economic identities, but, at both levels, there will need to be demonstrable proof that our interventions and our investment are focused on areas of activity in the economy that are or can be futureproofed. We face major economic challenges, which will only be intensified when we exit the EU, with increased global instability, welfare cuts and UK Government austerity, and, of course, the main topic of today’s debate, the fourth revolution. In solving future challenges and adapting to an ever-changing world, it’s essential that we build bridges between people so that we can develop knowledge and solutions for the future. So, yes, there are challenges, but let’s be in no doubt whatsoever that we want to harness the opportunities presented by the fourth revolution. So, I very much welcome the contributions of all Members to that discussion today.

Thank you very much, and I call on Hefin David to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I’ve listened to the huge range of challenges that Members have presented in the debate today, but I’m pleased to say they’ve been presented with a feeling of optimism, and none so encapsulated by the response of Dai Lloyd, who recognised that these challenges can not only be overcome, but can actually benefit our Welsh polity. Indeed, if we can’t deliver an optimistic vision of the future, then we shouldn’t be sitting in this Chamber in the first place.

In preparation for this debate, I spoke to another optimist I know, Professor Tom Crick, professor of computer science and public policy at Cardiff Metropolitan University—and I should declare an interest as an associate lecturer at Cardiff Met. He told me, and indeed said on Radio Wales this morning, that we need high-value jobs for people to go into rather than move elsewhere. Now more than ever, we need a coherent and long-term commitment from the Welsh Government for digital Wales, from skills to infrastructure and the wider digital ecosystem. He went on to say that there’s a significant opportunity for Wales here: what will be our unique selling point in Wales so we can compete in, and ultimately lead, these high-value digital industries? Tom, Professor Crick, is a welcome voice, and has been welcomed by the Welsh Government, and it’s pleasing to hear that the Cabinet Secretary makes note that he listens to panels of experts from academia and industry to develop his industrial strategy, and we look forward to hearing what that will be.

The unique selling point mentioned by Professor Crick should be key to a refreshed innovation strategy, and, in fact, we should even think about what we do mean by ‘strategic’ and ‘strategy’. Is it going to be something that we print and put on a shelf and put on the website, or is it something that’s going to be constantly changing and innovating? This is something that Lee Waters did when he presented his challenge, as he always does, to the Welsh Government and said we need to change the ‘Innovation Wales’ strategy in the context of the transformation we are living through. That challenge, I’m pleased to see, is being welcomed by the Cabinet Secretary.

We move into the future with beguiling speed. We don’t recognise transformational change in our daily lives, but then we look back, we see the world has changed while we’ve been doing other things. I’m thinking of when I was teaching. I’d ask my students how many of them owned a Nokia mobile phone: ‘Hands up. Who owned a Nokia mobile phone?’ None of them. In fact, one person put their hand up, and we laughed at that person. [Laughter.] But then you say, ‘Okay. Well, how many of you have owned a Nokia mobile phone in the past?’ And everybody put their hands up; they owned a Nokia mobile phone. Could it be that soon we’ll be looking back and laughing at ourselves because we owned smartphones and we couldn’t put down our smartphones? What will be the future instead?

Well, the trick is to work out what that’s going to be. I’m not particularly good at futurology, particularly when it comes to technology, so, it’s good, therefore, that Dai Lloyd, Rhianon Passmore, and Vikki Howells identified the potential that we have in Wales. Vikki Howells said about our natural resources to provide opportunities for energy generation. She recognised the need for short, agile supply chains in our northern Valleys—I like that concept; I’ll use it—and the need to grow and develop appropriate skills that match the needs and the changes that are ahead, and, again, that was echoed by other Members in the Chamber.

Let’s not forget that it’s not just the fourth industrial revolution, it’s not just about reinvention as invention. A lot of it is about working with and building on what we already have. Technological advances in manufacturing processes, as David Rowlands said, will mean machines being able to manufacture and remanufacture, removing the need for expensive renovation and reassembly.

But those benefits can lead, as others have said, to changes such as fewer checkout staff at our local supermarkets, and bank branches closing because people do their banking online. We’re very proud of Admiral Insurance in Cardiff, Newport and Swansea, but could that be hit hard by artificial intelligence? I raised my concerns about the bank closures in First Minister’s questions yesterday, and I was really pleased that the Cabinet Secretary acknowledged those difficulties. However, you sometimes feel—not because of the Government, but you feel that you’re howling at the moon when these changes are coming along, and what we must do is instead manage them, and manage our way through them, and embrace them optimistically. Jeremy Miles’s contribution covered that. He talked about the whole nature of the world of work, how we work and what we even consider work to be. David Melding, though he’s been a bit naughty and gone, agreed with—[Assembly Members: ‘Oh.’]

No, no, no. Never say anything that you don’t know what the answer is.

I apologise.

Yes. I would withdraw that, thank you.

I withdraw that, Deputy Presiding Officer. But I acknowledge David Melding’s contribution. The fact that Jeremy Miles made the point that we may be changing our working week—well, David Melding recognised it too. When Jeremy Miles made the point, I thought that it was quite a nice left-wing, social democratic idea, and then David Melding made a similar point, too, and I don’t think David Rowlands was very far away. So, maybe the fourth industrial revolution is also changing the nature of our politics, as well. Can we be—[Interruption.] Can we be that optimistic that such a thing will happen?

I think education is at the heart of this, and I would like to return to the argument that was advanced by Professor Tom Crick on Radio Wales this morning. He welcomes the development of the digital competency framework, as the result of some of the work that he has done with the Welsh Government. So, while we will need education and we will need to look at those things that are in the immediate gift of the Assembly, I think we also need to look at the long term. What further can we do? Let’s return to the wording of the motion, which says that the ‘Innovation Wales’ strategy and the Cabinet Secretary’s economic strategy need to be refreshed, looked at, and thinking about the potential market dominance and uniqueness that we can have in Wales. I was really pleased to see that I think we have got unanimous support for that in this Chamber, and I recommend the motion to the Senedd.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We now move on the Plaid Cymru debate on public sector procurement and construction, and I call on Dai Lloyd to move the motion.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. The purpose of this debate this afternoon is to highlight the need for a better system of planning for skills and training, as well as improving procurement practices in the construction sector in Wales. There are a number of infrastructure projects on the horizon over the next few years, which offer a golden opportunity for construction companies across Wales—large and small companies—as well as the wider supply chain. Some of these projects include the possible tidal lagoon in Swansea, the Cardiff and Valleys metro, the M4 relief road—whichever option is selected there, someone will have to build it—the electrification of the Welsh rail lines, the Llandeilo bypass and many other projects. So, to ensure that wales benefits economically from these projects, then the Welsh Government must improve procurement practices and ensure that the necessary skills and expertise are available in the Welsh workforce. We need to make the most of these opportunities. Our proposal today calls for more capital expenditure on infrastructure in Wales, in order to give an additional boost to the sector across Wales.

Last year, the OECD produced a report mentioning that an economy such as the UK should be spending some 5 per cent of its national income, GDP, on modernising its infrastructure. Now, in that year, 1.5 per cent GDP was spent, which was lower than the figure of 3.2 per cent spent in 2010. The figure is yet lower here in Wales. This ambition has been understood by the Scottish Government, which has declared that it’s to create an infrastructure programme of over £20 billion as part of its programme for government over the next five years. If we’re going to bring years of economic decline to an end here in Wales, then ambition is crucial. We in Wales must increase our expenditure on infrastructure to a similar level and ambition to that which has been shown by our Celtic cousins in Scotland.

Fel rhan o’n gweledigaeth ar gyfer comisiwn seilwaith cenedlaethol i Gymru, lleisiwyd yr angen i Lywodraeth Cymru fachu ar y cyfle a roddwyd i ni i gynyddu lefelau gwariant cyfalaf er mwyn buddsoddi yn seilwaith ein cenedl. Ar hyn o bryd rydym yn byw mewn cyfnod o arian rhad gyda chyfraddau llog ar lefelau is nag erioed, sy’n golygu na fu erioed adeg fwy costeffeithiol ar gyfer buddsoddi mewn seilwaith. Mewn gwlad fel Cymru, mae peth o’r seilwaith mwyaf sylfaenol—y gallu i deithio ar hyd y wlad ar y trên o’r gogledd i’r de, er enghraifft—ar goll, heb sôn am y math o seilwaith y bydd rhywun ei angen ac yn ei ddisgwyl yn yr unfed ganrif ar hugain.

Mae sector adeiladu Cymru yn wynebu heriau sylweddol dros y blynyddoedd nesaf i sicrhau bod ganddo’r gallu angenrheidiol i ddefnyddio’r cyfleoedd sy’n dod. Er mwyn i’r sector allu bodloni’r anghenion hyn, mae gwella lefelau cynhyrchiant yn y diwydiant adeiladu yn hollbwysig. Mae llif arian gwael, a achosir yn aml gan arferion talu gwael ar hyd y gadwyn gyflenwi yn rhwystr mawr i wella cynhyrchiant. Mae’r sector adeiladu yng Nghymru wedi ei ddominyddu’n bennaf gan fusnesau bach a chanolig, gyda llawer ohonynt yn chwarae rolau allweddol drwy’r gadwyn gyflenwi, yn cyflawni ein contractau adeiladu yn y sector cyhoeddus. Mae’r busnesau bach hyn yn hanfodol i les economaidd Cymru ac mae Plaid Cymru yn bendant y dylid defnyddio polisi caffael cyhoeddus i gefnogi’r busnesau hyn ledled Cymru.

Mae llif arian effeithlon yn hanfodol i is-gontractwyr llai ac nid yw ond yn deg eu bod yn cael eu talu’n amserol yn unol â pherfformiad ar gontract am helpu i gyflawni’r prosiectau adeiladu a seilwaith sy’n allweddol i economi Cymru. Mae’r defnydd o gyfrifon banc prosiect mewn contractau adeiladu yn ymrwymiad yn y strategaeth gaffael gwaith adeiladu o fis Gorffennaf 2013 a hefyd yn cefnogi datganiad polisi caffael Cymru a gyhoeddwyd ym mis Rhagfyr 2012.

Gadewch i mi egluro’n gyflym pam y mae cyfrifon banc prosiect mor bwysig ar gyfer mentrau bach a chanolig yng Nghymru. Gyda phrosiectau adeiladu yn y sector cyhoeddus, mae’n annhebygol iawn y gall y cleient, megis yr awdurdod lleol, fynd i’r wal. Felly, yn yr ystyr hwnnw, caiff yr adeiladydd haen 1 ei ddiogelu rhag unrhyw ansolfedd posibl ymhellach i fyny’r gadwyn gyflenwi. Fodd bynnag, ni roddir unrhyw amddiffyniad o’r fath i’r rhai sy’n rhan o’r gadwyn gyflenwi, gyda’r rhan fwyaf ohonynt yn gwmnïau bach a chanolig eu maint. Mae cyfrif banc prosiect yn bot diogel, sy’n sicrhau bod pawb yn y gadwyn gyflenwi yn cael eu talu, gan nad yw’r arian yn gorfod mynd drwy’r gwahanol haenau contractio, a dyna pam rydym yn ei gefnogi. Ym mis Ionawr 2014, cyhoeddodd y cyn-Weinidog Cyllid dri chynllun peilot ar draws tri awdurdod lleol gwahanol ar gyfer defnyddio cyfrifon banc prosiect. Fodd bynnag, ers hynny, cyn belled ag y gwn i, ni fu unrhyw symud ymlaen a mandadu cyfrifon banc prosiect yn gyffredinol, fel sy’n digwydd yn yr Alban a Gogledd Iwerddon. Drwy fandadu cyfrifon banc prosiect yn y sector cyhoeddus, gall Llywodraeth Cymru o leiaf roi diogelwch i fusnesau bach a chanolig yng Nghymru a gwella eu llif arian a’u sicrwydd o gael eu talu.

Rhaid gweithredu hefyd mewn perthynas â chadw arian parod. Mae cadw symiau dargadw yn ôl yn arfer hen ffasiwn sy’n ddiangen yn y diwydiant adeiladu modern. Y warant orau o ansawdd yw dewis cadwyn gyflenwi gymwys a chymwysedig sydd wedi ymrwymo i geisio cyrraedd y safonau perthnasol uchaf mewn iechyd a diogelwch, hyfforddiant, a pherfformiad technegol. Gallai system achredu a chyfundrefn drwyddedu, fel yn yr Unol Daleithiau ac Awstralia, liniaru’r broblem hon yn gyfan gwbl. Nid yn unig y byddai hyn yn gwella llif arian yn y sector, ond byddai hefyd yn gwella safonau iechyd a diogelwch, sy’n rhywbeth y dylai pawb ohonom ei hyrwyddo.

Er mwyn sicrhau bod Cymru yn cael cymaint o fudd economaidd â phosibl o brosiectau seilwaith yn y dyfodol yng Nghymru a thu hwnt, mae arnom angen diwydiant adeiladu sy’n feinach ac yn fwy heini, gyda busnesau bach a chanolig sy’n cael eu grymuso i chwarae rhan fwy cynhyrchiol. Wrth gloi, gwell caffael mewn gwaith adeiladu, drwy gael timau prosiect integredig sy’n cynnwys yr holl gadwyn gyflenwi, yw’r ddelfryd—ac wedi’i gynhyrchu yn Siambr y Senedd y safwn ynddi heddiw. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. I have selected the two amendments to the motion, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government to move, formally, amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

Thank you. I call on Mohammad Asghar to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you, Madam Presiding Officer. I formally move the amendment in the name of Paul Davies.

Public procurement plays a crucial role in the Welsh economy. A Welsh Government written statement in February 2011 revealed that the Welsh public sector spends over £4.3 billion on external goods and services. This equates to around one third of its annual budget. Of this figure, the Welsh Local Government Association estimates that 53 per cent was spent by local authorities. If we are to take full advantage of the full potential offered by the purchasing power of the public sector, reform is required. There is clearly a need, therefore, to better scrutinise procurement policy and its impact across Wales. The Welsh Government must appreciate the role of procurement as a tool for stimulating home-grown economic growth.

Wales is currently seeing a renaissance of large-scale infrastructure projects. The recent and very welcome announcement of the Swansea bay city region deal follows the Cardiff city deal. We look forward to other projects in the pipeline, such as the M4 relief road, the various tidal lagoons and the metro projects. Every pound spent in infrastructure projects directly boosts GDP by £1.30, with indirect effect to £2.84 per pound spent. It is vital, therefore, that the Welsh public sector focuses on providing the maximum benefit for Welsh communities and takes responsibility for generating economic, social and environmental growth.

By targeting recruitment and training opportunities in public contracts, a contribution can be made to addressing the issues of poverty and reduced social mobility. Organisations in the private and voluntary sectors are vital to local and regional economies. They must review public sector contracts in a positive way, and should do business with them. The public sector must make better use of their purchasing power to create opportunities for jobs and training for regeneration, and to maximise the value for money. We must have regular updates, especially on how local authorities are adopting and putting in practice these principles. We need all information on contracts being awarded, and the real outcome of these contracts on local economies. The bidding system must be streamlined and made easier, to ensure bids are not discouraged, and it is essential that all procurement processes must be completely transparent and ensure stability and confidence in the procurement system in Wales. We therefore need strong monitoring procedures to ensure transparency is maintained.

The number of public sector contracts awarded to Welsh businesses needs to grow. The opening up of more contract opportunities is vital for smaller local suppliers and third sector organisations. We need to break down the barriers through assessing the public sector’s procurement opportunities. The Federation of Small Businesses has long called for a breakdown of contracts into lots, and that a simplification of the process should continue. Deputy Presiding Officer, we need to ensure the public sector in Wales is geared up for this challenge. We must give Welsh small and medium-sized businesses a level playing field in bidding for contracts. We need to grasp the possibilities that have been presented to us. We have to ensure we maximise the benefits of reforming public procurement for the people of Wales from now on. Thank you.

I’m going to focus on the role of women in the workforce in the construction sector. The words ‘women’ and ‘construction’ don’t go together traditionally, and it’s time for that to change. At present, there are far fewer women than men in this sector. Encouraging more women to join the construction workforce could overcome some of the problems in the sector for the future, as well as offer new career pathways for women in Wales.

The construction sector in Wales is growing faster than anywhere else in the UK. With projects such as the Bontnewydd relief road and the Llandeilo bypass, as well as the south Wales metro, Wylfa and the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, there will be increasing demand for skilled workers in the sector. The regional skills partnership in north Wales estimates that 8,500 workers will be needed when Wylfa is built. Raising awareness of these opportunities among young women will help to deal with the skills gaps in the future.

Of the 113,000 people who work in the construction sector, only 10 per cent are women. Women are much more likely to do office work, and it’s estimated that 1 per cent only of female workers work on a site. Dealing with this difference sooner rather than later would allow the sector to use the potential of a much wider skills pool as it grows, and to overcome a shortage of workers with skills in the future.

Apprenticeships—that’s the key pathway into the construction sector, but the division is very clear here, with 99 per cent of construction apprenticeships being filled by men. Evidently, therefore, we need to do a lot more if we want to meet that workforce demand in the future.

One way to do that is to use public procurement in a constructive way, in order to help public bodies to do more to deal with the gender imbalance and promote equality in the construction sector. It has been accepted in Wales that public procurement should provide economic, social and environmental benefits, and the Welsh Government took positive steps to ensure that. However, further steps could be taken to ensure that public procurement also helps to promote equality between the genders.

Examples of this are seen in Europe, and I want to refer to one example of the practice in Berlin, where, for large contracts for companies with more than 11 workers, the contracts have to include measures to promote women in that work. Companies have to provide details in a separate statement. Even though this is not the part of the appraisal or awarding process, the companies have to adhere to that statement. The measures include having a qualified plan to include women and increase the percentage of women in senior positions, flexible working hours, equal pay and childcare facilities. The companies are monitored as they implement these commitments that they’ve agreed to, and they can face sanctions if they fail to do that.

There is an argument that it should be a requirement for every company in Wales that receives public money to show that they understand gender issues in their sector and that they have a plan in place to deal with that. So, what about starting with the construction sector? The kind of procurement that is undertaken in Berlin can be a powerful method to increase the number of female workers in the construction sector and to overcome a shortage of jobs in the sector in the future. Thank you very much.

I want to just talk about the opportunities posed by two Government policies. One is that Carl Sargeant announced an additional £30 million towards building affordable new homes, and the other is the Welsh Government’s target of 100,000 apprenticeships being created by 2021.

I think it’s very important that we use this opportunity to align these apprenticeships to the skill force that we’re actually going to need for the future Welsh economy. It won’t happen organically. Political drivers are required to make it happen.

I particularly refer to the way in which we build the homes that we need for the future. Private housebuilders are resistant to change and continue to build houses that are inadequately insulated and lack sustainable energy generation—an unholy alliance of the big six housebuilders with the big six energy providers. Now, the construction industry knows that low-carbon homes are achievable, but we have to have clear regulations, applicable to all new buildings, as well as a sufficiently skilled workforce with appropriate levels of knowledge of the precision skills required for zero-carbon home building. I hope that leaving the EU is not being interpreted as a cue for abandoning the requirement for all new buildings to be zero carbon by 2020.

We have excellent made-in-Wales examples in Pentre Solar and the SOLCER house, which demonstrates that we have the knowledge, but we just need to apply it. We need to ensure that we have all the apprenticeship skills lined up so that we can both build the homes we need for our own needs here in Wales and also pitch in for opportunities for construction work across Europe. So, I was astonished to be told, at a recent conference to brief employers about the new apprenticeship levy, by a senior Welsh Government official that he did not know how we would deliver on these important precision skills required. I don’t think that’s good enough.

We have to remember that it was Gordon Brown who led the way in 2006, announcing a zero-carbon homes policy, and Britain was the first country to make such a commitment. Had we kept to that commitment, we would have ensured that all new dwellings from last year would have generated as much energy on site through renewable resources as they would actually need in heating, hot water, lighting and ventilation. So, it was an absolute tragedy that ‘Six-jobs’ George Osborne axed these measures in regulations in July 2015—one of the first acts of the new Conservative Government—hidden away in a so-called productivity plan. The chief executive of the UK Green Building Council said it was the death knell for the zero-carbon homes policy.

Uncertainty breeds inaction, and the industry is always reticent to make firm steps to deliver low- and zero-carbon homes, unless there is clear guidance and legislation in place, because they feel that Governments have a track record of changing the goalposts, and, in light of what happened with Gordon Brown and George Osborne, that is understandable. But I feel that the Welsh Government, as a matter of urgency, needs to demonstrate its leadership by setting zero-carbon building regulations so that the new homes for the future that we are going to be building are built to last, like the ones built by Nye Bevan’s leadership in the 1940s and early 1950s, which are still widely sought after as homes to live in.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes.

Thank you for your comments. I’m enjoying your contribution greatly, but do you therefore not regret that you actually supported very modest targets in terms of changing regulations under the last Government, whereas others of us were arguing to strengthen those regulations?

Well, I’ve always supported stronger regulations and I will continue to do so.

So, I think we have an opportunity here to marry our ambitions in relation to our apprentices with our need to build more homes. So, I think there are many challenges to overcome, because it isn’t just getting the skills together; it’s also that there are knowledge gaps as well in ensuring that we understand the new design approaches, the new materials and the technologies that are changing all the time in relation to energy generation and conservation.

So, there will need to be more widespread understanding and expertise in the selection of, particularly, low and zero-carbon energy technologies, depending on the particularities under consideration, but I feel that this is a really strong opportunity for ensuring that our procurement policies and our skills policies are married up with the need for decent homes for the future.

My contribution to today’s debate will focus primarily on the need for greater skills planning and training in Wales within the construction sector if we want to achieve the optimum benefit for the people of Wales in terms of job creation, utilisation of the local supply chain and investment in skills, so that we can meet the demands of our incoming infrastructure projects.

The importance of effective skills planning to the success of infrastructure delivery continues to be highlighted as one of the most pressing issues facing the construction and engineering sectors in Wales. So, to capitalise on the largely positive construction environment in Wales at the moment, the Welsh Government and industry must work closely together to recruit talented people and train the workforce whilst also of course avoiding unnecessary skills mismatches.

For skills planning, innovation and cost effectiveness should be the key drivers for future growth and reform. Closer partnership between employers and Welsh Government is crucial of course, as well as linking labour market intelligence to regional learning and skills partnerships. In Wales, we have regional skills partnerships that bring together a range of relevant bodies to co-ordinate and plan for skills development. However, there is no formal structure to co-ordinate their work at a national level.

In Plaid Cymru’s proposals for a national infrastructure commission for Wales, we called for skills planning and forecasting to be a central role within the remit of the commission, which could have provided that level of central co-ordination. Whilst giving evidence to the Economy, Infrastructure and Skills committee, both CECA Wales and CITB Cymru agreed that construction sector skills should be part of the commission’s remit and that it should produce a national infrastructure plan for skills to forecast requirements and avoid gaps in demand. Unfortunately, the Welsh Government rejected this idea, claiming that the current structures were appropriate to meet future demand. I suppose only time will tell as to whether they’re right or not.

Our motion today specifically calls on the Welsh Government to consider establishing a national construction college for Wales. Back in February 2015, two years ago now, the then Minister for skills said that the Welsh Government were working very hard to get a construction college under way as soon as possible and that it would be aligned to employer needs. However, as far as I’m aware, very little has happened since then.

So, why do we need a national construction college for Wales? Over the years, some apprentices have had to leave Wales to gain industry recognised construction skills. The national construction college, as a strategic entity, would ensure that Wales has home-grown skills in place to meet the construction industry’s current and, indeed, future needs. The case for a new-build national construction college is based on the model for the rest of the UK’s national construction colleges—to satisfy the demand for courses not currently available in Wales. It would provide provision that’s more tailored to the needs of industry in Wales, with expert teaching staff and facilities that can help raise the profile and, indeed, the attractiveness of the sector.

A new-build facility could offer a dedicated centre of excellence with significant advantages, allowing, for example, large-scale equipment and realistic practice on a scale unlikely to be acquired within existing provision, and enabling Welsh construction firms to develop a broader base of skills in order to compete effectively within Wales and, of course, outside of Wales. Such a facility could potentially benefit the Welsh construction sector by bringing advanced resources and equipment within economical reach.

There are significant challenges ahead of us if we’re to ensure that the construction sector in Wales has the capacity to deliver on infrastructure projects and the future infrastructure projects that we know are coming. However, there are also significant opportunities if action is taken to meet that demand.

I recognise that strides have been made in recent years, such as the establishment of the construction innovation centre for Wales in Swansea that’s set to open in September this year. However, a strategic entity is required that provides if not all then certainly much more of the construction sector training provision that we require here in Wales. So, a key message for us from this debate this afternoon is that better engagement with the sector is now essential to improve and deliver enhanced forward skills planning and long-term improvement to the provision of training within the construction sector.

Thank you. Michelle Brown.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Isn’t it great that we are now able to have this debate and that the results will actually mean something? So, I would first like to thank Plaid for bringing the debate. There would, of course, be no point in us talking about how we can improve procurement if Plaid had had their way and been successful in their attempts to hoodwink the public into voting to remain in the EU, because the EU would not allow us to be in control of our own procurement rules. Plaid have done this a lot recently, bringing debates that would mean nothing were we to stay in the EU, yet at the same time they say leaving will be a disaster. It doesn’t say a lot for the party’s confidence in their own proposals if, at the same time as presenting them, they maintain that we would be better off not being able to implement them.

The motion does have its merits, though. Forward skills planning is essential, and Governments have consistently failed to do this, hence the current shortage in construction skills, nurses, doctors and the like. It also makes complete sense that Welsh people and businesses should have easier access to public sector contracts. I’m assuming that’s what they mean, but, just for clarification I would like to ask: are Plaid talking about Welsh jobs for Welsh people when they talk about maximising the social and economic impact of construction? If they are, why don’t they just come out and say it? It’s nothing to be ashamed of—it’s one of the things that people who want to leave the EU voted for. There’s no need to dress it up in fancy corporate speak, but, also, don’t pretend it isn’t something you argued against when you were trying to paint UKIP as isolationist.

It is certainly the case that we could do much better in terms of a co-ordinated approach to procurement, but we also need to be careful that we don’t spend so much money on making sure that we’re getting a good social and economic return for our public sector cash that the benefits are lost to the cost of administration. We certainly should not pursue the old Blair Government policy of inventing projects and jobs simply to get the unemployment figures down—any project using public money must be of benefit to Wales in its own right.

I accept that not all of this motion is about spending; there is a very relevant mention of training. I agree that any skills shortage in Wales should be tackled, and if there is, and continues to be, an identifiable skills shortage in the construction sector, colleges should be helped to develop a faculty and courses that deliver quality training. However, I am concerned that an entire college dedicated to construction could at some point see a desire for construction that is motivated more by trying to justify the existence of the college than the existence of a genuine need for additional construction—a situation where the tail starts to wag the dog. A national construction college is a very grandiose-sounding development, which will no doubt be a headline-winning story for Plaid if they win their argument, but, in reality, it offers nothing that couldn’t be provided through existing channels.

If you take a proposal to a potential backer, you are normally expected to say how much money you need and, in the case of finite resources, what services you expect to see have money taken away from them in order to pay for this new idea. Plaid won’t say what services they would cut to fund their proposals, because they know they will never be in a position where they have to answer that question. This Assembly term, Plaid have obviously adopted the strategy of calling for potentially expensive projects—you know I’m right—secure in the knowledge that they will never have to deliver or be scrutinised for them. This immature, wish-list politics doesn’t solve any problems and misleads the public that all our ills can be solved without diverting existing funds or increasing tax. Thank you.

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

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. The need to align procurement policy and practice with the wider economic, social and environmental ambitions of Wales has long been recognised, and it was a particular focus of my predecessor as finance Minister, Jane Hutt, and helps to explain the year-on-year growth in the percentage of procurement spend gathered by Welsh businesses. In construction, the particular focus of this debate, that figure is now over 70 per cent, and all of this, Dirprwy Lywydd, while we are still in the European Union.

Now, planning for the future is essential to ensure that Wales has the highly skilled, well-developed and supported construction industry that can meet our infrastructure needs and boost the Welsh economy. The intrinsic connection between public procurement and the development of a skilled construction workforce is clear, and it’s good that this debate highlights that relationship.

Rwy’n ddiolchgar, wrth gwrs, i Sian Gwenllian am beth ddywedodd hi yn tynnu sylw at y rôl mae menywod yn gallu ei chwarae yn y sector, a’r cyfleon a’r sialens sydd yna i drio tynnu menywod ifanc i mewn i’r gweithlu yn y dyfodol.

The way that the Welsh public sector procures infrastructure and construction projects can make a significant impact in the provision of good employment and training opportunities across the sector, and across the genders as well.

Now, the visibility of future plans for investing in our infrastructure provides the construction sector with the confidence it needs to invest in skills. It was why, even in these very uncertain times, I was keen to provide a four-year capital programme during our most recent budget-making round.

The Government has laid an amendment to the motion today not, I believe, because there are major differences of ambition between us, but because we believe at this point that a different set of actions is likely to be more effective in supporting the construction sector, and maximising the purchasing power of the public sector in Wales. In particular, it is not our view that this is the right moment to bring forward a procurement Bill as the motion requires. The decision to leave the European Union may have far-reaching implications for procurement policy, although that is by no means as clear as some here would have you believe.

Jenny Rathbone quite rightly drew attention to this Government’s commitment, as set out in the White Paper we published with Plaid Cymru, to ensure that all those protections in employment, in environmental regulations and in consumer rights that we enjoy as a result of our membership of the European Union go on being provided to our citizens after Brexit. However, legislation requires a level of certainty that would be hard to achieve in the rapidly changing period before us. We believe that we need, for the coming period, to build on the policy landscape we have in place here in Wales—the Wales procurement policy statement, the supplier qualification information database, the code of practice on ethical employment in the supply chain—to make the difference we want to see in creating opportunities for jobs and training, tackling modern slavery, eliminating blacklisting and achieving best value for the Welsh public pound.

And, of course, there is more ground to be gained. We know from the results of our procurement fitness check programme that we have varying degrees of procurement capability across Wales. In the local government sector, for example, some of the stronger performing councils who apply the policy innovatively enable Wales-based suppliers to win over 70 per cent of expenditure. In councils with less-developed procurement capability, as little as 36 per cent of procurement expenditure is retained within Wales. Therefore, if we are to maximise the value of procurement, we are focused on growing capability so that our innovative policies are applied uniformly across Wales.

The case for a national construction college is highlighted in the motion, and Llyr Huws Gruffydd ably set out the reasons why such an idea would wish to remain as part of a potential landscape of the future for skill planning purposes. For now, the Construction Industry Training Board and the consortium led by University of Wales Trinity Saint David is, as Llyr said, establishing the Construction Wales Innovation Centre to offer state-of-the-art facilities and world-class training for individuals and construction companies. That innovation centre headquarters will be based in Swansea, but it will also have sites at colleges right across Wales, including Coleg Sir Gâr, Coleg Ceredigion, Coleg Cambria and Coleg y Cymoedd.

Llywydd, it’s common ground between the Government and the mover of the motion that maximising capital infrastructure spending is a vital lever in supporting the Welsh economy generally, and the construction industry in particular. Against the backdrop of challenging settlements from the UK Government, I will consider all available means to support our capital investment programmes. My first priority is always to make maximum use of every penny of conventional capital available and then to consider how best to use other means.

The Government will maximise the opportunities presented by our new direct borrowing powers from 2019-20, which have substantially increased from £500 million to £1 billion. We go on ensuring that local authorities and housing associations make the most of the low-cost borrowing opportunities available to them, alongside harnessing alternative funding models, such as our Welsh mutual investment model, which launched on 23 March. And it’s part of our wish to have that sort of ambition for our future, which Dai Lloyd set out in opening when he listed those significant investment projects that we have—

ar y gweill ar hyn o bryd’,

[Continues.]—and which boost the economy and the construction sector right across Wales.

Llywydd, Mohammad Asghar spoke to the Conservative amendment, which the Government will support, because the Wales procurement policy statement has already had a powerful impact in lowering barriers to procurement, and we are using public investment in infrastructure and construction projects to deliver local benefits. It has opened the door to smaller, more local suppliers. Almost three quarters of major construction contracts awarded on Sell2Wales are now won by indigenous contractors. And our community benefits policy has enabled 83 per cent of £1.3 billion of measured investment to be recycled here within Wales.

Llywydd, I thank the movers of the motion. The debate has proved valuable in the points that it has raised and in helping us to make sure that our focus, now, must be on supporting public bodies to develop their capability to deploy the policies we have here in Wales and make sure that they are implemented to best effect.

I call on Dai Lloyd to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. It’s a pleasure to summarise this debate and try and bring all these suggestions that we’ve heard from the different speakers together. Could I thank Mohammad Asghar for his contribution, which was polished as usual? We will be supporting the Conservatives’ amendment, even though it more or less supports the same objectives as us, but in the spirit of being consensual, when we do see another party agreeing with what we say, we are willing to support that.

Could I thank Sian Gwenllian for her excellent contribution about the role of women in the workplace? I’d like to pursue the importance of having measures in place, and ensuring that we pursue procurement in a way that improves opportunities for people and expands those opportunities, and ensuring that we have a social conscience behind the procurement decisions that we make in the public procurement system. Procurement, as the Cabinet Secretary has said, does offer great opportunities for us, but also we believe that we need to reform its implementation along the lines that Sian Gwenllian suggested.

Could I also thank Jenny Rathbone for her contribution on zero-carbon homes and those issues? I thank Jenny for her very wise contribution there. And I thank Llyr, who emphasised the importance of skills in this, and also the college to boost those skills in the construction sector. Could I also congratulate Michelle Brown for her contribution? I was a little confused during the contribution, but it’s always fun to hear the contributions of some Members in the Chamber.

And also the Cabinet Secretary Mark Drakeford, could I congratulate you on your contribution? Evidently, there is a lot of agreement between us on what needs to be done. There are some things that are holding us back, naturally. We all know that the Welsh economy at present, in terms of our wealth—. Seventy-five per cent of that wealth comes from the public sector and only 25 per cent comes from the private sector. So, public procurement in the public sector can be a very important tool to try and reverse those figures, so that the public sector can invest in the private sector and raise that up. So, one sector helping the other in order to boost the activities that happen here. There is a construction sector out there that wants to see more construction, as I mentioned earlier. There is about £40 billion-worth of projects in the pipeline and that’s why we need to realise those dreams and release that funding with the infrastructure commission that we’re always talking about—our NICW—and we need to release that funding and go for it. But, a key part of that is public procurement, and there is a way to improve our procurement system. I tend to believe that we all basically agree that we need some reform and we could do much better, along the lines that Sian Gwenllian suggested.

We can’t agree with the amendments of the Government today, I’m afraid, despite the spirit in which the Cabinet Secretary made his contribution today. The purpose of our motion today was to highlight how acting on issues can have a positive effect on the construction sector in Wales. There are people in that sector who want to see the floodgates open, because as the Cabinet Secretary said, in the procurement sector, for example, the public sector is responsible for over 75 per cent of all construction procurement in Wales. So, direct action by the Welsh Government and the strategies and practices in procurement can have a huge impact on the health of our economy, and trying to do something about that split—the 75 per cent in the public sector and the 25 per cent in the private sector. We really need to raise that 25 per cent and create wealth for our country.

Of course, the arguments of the opposition parties are often an opportunity to make political points, but also an opportunity to discuss issues that can have a direct impact in a positive way on the lives of our citizens. That’s what I hope that we’ve tried to do this afternoon, as people look at our construction sector and the procurement sector and the need to ensure, when a company is awarded a contract to build whatever it is, that the contracts are timely—as I mentioned at the outset—and don’t waste money, but that people are paid on time and don’t have to wait months before being paid, thereby putting at risk their livelihoods, which can happen with some construction contracts. So, at the end of the day, I hope that you will support our motion. Thank you very much.

The proposal is to support the motion unamended. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

The next item is the Welsh Conservatives’ debate on local authorities, and I call on Paul Davies to move the motion.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I move the motion tabled in my name on behalf of the Welsh Conservatives. The point of today’s motion is to recognise the important role played by local authorities in delivering significant public services across Wales, and to explore ways in which local authorities can better support our local communities for the future. Now, we want to see strong and effective local government that will put power back into the hands of local people and their communities. We on this side of the Chamber are passionate about embracing localism to innovate and protect important public services, and there are a number of ways in which this can happen.

Of course, examples of innovation are evident across Wales, for example the Conservative-led authority of Monmouthshire introduced the Raglan project in 2015, which remodelled the way in which it delivers services to older people. This ensures that it can work with people who need help by delivering support primarily to people in their own homes wherever possible, promoting independence, and relieving burdens on the already overstretched Welsh NHS. The project supports people living with dementia and focuses on carers undertaking activities after daily discussions with the person and family, rather than working on fixed plans and set times. The project has developed connections with the community, and has supported people to re-engage with friends, family and the village as a whole. It’s exactly this kind of action that we need to promote and roll out across other parts of Wales: action that is innovative in its approach to delivering services, and action that actively engages and works with local communities.

Members will be aware that we, on this side of the Chamber, continue to advocate a community rights agenda that we believe would have a positive impact on communities and councils, and deliver significant improvements to better involve local communities in decision making. We believe that delivering these community powers is a cost-effective way of allowing community groups a voice for challenging and expressing an interest in carrying out a service or taking on a public amenity of local importance. Of course, a community rights agenda would include a community’s right to challenge council services, but also a right to bid for council assets, allowing local communities and groups to take over assets that are struggling or faced with the threat of closure. Neighbourhood planning, including a community right to build and neighbourhood development plans, should also be considered by the Welsh Government to allow communities to bring forward small-scale, community-led developments, such as shops, services or affordable housing.

Ultimately, we want to push more power and autonomy to our local communities and deliver real devolution that can make a difference to our local communities. Our communities must have the best possible opportunities to run their own services in their own areas. We must empower and encourage local authorities to engage more with local community groups and encourage greater collective responsibility within our communities.

Now, of course, one of the key challenges for local authorities in the future will be to protect or maintain services that impact upon the most vulnerable in our communities whilst also delivering efficiencies in their expenditure, and this is not always easy. This will be a particular challenge for rural local authorities like Pembrokeshire, in my own constituency, which will continue to struggle to provide its current level of services, partly because of its geography and because there are higher costs to delivering public services in rural areas. Delivering services such as social services for older people, for example, can be problematic over large geographic and sparse areas, as well as many other services, such as the provision of rural schools. Therefore, it’s crucial that the Welsh Government genuinely acknowledges some of the challenges that rural authorities face, and efforts must be made to relieve some of the disproportionate costs to delivering services to rural communities.

Indeed, it’s frustrating that councils across Wales have faced a 7 per cent decrease in their budget since 2013-14. Sadly, once again, rural councils have faced the biggest decreases, with Powys, Monmouthshire, and Ceredigion facing the largest overall falls in their funding at 11 per cent, 10 per cent, and 9.82 per cent respectively. Now I fully accept that difficult financial—

Will you take an intervention?

In a moment. Now, I fully accept that difficult financial decisions have to be made, but today’s debate is also about making sure that there is a fairer local government funding formula in place so that rural authorities have sufficient funding to deliver their local public services. I appreciate that a funding floor has been introduced to address some of the challenges facing some rural local authorities. However, it’s clear that a full review of the funding formula for local authorities is required, given that the Welsh index of multiple deprivation has historically highlighted that Powys and Ceredigion were also counted as the most deprived in Wales when accessing local services such as libraries, schools and leisure centres. However, I understand that the Cabinet Secretary is committed to reviewing this funding formula and, therefore, perhaps, in responding to this debate, the Cabinet Secretary will take the opportunity to explain when the Welsh Government will bring forward this review, because rural local authorities continue to face significant challenges in delivering key public services. I give way to the Member for Swansea East.

Can I thank Paul Davies for that? You talk about the change, but the absolute amount of money that rural authorities get is substantially more than places like Cardiff and Swansea.

I’m afraid the Member for Swansea East can’t get away from the fact that Powys, Monmouthshire, and Ceredigion have faced the largest overall falls in their funding since 2013-14.

Now, the third point of our motion acknowledges the important role played by small businesses in driving the Welsh economy and believes local authorities should work closely with the business community. Welsh small businesses are a fundamental part of our local communities, providing important services and job opportunities for people across Wales, and local authorities could and should do more to work with local businesses.

Now, the previous debate talked about procurement, and it’s a real shame that Wales’s local authorities spend roughly 40 per cent of their procurement spend on non-Welsh companies, when there are businesses across Wales that could deliver the same services. For example, in 2015-16, 43 per cent of non-Welsh companies were used by Carmarthenshire in supplying their goods and services, and, in Ceredigion, the figure is 46 per cent.

Now, I appreciate that local authorities have to deliver value for money for the taxpayer when providing services, and procuring local businesses isn’t always possible. But there is far more that can be done to support local businesses and support local economies. Members will remember the work done by the Federation of Small Businesses in 2013 on local government procurement, which noted that for every £1 spent by a participating local authority with local SMEs it generated an additional 63p to benefit its local economy, compared to just 40p generated by larger local firms. Local authorities, therefore, have a responsibility to work closer with businesses to support their own local areas and explore the benefits of delivering more contracts to smaller businesses. The Welsh Government must also be responsive to the needs of SMEs in Wales and look at ways in which it can better break down the barriers for smaller businesses to win public sector contracts. Perhaps the Cabinet Secretary in his response will tell us what steps the Welsh Government is currently taking to do this and to encourage local authorities to be more flexible in their approach to procurement.

Of course, the benefits of working closer with more local businesses are clear. Local businesses can also provide valuable apprenticeships and work experience placements, which can significantly enhance the provision of skills in our communities. Greater collaboration between local authorities, schools and colleges and local businesses can lay the foundation for lifetime learning in our communities and ensure that any gaps in local skills provision are addressed by the local community.

In closing, Llywydd, naturally, local councils across Wales have an important role in delivering services and we’re keen to see stronger partnership and collaboration across sectors in our communities. Local authorities continue to face challenging settlements, particularly in rural areas, and it’s crucial that we iron out the funding formula to ensure that it is as fair as possible. That’s why we want our councils to be innovative and work closer with local community groups and businesses to see our services delivered as effectively as possible for the benefit of local communities. We urge the Welsh Government to do more to support local authorities and encourage greater community action and involvement in the running of local services. I urge Members to support our motion. Diolch.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. I call on Sian Gwenllian to move amendments 1 and 2, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you, Llywydd. I move amendments 1 and 2 in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. I’d like to thank the Conservatives for tabling a motion that does recognise the importance of local authorities and, in that regard, how local democracy contributes towards public services that are of a high quality.

Just a few words on some elements of the original motion—point 3 refers to acknowledging

the important role played by small businesses in driving the Welsh economy’

and how close collaboration between business and local authorities can lead to innovation and economic growth on a local level. In Gwynedd, for example, the partnership between the council and Hwb Caernarfon and the Bangor business improvement district is an excellent example of how collaboration between local authorities and the local business sector has brought more investment and new services into those areas for the benefit of the business community and the wider community. The council also assists small, local companies to collaborate in terms of public procurement contracts and encourages events such as meet-the-buyer events for local companies. Amendment 1:

Notes the importance of sharing best practice across local authorities in Wales’.

There are a number of examples of that in Carmarthenshire, Gwynedd and Ceredigion, as well as elsewhere in Wales.

But I would like to use my contribution this afternoon to specifically refer to amendment 2. Point 2 of the original motion:

Notes that strong and effective local government should see power put back into the hands of local people and their communities.’

I would agree entirely. One obvious way of doing that is to introduce a fairer electoral system, which makes councils more accountable and more representative of the communities that they serve. In the local elections of 2012, only 39 per cent of people voted. In the Assembly election in May, the figure was only 45 per cent, and that was the highest rate since 1999. There are a number of reasons for this, clearly, but one of them, certainly, is the fact that many people refuse to vote because they feel that their votes don’t matter. Under the current system, parties who finish third can go on to win the majority of seats.

You say people don’t vote because their vote will not be taken into account, but the two lowest turnouts we’ve had have been the European elections and the police commissioner—both done under proportional systems.

Well, clearly, there are also other reasons that would account for that as well, but certainly the introduction of proportional representation would improve that. We have seen the situation in local authorities in Scotland where, certainly, the turnout has been far higher in those elections. I believe that we need a new electoral system in order to raise people’s confidence in politics, and, according to the Government’s White Paper on local government reform, the Government has stated an intention to introduce STV in local government elections, but it is up to the individual councils to decide whether they want to implement this or not. Our long-established policy is to introduce the system of STV, but it should be mandatory in local authority elections across Wales. This could mean that local authority elections could be far more competitive, and that the constitution of authorities themselves would be more closely linked to the aspirations of the population, which would enhance the accountability of local government and, ultimately, improve public services.

So, the question is: do we want to accept the unfairness of the current process? And, as a nation, if we truly believe that every citizen is equal, then we should also believe, and ensure, that all votes are also equal. There is no good reason for not introducing STV for local government elections across Wales. There is a golden opportunity to do that now, but it needs to be done on a statutory basis for all councils. Otherwise, I don’t think it will happen. Sometimes, broader considerations in terms of fairness and the welfare of democracy are more important than the idea of leaving the decision to local politicians, and perhaps leaving it to those local politicians would mean that they would put their own welfare, and the welfare of their own parties, before the general well-being of local democracy. We need to make that positive change for the benefit of democracy in our nation. I very much hope that we will receive support for that principle in support for our amendments here this afternoon. Thank you.

While I fully expect, during the course of this debate, that people will be talking about funding decisions and the implications of those, I just wanted to have a quick look at the gap between the need for local decision making and the disconnect between citizens and those to whom they currently delegate those decisions. Because it seems extraordinary to me that it is much easier to have access to your Assembly Member, and even a member of the Government, than it is to your councillor, or a council cabinet member in particular. And, of course, we do have councillors who have an exemplary record of being available to residents, talking to them, working with them, and even resolving their problems. But, judging by the casework that comes through the door of my office on the back of the perception of a local councillor not doing anything, or not responding to them, this is far from a universal experience.

Assembly Members, and this Assembly as a whole, are acutely aware that we need to communicate our purpose and our work as individuals and the work and purpose of the institution as a whole to Wales—and it’s not easy; we’ve found that. But we do recognise that the odd self-congratulatory newsletter, press release, or survey on a labyrinthine website, is not the way to do this. And, with a disappointing turnout and so many uncontested seats at the last council election, I think councils have to ask themselves why the public has so little interest in them, and I think we must ask why that seems to suit them so well.

One of the things that’s really struck me during my time as an Assembly Member is how infrequently the public kicks off about a local decision. I appreciate there’s been a growth in social media armchair warriors, but I think there’s a real feeling, and a real perception, that public disapprobation has very, very little effect on council decision making. Now, as Assembly Members, of course, we are aware the obligations that this place actually places on local authorities. Planning, school places, recycling—even the Welsh language—are some of the issues that result in local authority proposals that can be unpopular. Many councils, of course, are wise enough to follow Welsh Government guidance to the letter, using process as a shield to protect their preferred response to those responsibilities. But, just in my own region, South Wales West, I just think of the effort it actually takes to get local authorities to look again at the way they want to try and achieve an objective. Sometimes, as with Parkland school, a solid well-made argument against a proposal is enough to prevent a silly mistake. Sometimes it takes a relentless long-term community campaign, as we’ve seen—that is needed to persuade the council to de-pedestrianise parts of Bridgend town centre, for example. Sometimes it means taking a bad council decision to the Welsh Government and getting them to change guidance for all councils, as happened with Swansea’s stubbornness on a safe route to school issue. Sometimes, of course, it means taking a council to court, as with Llangeinor school and the Catholic schools in Swansea, at colossal expense.

Part of this willingness of council cabinets to sit back and ride out the ructions comes, I think, from a complacency born of long-term domination of a council by a particular party or group. Scrutiny by opposition councillors, however good it might be, is pretty futile unless residents know it is happening. We could do with fewer council fanzines distributed at public expense and a wave of opposition councillors getting on social media and tagging their local press into the work that they do. Otherwise, this complacency and disengagement roundabout just keeps on spinning. That complacency extends to the observation that, after a while, the aggrieved will all get fed up and discover that, after all, the council was right all along.

But the thing is, so many of those decisions don’t turn out to be right. I’m just going to look at Swansea: bendy buses, the lethal Kingsway, the vainglorious boulevard, concreting over Castle Gardens and now replanting it, parking at Meridian tower—the spaces were too small—Parc y Werin, the installation of the Nowcaster machines that still don’t work, the sale of naming rights of the Liberty Stadium for 4p, bin bags banned from Garngoch tip and now having to be taken there after all, and, of course, buying recycling sorting machinery and then not being able to use it because of their own planning regulations.

Now, part of the purpose of localism, the right to bid, the right to challenge, local referenda, the growth of resident and community groups sitting alongside the council, with proper influence—not just the joy of ticking boxes in a web-based consultation—is buy-in: joint responsibility. Not mob rule, but an understanding of co-production and the creation of a new route of communication about complex challenges and the steps it takes to address them and why they’re a matter for everyone.

Now, I would have liked to have time to talk about partnerships with businesses. The fact that community groups and local authorities seem to occupy the whole territory for funding community capital, with no reach out to local business, for example, is a wasted opportunity, but time’s against me, so I’ll leave it with an invitation to councils not to fear your residents but get them to share the load.

Can I say at the outset that I want to thank the Conservatives for bringing this motion, which I think is a very wide-ranging motion, covering lots of very important issues? I’m not today going to comment on Plaid’s amendment on proportional representation, because this is currently the subject of consultation through the local government White Paper, and I guess we really ought to allow that process to take its course. I’m sure there’s going to be plenty of time to debate this issue and our respective positions on PR or not in the weeks and months ahead. But I want to be a little bit more upbeat today; so I’m going to focus my comments on part 3 of the motion, around the role of local authorities supporting greater collaboration, innovation and entrepreneurship, and to talk a little bit about what’s happening in my constituency, which I think shows how local government and the Welsh Government are working together effectively to deliver results for small business in particular.

Llywydd, it’s not by chance that Merthyr Tydfil has become the growth capital for new businesses in Wales. Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council has played a key role, working with partners to develop innovative schemes with collaboration at their heart. For example, the Merthyr Tydfil Enterprise Centre, which is a joint initiative run by the council and by Tydfil Training, using the Welsh Government’s Vibrant and Viable Places funding, provides a hub in the town centre to provide an entrepreneurial culture within the town and brings together partners from the private, academic, voluntary and public sectors, including—crucially—Merthyr council.

One particular success of the enterprise centre has been the Meanwhile Uses programme, which engages with landlords to identify vacant premises in the town centre that can be used by start-up businesses or businesses looking to expand or diversify, rent free, for up to six months. This period gives their ideas an opportunity to flourish before they make the decision to move into commercial rents. The arrangement also benefits landlords otherwise unable to let their properties, as the rental for that period is met by the council under the VVP funding.

Merthyr Tydfil borough council currently has seven businesses benefitting from this scheme, and the enterprise centre also provides funding to help businesses set up with grants of up to £5,000. So, as well as funding channelled through the local authority under schemes such as Vibrant and Viable Places, the council is also able to provide a holistic approach to the development of enterprise by working with the third sector and academic organisations to bring together advice, expertise and training, and by doing this in conjunction with the advice and support in relation to local authority processes—planning and development and conservation, for example—they can bring wraparound support for new businesses.

Merthyr council has also secured a Welsh Government grant under the Effect project to provide business development services that have included advice, guidance, mentoring, training and support for new businesses, linking with the local employability and skills initiative. Under this scheme, Merthyr council has supported 40 town centre businesses, created 51 jobs and safeguarded 151 more.

If we can just briefly take a look at Merthyr Town Football Club for a moment. Merthyr Tydfil council was a key partner in supporting the development of the club’s Penydarren Park ground, again with Vibrant and Viable Places funding. With this support, the football club was able to extend the clubhouse to build a function room that can cater for up to 120 guests. It has a sports bar, a commercial kitchen, an IT suite and offices with Wi-Fi throughout. It’s now the envy of non-league football clubs throughout the country. But importantly, building on its community philosophy, the club has now developed into a significant business hub, attracting businesses in Merthyr to become involved in the club, to use its facilities under the Martyrs business network—’Martyrs’, by the way, being the nickname of Merthyr Town Football Club. The business network enables local business entrepreneurs to get together to share ideas, knowledge, experience and business referrals. It started a year ago and now has 163 members. Common to the role of all of this that I’ve just been talking about is the local council, not just in supporting funding throughout the Welsh Government’s Vibrant and Viable Places scheme, but through direct partnership, providing that wraparound guidance and facilitation with the support of academic and third sector parties.

In conclusion, Llywydd, I welcome the motion from the Conservatives, and particularly, as I said, the first amendment from Plaid. Local authorities do have a crucial role to play in supporting business development around collaboration, innovation and entrepreneurship, and if anyone wishes to look at the examples of best practice, I can commend to them the excellent work in this field of the Labour-run Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council.

I’m pleased to take part in this debate. It’s important that we have strong local government in Wales, and of course we’ve got some great examples of local authorities that are working for all of the people who live in those local authority areas, including, of course, Monmouthshire County Council in particular. We all know that there have been significant pressures on public finances across the board in recent years, because of the legacy of the previous Labour Government, and that has provided significant challenges to local authorities in terms of making things go further with the limited resources that they have. But I have to say that some of our rural local authorities have struggled particularly to meet these challenges because of the unfair local government funding formula that we have here in Wales. I think it should come as no surprise to us, therefore, that in terms of things like school closures, we’ve seen more closures in rural local authorities than in other parts of Wales. In fact, since 2006, there have 157 primary school closures in Wales, and 95 of those—60 per cent—have been in rural local authorities. So, the figures simply speak for themselves.

Now, of course, it’s not just our schools. We’ve also seen massive reductions in other services. We’ve got the great accolade of being one of the best performing recycling nations in the world, and that’s something of which I am very proud, and many homeowners and businesses have worked with local authorities to deliver those stunning results. But you have to take the public with you when you’re making significant changes to waste collection regimes, and I think that some local authorities now are beginning to step too far as a result of the financial pressures that they are faced with in reducing their waste collection services. Just look at local authorities like Conwy, for example, at the moment, where 10,000 households in that local authority area are now facing four-weekly bin collections—extremely unpopular, leading to an increase in fly-tipping, leading to an increase in litter, making the environment look very unattractive, and potential public health risks associated with things like clinical waste and pet waste in people’s bins for long periods of time. You can see that these sorts of financial pressures, because of that unfair rural element of the funding formula, are leading to real problems in some of our local authorities.

There are different ways to deliver services, and one of the positive things that’s taking place in my own constituency is the business improvement district that we have now in the Colwyn Bay area, where you have businesses there that are working to add value to the work that the local authority is doing to improve the fortunes of the Bay of Colwyn, working collaboratively with the chamber of trade, with the voluntary organisations in the Bay of Colwyn and, indeed, with other stakeholders like the town and community councils that represent that area to deliver some real improvements in the town.

It’s early days; the business improvement district was only established on 1 April 2016, but already there are some green shoots that I think are looking very promising for the future of Colwyn Bay. That is one of the things that I believe will drive the renaissance that’s taken place in the town in recent years. Those sorts of collaborations are things that I would very much like to see more of. I wonder, Cabinet Secretary, in your response to today’s debate, whether you can tell us whether there are any more strategic things that the Welsh Government might be able to do in order to promote that sort of positive engagement and collaboration between the businesses in our communities across Wales and indeed local authorities, whether they be the unitary authorities or indeed the minor authorities too.

Thanks to the Conservatives for bringing today’s debate. We support their motion. We, like them, recognise the crucial role played by local authorities in delivering public services. As challenging financial times continue, local councils are having to deliver these services in different ways. Outsourcing is now becoming a fact of life for many councils. Outsourcing can work, but, of course, local councils still have to ensure that a good level of service is delivered to the local residents. This will be one of the major challenges facing local government in the coming years.

Of course, sometimes, services can improve if an arm’s-length operation is brought into place. Community-run schemes, as advocated today by Paul Davies, could in some cases be the answer. We also note the Conservative motion’s desire to see power put back into the hands of local people. We also value localism in UKIP and we do have a problem with supposedly local development plans effectively being foisted on local communities by planning decrees emanating from central Government.

In fact, we favour local referenda on major developments where a significant proportion of the local population demands such a referendum. So, yes, let’s put power back into the hands of local people and let’s do so in a meaningful way. Local councils should also work closely with small businesses and council procurement policies should favour local SMEs as far as possible. However, this objective does need to be balanced by the need to get the most effective deal for the council tax payer.

Paul Davies did recognise this need for balance in his contribution and he did illustrate also that, very probably, there is considerable scope for local authorities and SMEs to collaborate more closely. We would welcome such collaboration.

We also support the Plaid Cymru amendments. We have a local government reorganisation on the way, so it is crucial that we share best practice across local authorities. It is essential that the reforms, whatever shape they eventually take, do deliver better public service outcomes for the public, or at the very least that they maintain the level of public service that we have now.

The second Plaid Cymru amendment relates to voting in local elections. We support Plaid’s desire for councils to move away from first-past-the-post to proportional representation in order to strengthen accountability. Mike Hedges raised the apparently vexing issue of lower turnout in police and crime commissioner and European elections. However, I believe that this isn’t due to the electoral system used but, in the case of the PCCs, it is, rather, due to the fact that there is no public support for this office in the first place. As for the European Parliament, it was a legislature that, clearly, in many people’s eyes, had such little power that it wasn’t worth voting for.

So, we support the motion and we support the amendments. We support everything, in fact—consensus politics. [Laughter.]

Since I’ve been elected to the National Assembly for Wales, I’ve been heartened to see the increased appreciation from this place of the integral role that local government plays in Welsh public life. When I sat as a councillor for nearly three terms, it did not always seem that this Chamber understood the complexities of life on the ground in an era of huge public spending cuts inflicted by a UK Tory Government.

It is, indeed, a great privilege to serve as a county councillor or a community councillor. It is an invigorating responsibility to be charged with making a difference to people’s lives—indeed, it can be hard to give up, as ordinarily I am sat next to a county councillor during each Plenary.

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford, is to be applauded for dramatically changing the relationship between Welsh Government and Welsh local authorities. All healthy relationships are founded on mutual respect, an ability to listen to one another and partnership working, but the vision of strong resilient delivery partners in local government is of equal import and merit today and every day, making a real difference to people’s lives and often the most vulnerable in our society.

Llywydd, four weeks tomorrow, the Welsh people will go to the polls to elect their local councillors across Wales’s 22 local authorities. So, if my fellow Assembly Members forgive my indulgence for being partisan, as you know, if you were to cut me, I would bleed Welsh Labour red blood. But, it remains true: in the storm of austerity, self-inflicted and caused by the Tory Government in London, Welsh Labour councils have still been delivering for our people and not just the privileged few.

In my own Assembly constituency within Caerphilly County Borough Council, the Welsh Labour-led council has invested over £210 million in the Welsh housing quality standard, providing real warm and safe homes for thousands of local people most in need. Let me use this opportunity to place on record my appreciation for the dedicated service of council leader, Keith Reynolds, and his predecessor, former councillor Harry Andrews. They and their Labour colleagues across Wales have done everything they can to improve the lives of their constituents, even as budgets have been squeezed beyond all recognition as a direct result of continuing Welsh block grant cuts from Westminster. Despite this, Caerphilly County Borough Council have made record investments in modern library services, meeting the demand from citizens, with Welsh Labour council tax in Wales remaining lower than under the Tories in England—indeed, in Caerphilly the council tax rise this year is a mere 1 per cent.

In education, across local government, we have seen how the partnership between the Welsh Labour Government and Welsh local authorities has delivered new school buildings across Wales through the twenty-first century schools programme, none more magnificent than Islwyn High School. Wales has seen the best ever GCSE results and we have closed the gap with England, with our disadvantaged pupils now catching up with their peers. As such, I welcome strongly the White Paper that is out for consultation until 11 April—a direct result of discussions between the Welsh Government, local authorities and other stakeholders—co-constructed, co-determined and constructive for a resilient future. I would caution that, for Islwyn, a priority must be to improve voter registration and turnout at elections over a headline-grabbing proposal to change voting systems for local authority elections.

Equally, I am proud of our record in Wales around recycling services—ambitious targets set by the Welsh Labour Government for local government achieving a real difference. Today in Wales, thanks to an accountable local government, we are now on course to become the highest recycling nation in Europe, and I could go on and on.

But, the people of Wales want to see their standard of living improve. On 4 May, the only way to ensure strong and effective local government is to simply vote Welsh Labour.

Strength-based development is about helping people in—[Interruption.]

I can’t hear Mark Isherwood, mainly because his fellow AMs in his own group are shouting so much. Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. Strength-based development is about helping people and communities identify the strengths they already have in order to tackle the root problems preventing them from reaching their potential. Applying this approach, the co-pro revolutionaries in the Co-production Network for Wales are adopting international best practice, working for an approach that enables people and professionals to share power and work together in equal relationships to make public services more effective and relevant. This is about unlocking community strengths to build stronger communities for the future.

Regrettably, however, the Labour Welsh Government has proved averse to implementing the Localism Act 2011’s community rights agenda, which would help community engagement and deliver services more efficiently and effectively. Overall, there’s been a top-down approach towards community engagement in Wales, with resources and guidance to local authorities being generated from central Government. Moreover, the Welsh Government has published a centralised document, ‘Principles for working with communities’, which includes the involvement of communities, service users and organisations in defining community problems and the design and delivery of new approaches, but no grass-roots powers for communities.

Although there are some powers of local intervention in Wales, local authorities are not currently obliged to undertake community asset transfers nor are there registers to show which local authority assets are under threat, unlike across the border. Furthermore, the results of the Welsh Government’s consultation on protecting community assets in 2015 showed 78 per cent of respondents welcoming a power to initiate a transfer of assets from public sector bodies, essentially supporting the community right to bid missing in Wales.

The Welsh Government has given funding for a pilot scheme to the Gwent Association of Voluntary Organisations for a community asset transfer officer—good—helping groups in Gwent bid for community assets—fantastic—but it isn’t yet clear if it has been a success. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government said in November 2016 that the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children had been participating in talks with the Campaign for Real Ale regarding the future of Welsh pubs. That sounds very interesting; I think I’d have enjoyed those talks too. However, we’re yet to see the results of these talks. Last year, Flintshire Local Voluntary Council told me that Welsh Government cuts to local voluntary councils would devastate their ability to support more user-led, preventative and cost-effective services. In other words, by spending money smarter, we could safeguard those services by working differently. And the Wales Council for Voluntary Action said that Welsh Government and the sector need to refresh current engagement mechanisms, develop, promote and monitor a programme for action based on co-production and common ground, with local authorities, health boards and the third sector working much more imaginatively to develop better services that are closer to people, more responsive to needs and add value by drawing on community resources.

Oxfam Cymru has specifically called on the Welsh Government to embed the sustainable livelihoods approach in all policy and service delivery in Wales, helping people identify their own strengths in order to tackle root problems preventing them and their communities from reaching their potential.

Five years ago, the current Minister rejected the WCVA’s ‘Communities First—A Way Forward’ report, which found that community involvement in co-designing and co-delivering local services should be central to any successor lead tackling poverty programme. Five years later, and after spending £0.5 billion on it, the same Minister has now said he is phasing out Communities First, having failed to reduce the headline rates of poverty or increase relative prosperity in Wales. As the Bevan Foundation states, if people feel that policies are imposed on them, the policies don’t work, and a new programme should be produced with communities, not directed top down.

Let us look to local area co-ordination in Derby—supporting residents and communities, driving collaboration between local people, families, communities and organisations to build something bigger and more sustainable, building on the very successful model implemented in Australia. An independent evaluation by the University of Derby, working with just 50 people, found savings of £800,000 for the health and social care economy, and that introducing local area co-ordinators had built relationships, established trust, worked to people’s strengths and aspirations and built connections with family members and other citizens to create solutions for those communities. This convinced that local authority and NHS there to invest and expand to all 17 council wards. If only the Welsh Government would listen. They could use funding better, improve lives, and therefore help public services save money. So, my question to all Assembly Members is: will you join the revolution, step up and co-produce the Wales we want?

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

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and I thank all Members who have contributed to this debate this afternoon.

Wrth i ni symud tuag at yr etholiadau llywodraeth leol ar 4 Mai a thoriad y Pasg, mewn ysbryd ecwmenaidd o gynhwysiant, bydd y Llywodraeth yn cefnogi’r cynnig y prynhawn yma.

Wrth gwrs, bydd gan y pleidiau gwleidyddol yma syniadau gwahanol tu hwnt i’w rhoi gerbron yr etholwyr, ond nid yw ein cyd-ddealltwriaeth o arwyddocâd cynghorau lleol fel darparwyr gwasanaethau allweddol, chwaraewyr allweddol yn y broses o greu economïau lleol a chysylltiadau hanfodol yn y gadwyn ddemocrataidd, yn lle drwg i ddechrau. Wedi dweud hynny, Llywydd, rwyf wedi edrych sawl gwaith y prynhawn yma ar y cynnig, gan geisio dod o hyd i gyfeiriad ynddo at fformiwla gyllido, heb sôn am alwad ynddo i ddiwygio’r fformiwla gyllido, i symud cyllid o ardaloedd a gynrychiolir gan lawer o gydweithwyr y rhai a gynigiodd y cynnig.

Felly, gadewch i mi fod yn glir. Mae un Llywodraeth Cymru ar ôl y llall, yn cynnwys y Llywodraeth hon, wedi gweithredu i amddiffyn awdurdodau lleol a’u gwasanaethau yma yng Nghymru rhag y toriadau a osodwyd arnom a rhag y driniaeth a gafodd awdurdodau lleol dros y ffin yn Lloegr. Mae’r fformiwla ariannu a ddefnyddiwn yng Nghymru yn fformiwla wrthrychol. Mae’n cael ei gyrru’n bennaf gan nifer y bobl sy’n byw mewn ardal, nifer y disgyblion mewn ysgolion, a chan gyngor arbenigol ar gostau amddifadedd, natur wledig a gwasanaethau penodol. Dyna pam y pleidleisiodd arweinwyr Llafur ar yr is-grŵp cyllid eleni i weithredu newidiadau i’r fformiwla gwasanaethau cymdeithasol, sydd wedi symud arian o ardaloedd trefol ac i ardaloedd gwledig yng Nghymru, am eu bod yn cydnabod, os ydych yn dibynnu ar gyngor gwrthrychol, fod yn rhaid i chi gymryd y cyngor hwnnw pa un a yw’n digwydd bod o fantais i’ch ardal chi ai peidio. Yn y ffordd honno, mae gennym fformiwla y byddwn yn ei harolygu a’i hadolygu, ac sy’n destun craffu, o un flwyddyn i’r llall.

Ar ran y Llywodraeth hon, Llywydd, mae awdurdodau lleol yno i gefnogi unigolion, teuluoedd a chymunedau pan fydd angen help arnynt, ond hefyd i ddarparu gwasanaethau sy’n ei gwneud yn bosibl i bobl fyw eu bywydau eu hunain yn y ffordd y byddent yn dymuno eu byw—teuluoedd sy’n disgwyl i ysgolion roi’r cychwyn gorau mewn bywyd i blant, sy’n disgwyl y bydd gwastraff yn cael ei gasglu a’i waredu’n ddiogel, y bydd palmentydd a ffyrdd yn cael eu cynnal a’u cadw ac y caiff gwasanaethau eu darparu i bobl hŷn yn eu cartrefi eu hunain yn rhai o’r amgylchiadau mwyaf agored i niwed yn ein cymunedau. Mae awdurdodau lleol ledled Cymru yn cynnal cannoedd o wasanaethau drwy filoedd o sefydliadau, i filiynau o bobl yng Nghymru drwy fuddsoddi biliynau o bunnoedd. Mae’r cynnig yn hollol gywir i ddechrau drwy gydnabod eu harwyddocâd.

Er gwaethaf heriau go iawn, mae llywodraeth leol yng Nghymru wedi bod yn gwella ac mae wedi bod yn gwella hyd yn oed mewn cyfnod o galedi gwirioneddol. Ond mae heriau gwirioneddol yn parhau o fewn llywodraeth leol ac i lywodraeth leol. Mae mwy i’w wneud i sicrhau mwy o gysondeb a rhagoriaeth ac ar yr un pryd, gwyddom fod llai o arian yn mynd i fod ar gael ar gyfer gwasanaethau cyhoeddus. Mae diwygio’n hanfodol os yw awdurdodau lleol yn mynd i fod yn gadarn yn ariannol a gallu cynnal a gwella ansawdd gwasanaethau yn ystod y cyfnod eithriadol hwn o gwtogi. Ac er bod diwygio’r ffordd yr ydym yn gwneud pethau yn anghenraid, wrth wraidd y Papur Gwyn a gyhoeddwyd ar 31 Ionawr, ceir perthynas newydd rhwng y dinesydd a’r gwasanaethau lleol, lle y mae’r rhai sy’n defnyddio’r gwasanaethau hynny yn cael eu trin fel partneriaid cyfartal yn y broses o wella.

Wrth gwrs, Llywydd, nid oeddwn yn cytuno â phopeth roedd Paul Davies yn ei awgrymu, ond bydd yn gwybod fy mod wedi treulio prynhawn cyfan allan gyda’r gweithwyr rheng flaen sy’n rhedeg prosiect Rhaglan, ac roedd yn brynhawn da iawn hefyd, yn gweld prosiect arloesol sy’n trosglwyddo grym i’r gweithwyr rheng flaen mewn perthynas â’u defnyddwyr sy’n seiliedig ar ymddiriedaeth go iawn. Mae’r strategaethau cyfranogiad y cyhoedd y mae’r Papur Gwyn yn eu hargymell wedi eu cynllunio i fod yn ddeialog lle y caiff cryfderau ac asedau eu nodi, a lle y gweithredir ar y cyd i ddatrys problemau cyffredin. Fel y mae ail ran y cynnig yn dweud: llywodraeth leol gref yn rhannu grym a chyfrifoldeb gyda’i phoblogaeth leol. Ac mae llywodraeth leol yn dibynnu’n allweddol ar safon y bobl sy’n cael eu hethol i gynrychioli pobl eraill. Cyfeiriodd Suzy Davies at yr angen i barhau i wella safon y bobl sy’n dod i mewn i lywodraeth leol, i wneud y swydd honno’n werth chweil iddynt ei gwneud, er mwyn sicrhau eu bod yn cyflawni’r cyfrifoldebau hynny mewn ffordd sy’n cyd-fynd â’r rhwymedigaethau a osodwyd arnynt. Mae manylion y Papur Gwyn yn ei gwneud yn glir fod creu llywodraeth leol gref yn dibynnu ar gynghorwyr lleol gweithgar, ymroddgar a hawdd dod i gysylltiad â hwy, ac yn cryfhau arwyddocâd y cynrychiolwyr lleol, a’r rhwymedigaethau a osodwyd arnynt.

Llywydd, a gaf fi am eiliad ddychwelyd at bwynt a wnaeth Rhianon Passmore, lle y bu’n talu teyrnged i Keith Reynolds, arweinydd Cyngor Bwrdeistref Sirol Caerffili sy’n ymddeol? Ar draws Cymru, ceir arweinwyr o wahanol bleidiau gwleidyddol sydd wedi penderfynu na fyddant yn ceisio am arweinyddiaeth eu cynghorau ar ôl yr etholiad, ac rwyf am dalu teyrnged i bob un ohonynt. Mae bod yn arweinydd cyngor ar unrhyw adeg, ond yn enwedig yn y cyfnod hwn, yn galw am ddewrder gwleidyddol ac mae’n galw am wytnwch personol a phenderfyniad, ac o’r gogledd-orllewin pell i dde-ddwyrain eithaf Cymru mae gennym bobl sydd wedi cyflawni’r cyfrifoldebau hynny, sydd wedi darparu gwasanaeth i’w cymunedau lleol, pobl na fyddant yno ar ôl 4 Mai, ac nid wyf yn credu y byddai’n syniad drwg i ni gydnabod y cyfraniad y maent wedi’i wneud heddiw. [Aelodau’r Cynulliad: ‘Clywch, clywch.’]

Llywydd, gadewch i mi ddweud rhywbeth yn awr am drydedd agwedd y cynnig heddiw. Mae’r Llywodraeth yn cydnabod rôl busnesau bach a chymorth busnes, i sicrhau ei fod ar gael i entrepreneuriaid, microfusnesau a busnesau bach a chanolig eu maint ar draws Cymru, ac rydym yn gwneud hynny drwy ein gwasanaeth Busnes Cymru. Mae Sir Fynwy dan arweiniad y Ceidwadwyr, Powys dan arweiniad annibynnol, a Cheredigion dan arweiniad Plaid Cymru i gyd yn defnyddio Busnes Cymru fel eu gwasanaeth llawn, ac mae Castell-nedd Port Talbot dan arweiniad y Blaid Lafur yn gweithio gyda Busnes Cymru i ddarparu ymateb ar y cyd i gadwyn gyflenwi Tata. Roeddwn yn cydnabod yn y ddadl ddiwethaf fod yna amrywiaeth ym mherfformiad caffael ar draws gwahanol awdurdodau lleol, ond mae wedi bod yn galonogol y prynhawn yma i glywed amrywiaeth o enghreifftiau byw go iawn lle y mae awdurdodau lleol yn defnyddio’r pwerau a’r adnoddau sydd ganddynt i ymgysylltu â busnesau lleol i greu economïau’r dyfodol. Darparodd Sian Gwenllian enghraifft uniongyrchol o weithredu llwyddiannus yng ngogledd-orllewin Cymru; dywedodd Dawn Bowden wrthym mai Merthyr yw prifddinas twf Cymru; a nododd Darren Millar arwyddion cynnar adfywiad ym Mae Colwyn—a phob un yn lleoedd lle y mae awdurdodau lleol yn cydweithio â’u poblogaethau lleol i ysgogi gwelliant.

Llywydd, nid ydym yn bychanu’r camau sydd angen eu cymryd er mwyn i awdurdodau lleol ledled Cymru allu parhau i ddarparu gwasanaethau, gan weithio gyda phoblogaethau lleol, gan weithio gyda busnesau lleol, er mwyn creu’r gwasanaethau sydd eu hangen arnom. Ond wrth i ni nesu at yr etholiad, rwy’n siŵr y byddwn yn dymuno gweld yr holl bobl sy’n ymgeisio yn yr etholiad yn cymryd rhan yn llwyddiannus yn y broses ddemocrataidd fel bod gennym awdurdodau lleol bywiog, egnïol a llwyddiannus sy’n gallu dal ati i wneud y gwaith pwysig hwn yma yng Nghymru.

I call on Nick Ramsay to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. And can I thank everyone who’s taken part in this afternoon’s debate? It is a fact that local authorities across Wales are clearly under increasing pressure year in, year out. We know that, they know that, there’s no denying it, whatever your view of the reasons for it. As Paul Davies said in opening, we need innovation in local government, and we need action not just words. We need a bottom-up approach that truly engages local communities. As the Welsh Local Government Association has said, the running costs for councils will increase by £750 million by 2019-20. So, it’s not rocket science. We need to do things differently, we need innovation and we need to learn from best practice.

My own council of Monmouthshire, mentioned by a number of speakers, and led by Peter Fox, has made waves in this area—[Interruption.] OBE, indeed. In many ways, Monmouthshire has been forced to innovate, but it’s worked. It is doing more with less than ever before, and the fruits of that are there for all to see. Monmouthshire has achieved that through working closely with business, by having innovative weeks such as Back2Business Week, building up strong relations with local businesses and local firms, so that those firms know where support is when they need it most.

In fact, Dawn Bowden, in a passionate speech, spoke about the need to develop strong council links with businesses. You spoke of the need for the local economy to be productive enough to provide that finance for the local economy, for the council to have that money to spend on services. And, yes, many authorities in Wales are dependent on money from the centre—you would expect that in a country such as Wales, with the sort of history we’ve had—but that’s not to say that we shouldn’t seek to build up the economic base of those areas so that, over time, hopefully, they can become more self-sufficient, more independent, more confident and have more money to put back into those local economies. That will lift not just the economies of those areas, but the self-esteem of those areas and, moving into the future, the way that they look outwards to the rest of the world.

I mentioned Dawn Bowden’s contribution, if I can just turn to some of the other contributions that speakers have made, and, Suzy Davies, you spoke heavily about the openness and transparency issue. You said there’s a lot of disengagement with local authorities, and you’re quite right to ask that question—why is that? Local government, local authorities are actually, or they should be, the most accessible level of government, being the closest to people, but, too often, our constituents do find it easier to come to us in this Chamber, or to go to Westminster—whatever level it may be. They don’t automatically go to their local authority. Often, it is cynicism that has been engendered because of the lack of action that they’ve seen in the past when they have taken issues to their local authorities.

So, I think we do need to see a new spirit in our local authorities. We’ve got the local elections coming up where we can have local councillors who really are looking out for the interests of their constituents. Maybe they do have to be honest with them sometimes and say things aren’t possible—that’s part of being in democratic life—but that is a discussion that has to be had to get that confidence going that we want to see.

Darren Millar was right to return to the vexing issue of the local government funding formula. I do accept the Cabinet Secretary’s comment that it wasn’t intrinsic to the motion, but if you try to look at this issue separately from that of the funding formula, then everything else falls down, because without that finance, without that fairness, without that new look at the funding formula, I think, in the years to come, we’re going to find it very difficult to maintain public services at the local level as we would like to see. I know full well from my time as a county councillor that the local government funding formula is a very complex beast. You do not take on changes to that formula lightly. It is, in fact, for those who understand the formula, a variety of formulas with all the interlinks that have grown up over time. But that’s not to say that we shouldn’t try, that we shouldn’t start on that process of making it fairer.

I look across at the Welsh Labour Party, the party that has proclaimed over so many years to be the party of fairness, the party of Wales and the party of localism within Wales. Well, let me tell you, this funding formula is not fair. So, if it isn’t fair, then I would suggest that you go back to the drawing board, put the principles where the mouth is and we look at developing a new system as we move forward.

If I can turn to Rhianon Passmore—you wouldn’t let me intervene on you, probably wisely. To be fair, Rhianon, you weren’t quite as partisan as you have been in some speeches. You made some very good points, actually, but you did take us back to the era of austerity, so often prevalent in debates in this Chamber, and I would remind you—you didn’t let me at the time—that that era of austerity did follow the era of profligate spending and profligate borrowing and ballooning debt that the Labour Party now don’t want us to remind them about. Do you know what? Perhaps if Rhianon Passmore and perhaps if Mark Drakeford had been running the UK Government back in the early 2000s, perhaps we wouldn’t have ended up in the mess that we are in. Unfortunately, you weren’t, Rhianon. I would probably have supported you. So, we are where we are, and we have to move forward. I’ll take an intervention.

How much has the public debt gone up by under the Conservatives?

A lot less than when it went up under the Labour Party. It takes a long time to turn a supertank around. At least we’ve started. Unfortunately, your party in Westminster didn’t.

I realise I’m out of time, Presiding Officer, so in conclusion to this non-partisan and fair-minded debate—or at least it started that way—I’m happy to join you, Mark Isherwood, on your revolution and on your tour of co-production and Welsh pubs. It sounds great fun. So, we can investigate together ways that we can boost local economies. At the end of the day, everyone in this Chamber had something good to say in this debate. Let’s focus on the positive. We all want to get to the same situation. [Interruption.] Yes, Alun Davies, let’s focus on the positive. We all want to get to the same end destination: we want public services that deliver properly for people in their local areas. Let’s work together where we can to try and develop that better system financially, economically and, indeed, democratically locally. The future can be gold, and if we just grasp it, let’s start now.

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

We now reach voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time and the first vote on the debate on the legislative proposal by Simon Thomas. I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Simon Thomas. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 34, 12 abstentions, nobody against, and therefore the motion is agreed.

The next vote is the vote on Plaid Cymru’s debate on public sector procurement and construction, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, one abstention, 35 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I call for a vote now on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 21 against. Amendment 1 is therefore agreed.

I call for a vote now on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 46, no abstentions, one against. Therefore, amendment 2 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, 17 abstentions, four against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on the Welsh Conservatives’ debate on local authorities, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 40, no abstentions, eight against. The motion, therefore, is agreed.

And we turn now to the short debate, which is the next item on our agenda.

If Members could leave quietly for Easter, before I call on Mike Hedges to speak on the topic he has chosen—Mike Hedges.

Diolch, Llywydd. Thank you. I’ve given a minute of this debate to Suzy Davies and another minute to Simon Thomas. In 2013, the Welsh Government created a Swansea bay city region to engage more partners in improving the regional economy. The councils of Swansea, Carmarthenshire, Neath Port Talbot and Pembrokeshire worked together on a Swansea bay city region board. The board has adopted a city region economic strategy to identify key actions for increasing the city region’s economic performance. When any boundaries are set, there are always two questions: should it be larger, or should it be smaller? As whole council areas need to be included, three councils next to the regional boundaries are Powys, which stretches almost to the border of Wrexham, Bridgend, which is part of the Cardiff city region, and Ceredigion, which I would argue is economically and culturally more akin to Gwynedd than it is to Swansea and Neath Port Talbot. Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, Llanelli, and the Amman Valley are, effectively, one economic entity: just look at the traffic movement in the morning and the evening. That means it must include Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, and Carmarthenshire. The question is now: should Pembrokeshire be part of the area? I would argue that it has an industrial area in the south, and its close connection with Carmarthenshire means that it fits better with Swansea bay than any future mid or north Wales region. One of the problems is that areas that are part of the Swansea-Neath Port Talbot travel-to-work area, such as the southern part of Powys around Ystradgynlais, border areas such as Porthcawl, Pyle, Hirwaun and southern Ceredigion, are outside the Swansea bay city region. This is inevitable whenever a border is set: there will be a border area that interacts economically and socially with the region around it.

I think, turning to transport, which I think is really one of the keys, although the Swansea city region plan and programme is not about transport as the Cardiff city region is, it is still incredibly important. And while few, if anyone, would wish to travel from the Afan Valley to the Preseli mountains, i.e. from one end of the region to the other, daily, there’ll be a need for the whole route to be improved, because there will be a demand for good links between, and into, both the major population centres as well as into sites to find leisure, retail and employment. I think that is the key: people need to be able to get to work, they need to be able to get to the retail centres, and they need to get to leisure facilities. And the danger is you can be not very far away from a major place of employment in the region, but if you happened to, by chance, be without a car, then some of these journeys are almost impossible.

Road: the priority—and if I’d written this 20 years ago, it would have been the same—is the dualling of the A40 for the whole of its length, and also traffic lights at Cross Hands roundabout to improve links between Pembrokeshire, Carmarthenshire, and the rest of the city region. Other bottle necks occur around Port Talbot on the M4, where the M4 road ends, roads leading to Cross Hands roundabout, and Carmarthen, and further improvement needs to be considered, especially as the traffic queues continue.

In the 1990s, West Glamorgan County Council set about opening five railway stations: Llansamlet, Briton Ferry, Baglan, Skewen, and Pyle. Although the Cardiff city region has strong links with Port Talbot as part of the Swanline scheme, the other stations to the west of the Swansea bay region will have timetabled trains, which include Carmarthen, Llanelli, Llandeilo, Ammanford, Pantyffynnon, Pembrey and Burry Port, Whitland, Tenby, Pembroke Dock, Haverfordwest, Milford Haven, Goodwick, and Fishguard. See: traffic and trains do go west of Swansea, and they even go west of Cardiff. There are other stations that could be brought back into use, such as Landore and St Clears. What is needed is a programme to bring unused former stations back into use and to make greater use of the existing railway stations to make rail a viable option for travel, either for work or leisure. The main line to London will continue to be a major rail link that benefits the economy of the whole of the Swansea city region, and it’s very important that it’s electrified as soon as possible.

Returning to buses, an improved bus service is desperately needed to link the train station and city town centre to the employment hubs, but also to link to population centres. Railway stations in Llansamlet and Gowerton could be transport hubs, where buses meet trains and fan out to the surrounding communities. The example at Llansamlet station is that a regular bus service terminates in Frederick Place, round the corner from the station. This should be terminating at the station, which would then be providing a bus service to the surrounding area. I’ve said many times, and I’m going to say it again, we will need Landore station opened, and not just on a Saturday for the football, but for movement of people to stop people having to get into the city centre, because we’re trying to keep people out of the city centre. Landore station will do that. The success of park and ride needs to be built upon. This keeps cars out of the city and town centres, and allows the first part of the journey to be carried out by car and the final part of the journey by bus.

Turning to cycling and walking, the all-Wales coastal path and the Pembrokeshire coastal path walk are great examples of success at creating opportunities for leisure walking. There are dedicated cycle routes, but the gaps in them need finishing, and there is a need for safe storage and parking places for cycles, especially in city and town centres. I really do want to highlight the importance of completing the cycle routes. It’s pointless having a cycle route if you have to go across a major road as part of that journey. It would get most people not to do it. You have the enthusiastic cyclists who’ll do it, but most people won’t.

Finally, on public services, if we believe, as I do, that the Swansea bay city region, covering the council areas of Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Carmarthenshire, and Pembrokeshire is a coherent sub-Wales region, then the obvious next step is for all public services to be run within this footprint. All services under Welsh Government control can be aligned. Obviously, this cannot be done immediately, but, as a structure, each service is reviewed then the structure changed. Next, steps to align services in the city region must be taken. And I’ll say it again, because I’ve said it a dozen times here now: Swansea and Neath Port Talbot look Janus-like. If it’s for fire, if it’s for the education consortium, we look to the west. If, however, it’s for policing or it’s for health, we look to the east. There is no coherence about it. It’s almost as if everybody who’s come along to create a structure has decided on their own, without giving any thought to what went before.

Firstly, and most simply, is fire and rescue. That can be easily realigned to the city region boundary, and it would only mean the transfer out of Powys and Ceredigion to the North Wales Fire and Rescue Service. Secondly, there’s going to be an economic sub-region, where what is needed is to have a development plan equivalent to the old county development plan to cover the whole area. This would ensure that housing and economic development planning can be aligned over the whole region, and not only on a local authority area. The development of the bay campus, which is in Neath Port Talbot, which will almost certainly have a greater effect on Swansea than on Neath Port Talbot, is an example of the need for an area-based approach. I also remember, in the old district council days, Lliw Valley produced their Clydach market opposite houses that were in Swansea. The people who were affected were the people living in Swansea, but the people who got the benefit were from Lliw Valley, and I think it really is important that we look at it as a whole region. You can look at Trostre park without thinking of it as part of the Swansea shopping area.

The third whole Swansea city region policy co-ordination needed is transport strategy—the Swansea bay equivalent of the Cardiff city region metro system. This needs to ensure that there’s a coherent rail and bus network that can move people from the residential areas to the main employment, retail and leisure sites. Also, the road network needs to ensure that movement between major population centres is via at least a dual carriageway. Within the city region, a simple subdivision in two can be done—west Glamorgan and Dyfed, which equates to the former counties of Dyfed minus Ceredigion and west Glamorgan. Joint boards with Neath Port Talbot and Swansea could be set up for both social services and education, which are the two main former county council services, and the same can be done for Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire. The health boards could be realigned to these larger areas covered by the joint boards. That would align health boards and social services just like they were when health boards such as West Glamorgan health board existed to cover health. Also, it would make it easier for health boards covering Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire to work with West Glamorgan. We have the situation, as everybody knows, that the major hospital for most of west Wales is Morriston, yet it is not part of Morriston, so you have this ARCH, a regional collaboration for health, programme and all these other things that have been put together in order to try and put right what’s a structural weakness.

Local services would continue to be run by the current local authorities. Local authorities are the right size for providing most public services, and anybody who’s picked up the book on local authority services, which goes on for about 40 pages, will realise just how many services there are that local authorities provide, and most of them are best provided locally. Local people making local decisions on behalf of the area in which they live is the basis of local democracy. It’s about agreeing the city region as a basic footprint, and then having services within the region organised in the most suitable area within the footprint.

In conclusion, I fully support the proposed Swansea city region. I also am very pleased with proposals to improve the economy of the area by the four councils in the area. I think credit should be given to all four of them on working together to try and get a system working and improving the GVA. The most important thing for an area like Swansea city region is to increase the value of the economy and get people earning more. I hope improved transport and co-ordination of services within the footprint can be supported by the Welsh Government, because we need to get the transport right, we need to get public services on a standard footing, and we need to make sure that we do well for our area.

Thanks you for giving me a minute here, Mike. I think, with the city deal, the direct loan to Yr Egin and the prospect of a prison coming to Port Talbot shortly, that puts to bed the idea that the UK Government isn’t interested in investing in south Wales. But I think you’re right to raise two points in particular with this. The first is to query the role of local input and how residents within the city bay region can contribute to its detailed design, if you like, and also the issue of transport as well, rather than just relying on digital infrastructure. We do need to look at why the plan has missed this opportunity to talk about interconnectivity. I hope you’ll agree—I raised this a little bit earlier on—that congestion and air quality should go hand in hand in any discussions about transport and infrastructure, and that we shouldn’t lose the opportunity to consider things like monorails and trams and light railway, as well as the existing rail network that you’re talking about, even though it is closed. And, if we are talking about buses and taxis, maybe there should be a presumption now that we shouldn’t be looking at diesel models. I completely agree with what you said about the cycle tracks. There’s no point them going all round the houses; people just won’t use them, then. Thank you.

I’d like to thank Mike Hedges for bringing this debate forward today. I think he’s gone beyond the city deal and presented a much broader vision for the Swansea bay city region. But I want to focus on two issues: first of all, I’d like to welcome the emphasis on rail that was included in Mike Hedges’s presentation, and to endorse the need to reopen the rail line between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth as part of the backbone that will maintain the city region as we move forward. I would also like to say that I’m disappointed that the city region deal specifically in Swansea bay isn’t aimed at being low carbon. I think that is missing. There are wonderful things to be seen there, but I think that we have lost sight, both in Swansea bay and in Cardiff, of the zero-carbon element and working towards a zero-carbon economy. And, finally, I’d like to say that there is no better example of how the city region area could work than the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, linking the marine engineering expertise in Pembrokeshire with the more standard engineering expertise in Swansea itself, and, of course, the energy experience of the whole region.

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

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Let me begin by thanking Mike Hedges for using his short debate today for the topic of the Swansea bay city region deal. I’m going to focus my remarks on the deal itself, what it brings to south-west Wales, and the potential that it has for the future of the economy of that part of our country. We’ve long recognised the opportunities of city deals to make a lasting impact. Indeed, the Welsh Government held the view from November of last year that the Swansea bay region city deal was ready to be signed, and we’re very glad, now, that we’ve been able to reach that point. We welcome the successful signing of a deal that is worth £1.3 billion, and the Welsh Government, as the senior funder of the deal, will provide £125 million-worth of Welsh Government investment.

Now, the deal is based on an ambitious vision to position the region for the technologies of the future over the next 15 years. It aims to boost the local economy, to generate almost 10,000 new jobs, and to attract over £600 million from the private sector. The UK Government and the Welsh Government have worked together to help agree the city deal, but it’s important to remember that the deals are led by the ambition of local authorities and by regional collaboration amongst stakeholders. Leaders and chief executives of all four authorities have been vitally important in crafting the deal, as well as local health boards and universities. I want to acknowledge the contribution of Sir Terry Matthews, who has played a crucial role throughout the process, and, in the latter stages, the leadership of Rob Stewart, the leader of Swansea city council, was pivotal in bringing the whole deal to a conclusion. Over the past few months, Swansea, Carmarthen, Neath Port Talbot and Pembrokeshire councils have all worked with partners across the public and private sectors to come to a view of what is important for the future of the region to identify the steps that will allow them to produce sustainable economic growth in all parts of it. Unlike the Cardiff capital city deal, this deal begins by identifying 11 major project proposals. They’re put forward within the themes of health, energy, economic acceleration and smart manufacturing. All those proposals will require further work. They will all need to be presented. We are by no means without opportunities to take advantage of low and zero-carbon ideas as those project ideas are further developed and brought before funders. Together, they will deliver world-class facilities in physical infrastructure, together with major investment in the region’s digital infrastructure too.

The deal identifies and builds on the enormous strengths of the area. In energy, it takes the huge potential for renewables, and focuses on realising the potential of Pembroke Dock as a place for testing offshore energy technology and its commercialisation. In smart manufacturing, at the geographical opposite end of the deal area, there will be a new steel science centre, with a particular focus on environmental and energy improvement. In the life sciences—a key element in the future of the local economy—there is bolstering, through the deal, in new actions to integrate research and provide business incubator and clinical trials. And right across the whole of the deal area, the potential for economic acceleration is recognised as resting not simply on physical infrastructure, but crucially on the development of human capital. That is why, in all geographical parts of the Swansea city deal, there will be skills and talent development as an integral part of all the different investments that the deal brings.

It’s important to remember, Llywydd, too, that the development of city deals should not be seen as simply project delivery and funding vehicles. The Swansea city deal is meant to be a catalyst to capture the commitment that so many individuals and organisations demonstrate to the future prosperity of south-west Wales, to enhance a collective confidence that the investments secured through the deal can be put to work for the benefit of the whole region. And of course, as the Minister with responsibility for local government, I am particularly interested to see how the city deal unlocks the regional potential of the area. And building on what has been achieved in the Cardiff capital deal, our White Paper on local government reform proposes that the city deal areas become the place where we locate, in future, the responsibility for economic development, regional transport—as Mike has emphasised throughout his contribution—and land use planning. If you bring those responsibilities together and have them discharged on a regional basis, we believe that that will complement the deal and make sure that it delivers its full potential. To do that, the deal has a set of agreed governance arrangements, and a clear commitment to an implementation plan.

The governance arrangements are centred on a joint cabinet. It is very important, I believe, that final accountability in decision making should rest in the hands of elected individuals. Alongside the joint cabinet, there will be an economic strategy board that will be chaired by a representative of local private industry. It will monitor progress on the delivery of the deal and provide strategic advice to the joint committee on the way that the deal is operating on the ground. That governance arrangement will work with the UK Government and the Welsh Government to develop an agreed implementation, monitoring and evaluation plan in advance of implementation, and that will set out the proposed approach to making sure that we know that we can track the investments that we make and the impacts that they have on the local economy and on local communities. The city deal delivery team will provide the UK and Welsh Governments with a quarterly performance report. A joint scrutiny committee will be drawn from the membership of the four authorities to provide an independent scrutiny function and, in that way, involvement of local populations, as Suzy Davies said, is built into the way the deal is structured from the outset.

Now, anybody who has been involved in Welsh public life at local authority or at Assembly level will know that working collaboratively brings challenges as well as opportunities, but what we have seen in the Swansea bay city deal is a group of local authorities with significant other players willing to come together, willing to overcome those challenges, to find new ways of challenging traditional ways of working, to find shared objectives, and to make the compromises that are inevitable if you are going to agree on long-term investments dedicated to making the very most of the investment that is available. We stand on the cusp of this new deal, with the potential that it has for south-west Wales. Now, it will be for all those who have come round the table so successfully to date to go on demonstrating that they can turn the very promising plans that we have been able to support into real action on the ground.

That brings today’s proceedings to a close.