National Assembly for Wales

I call Members to order.

Before I call on the First Minister, I’m sure Members will wish to join with me in extending our condolences to all those affected by the recent horrific events in Las Vegas.

The first item on our agenda is questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Joyce Watson.

Yes. Throughout our history, black, Asian and minority ethnic people have brought skills and entrepreneurship to Wales. And, as we celebrate Black History Month, the theme, ‘Our stars, our future, our history’, supports our ambitions within ‘Prosperity for All’, because we know that a prosperous Wales needs diverse, creative, highly skilled and adaptable people.

I thank you, First Minister, for that answer. Last week, I was delighted to attend and speak at the launch of the tenth Welsh Black History Month. Events, which are held throughout October, help us to reflect on the rich heritage of Wales and the diverse make-up of its people and their contribution to shaping Wales. And it gives us an opportunity as a parliamentary body to reach out to black and minority ethnic people and to encourage them to become engaged with us and the work that we do. As you know, First Minister, our next Assembly apprenticeship scheme will be launched next year. Could I ask you, therefore, what steps the Welsh Government are taking to promote applications from black and ethnic communities?

Well, we’re providing £360,000 in the course of 2017-20 for the all-Wales black, Asian and minority ethnic engagement programme, providing information, of course, to the Welsh Government on key issues and challenges, and that will help us, of course, to ensure that we’re able to recruit in a way that fully reflects the population and make-up of Wales.

Three weeks ago, I attended a meeting in Wrexham with the Polish ambassador from London, the consul general from Manchester, a council representative, various agencies in attendance, and, of course, representatives of the Polish and Portuguese communities, talking about how we could develop a contact centre. In this case, the Polish consul talked about the Polish community business clubs possibly being able to raise the funding to access this. But we need somebody to facilitate a way forward, to tackle the barriers that people in these communities are continuing to face, and also, in consequence, to reduce pressure on statutory services. How could the Welsh Government help facilitate progress in this area?

Well, we look to work, of course, through our engagement with the different communities, through the various fora that we have, and also, of course, the work with the Polish ambassador and Polish diplomatic representatives in the UK. We’re more than happy to work with the ambassador in order to identify where such groups exist in Wales and how we can best engage with them. I’ll write to the Member. If I write to the Polish ambassador, perhaps if I could enclose as part of the letter the words that he’s used in this Chamber, and then of course we can see how we can best work together in order to achieve the outcome that he’s described.

First Minister, on Friday I was with the ethnic youth support team in Swansea, and they were saying that they would like to have much more support going into schools and education venues in regard to trying to get communities to work together. And so, in one school, they had a white girl wearing a hijab, and she walked down the street, and then she came back and said how different she felt she’d been treated because she was just wearing one piece of headwear that was different to how she would usually dress. And I think these types of things would help children who’ve never been introduced to other communities, or other ethnicities, in their lives to try and understand how it is to live in those everyday experiences. So, I was wondering whether you were able to speak to them—I know they work closely with the Welsh Government—in providing them with additional resource to go and do this in other schools across Wales, to make sure that, when we start at a young age, those potential problems may be alleviated by starting as early as we possibly can?

Well, can I suggest that the organisation involved goes through the usual route—talks to the Minister’s officials—and then, of course, we can consider what resources might be made available in the future?

Yes. We’re committed to providing effective patient advocacy services in Wales. Services are provided to adults by community health councils, and local health boards are responsible for arranging the provision of advocacy services to children and specialist mental health advocates.

Thank you. During our debate recently, your Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport was very much in favour of abolishing community health councils and replacing them with a new body. This is despite an inordinate amount of public objection. How ironic then, First Minister, that, in my most recent correspondence with the Cabinet Secretary regarding a problematic constituent case, he has had the audacity to suggest that I recommend to my constituents approaching their CHC, in effect passing the buck for the shortcomings of his, and your, health service. First Minister, would you not agree with me that this is rather duplicitous of the Cabinet Secretary, and would you also place on record your acknowledgement and support of the work that the community health councils and their volunteers have carried out on behalf of our patients as an advocacy service over many years?

Duplicitous—that’s the word of the day. I think we had that yesterday from the Secretary of State for Wales in his widely ignored speech. [Laughter.] I don’t accept at all that the Cabinet Secretary has been in any way duplicitous. Of course, he would refer a constituent of yours to an independent advocacy service. That’s what exists under the current structure and that’s what will exist in the future—an independent service. The Minister cannot be by nature independent, so I think the answer he’s given to you is absolutely correct: that if your patient needs advocacy, it is right that that advocacy service should be independent. It’s right, then, that it is the community health council, as they provide that service at this moment in time, and—we look to see, of course, what the responses will be to the White Paper—your constituent, I believe, has been given the right advice, based on what you’ve told me in the Chamber today.

First Minister, the Welsh Government, in January 2017, announced veterans and armed forces champions of health boards and NHS trusts in Wales. The Aneurin Bevan Local Health Board, which covers my constituents in Islwyn, named Brian Mawby as the champion. Congratulations to him. What impact does the First Minister believe these champions are having on ensuring that local service plans provide support, and that their local plans reflect the needs and priorities of the brave men and women of Wales who have bravely served our nation in our armed forces?

Very much so. We know, of course, that there are very effective champions in many aspects of public life in Wales, and they do much to influence positively the direction of the Government and, indeed, public bodies and agencies. So, yes, I very much recognise the work that your constituent has done, as many others have done across Wales, because they add to the knowledge the Government has in order for Government to act in the most appropriate way for the people.

First Minister, an independent patient voice is vital, particularly for those who can’t make themselves heard. We have made huge progress in providing advocates for people with mental health issues, but patient advocacy services are also vital to people with dementia. There have been calls for every person with dementia to have access to a skilled and independent advocate who understands dementia and is equipped to advocate effectively. First Minister, do you support this view and will you outline the actions your Government is taking to improve advocacy services for people with dementia?

Well, health boards are responsible for arranging the provision of general patient advocacy services for children, and children and young people in receipt of mental health care can be further supported to raise concerns through accessing independent mental health advocacy. All health boards in Wales have in place arrangements to provide mental health advocates trained in working with children and young people—that’s true. And, of course, we want to make sure that the patient voice is strengthened when it comes to mental health services for adults. We’ve done much, of course, to assist those organisations who are helping people and their families who are dealing with dementia, such as, for example, by pushing forward with dementia-friendly places so that people can go and live their lives as long as possible and in as familiar an environment as possible.

Questions now from the party leaders. The Plaid Cymru leader, Leanne Wood.

Diolch, Llywydd. First Minister, homelessness is a blight on any civilised society. Have you noticed that the number of rough sleepers is currently increasing?

The number of rough sleepers, according to the last count, is 141. That count took place in November of 2016. It’s difficult, of course, to count the number on a regular basis because it does fluctuate up and down, but she is right to identify the fact that rough sleeping is an issue, which is why—the Secretary will be giving his statement on the budget later—we will be looking to provide all the resource that we can in order to alleviate the problem.

Homelessness is on the increase, First Minister, and that’s from rough sleeping counts, applications for homelessness support, people in temporary accommodation, evictions—the lot. Here in Cardiff, The Wallich estimates that there’s been an 18 per cent increase in rough sleeping compared to the same quarter in 2016. It comes as no surprise, to us at least, that this is happening. Everyone predicted that this would happen as a result of welfare cuts, which, I remind you, started under the Blair Government when Lord Freud was given his first ministerial job. But it was also predictable that Westminster’s dysfunctional political system would ignore these warnings and go ahead with their cuts anyway. Why wasn’t your Government and your party more proactive in seeking the powers to not have to implement these cuts?

Well, it’s one thing to have the powers, it’s another thing to have the money. It’s one thing to say, ‘We’re going to do something’; if the money isn’t there to do it, then it becomes more difficult. What have we done? Well, we’ve just announced an additional £2.6 million to support services for rough sleepers and young people, and crucially we’ve introduced legislation to prevent homelessness in the first place. Dealing with people who are already on the street is important, but surely it must be the case as well that prevention is a priority for us. The legislation has meant more help for more people and help at an earlier stage, including rough sleepers, and the latest homelessness statistics for the first quarter of this financial year show a steady rate of success in times of increasing demand—63 per cent of all households threatened with homelessness had their homelessness prevented in Wales. That would not have happened anywhere else, and that’s as a result of the legislation.

First Minister, you can’t condemn Westminster for callousness while still accepting that the powers to prevent homelessness remain in Westminster. You’re right—you have recently reformed the homelessness system to adopt a more preventative approach, but clearly there remain a great number of people who have fallen through the very wide holes in your safety net. Now, if you accept that we are facing a homelessness crisis—and I’d be very surprised to hear you deny that we are facing a crisis—will you commit to abolishing the Pereira test to get rid of homelessness intentionality, ending priority need, so that everyone is entitled to a home?

The legislation has gone some way to addressing that. She and I are in a different position. I don’t believe that it makes sense to devolve welfare because we know that Wales is a net recipient of the overall pot. I do agree with her that the actions of the Tory Government have been heartless, unthinking, and have led to more people being homeless. I was in Brighton last week and it was extremely noticeable how bad the problem was in Brighton. We have a problem in Wales, we know that. It was far worse there. I believe part of that is because, in England, they have not enacted legislation that would help to prevent homelessness in the first place. The answer to this, of course, is to have a welfare system that works for people, a welfare system that is compassionate, and a welfare system administered by a Labour Government in London.

The leader of the opposition, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, recently the Cabinet Secretary for Education delivered a speech that highlighted that there were secondary schools in Wales that until recently had not been entering a single pupil for a GCSE science exam—not a single pupil in secondary schools in Wales. Also, there had been a tendency for many schools to enter pupils for the easier BTEC courses, where, in 2016, there was a 99 per cent pass rate. Estyn, in a recent report, have highlighted the difficulties that some science subjects face in the way they’re taught within Welsh schools. Don’t you think it is vital, if we are going to be aspirational about delivering a high-wage economy, a skilled economy, that we have more pupils entered in the sciences? And, what confidence can you give that, in the PISA examinations in 2018, we will see real improvement in the sciences? We’ve gone back by 20, from 505 to 485, from 2006 to 2016. It has to be a key area of improvement. Yet, on your watch, we’ve got schools that haven’t been entering pupils for science at all.

First of all, we have for some time in Wales been emphasising the need to create parity of esteem between the academic and the vocational. Therefore, we should not make negative comparisons between BTECs and GCSEs. One is a vocational qualification; the other is more of an academic qualification. Schools will enter candidates for the appropriate exam according to what they feel they need, in terms of their future skills.

He asks about PISA. Well, we’ve seen GCSE results improve year after year—that is a good sign as far as PISA is concerned. We’ve seen improvements in subjects at A-level—that’s a good indication that PISA will improve in the future. We have, of course, new exams—we’ve made sure that they have been rolled out without great difficulty. We’ve taken the decision to postpone the introduction of the curriculum—that’s the right decision, and we know that teachers and professionals have supported that. And, of course, we are building schools all around Wales—schools that would not be built if he were in my position.

First Minister, that was a pathetic answer. On your watch—[Interruption.] On your watch—[Interruption.] On your watch, we have had secondary schools in Wales—. And these aren’t my comments, because we can’t get the data—we’ve applied to the Welsh Government to have the data that the Cabinet Secretary based her speech on. Here’s the speech—. The speech is here; it’s her remarks, not my remarks, that say how shameful it has been that, under your Government, we have had secondary schools not entering a single—a single—student for science GCSEs—not A-levels, GCSEs. How on earth can you defend that when you’ve been First Minister for seven years? These are the remarks of your Cabinet Secretary, not mine, so how can we have confidence that we will see the improvements we need in science, technology, engineering and mathematics when we’ve had such a laissez-faire attitude from your Government?

That was a response worthy of the Secretary of State for Wales—and that’s not a compliment, by the way. The reality is that the system has been changed. We’ve just introduced, of course, the new GCSEs; that has happened. So, far from sitting back and doing nothing, we’re encouraging schools to enter pupils for GCSEs and other qualifications, and at the right time—and at the right time—so they’re not entering them early in order to get them through a particular subject and the grades are coming down as a result. That is something that we have done as a Government. [Interruption.] Well, it’s unlike David Melding to be like this, but, clearly, something has caused him to be annoyed this morning, or this afternoon.

We’re confident in what we’re doing: we’re confident in what we’re doing in terms of changing the syllabus; we are confident in what we’re doing in terms of results—we see results improving, both at GCSE and A-level. We see money going into education in a way that’s been deprived from schools by his party in England. We see schools being built across Wales that would not be built by his party if they were in power here. And, of course, we want to make sure that as many of our pupils have as many opportunities as possible to enter examinations in order to get the qualifications that they need—that’s exactly what we’ve done in terms of the system we’ve now introduced.

First Minister, David Melding is most probably getting annoyed by your performance this afternoon, because it is a very laissez-faire attitude, I have to say. You can’t defend a system that has not—[Interruption.] You cannot defend a system that has not been entering GCSE students for the sciences, and then stand there and try to defend it. I want to have confidence, First Minister, that we will see improvement. I want to see improvement in the Welsh education system. We all want to see that. But we had in the last GCSEs the worst results for 10 years. We’ve got the PISA examinations coming forward now in 2018. I asked you in the first question: where are we going to be? Give us an indicator of where we’re going to be—just give us something to come out of this First Minister’s questions where we can mark your homework as to where science will be in 2018.

Science entries are up. We changed the system partially to encourage schools to enter more students, and enter them at the time that is appropriate for them. That has been done. He talks about the worst GCSE results for 10 years—I do not recognise that, if you compare like with like. If he thinks that things are rosy in England, I suggest he needs to look at what happened in England with the system there. And he makes that comparison from time to time. Look, we will make sure that the education system is properly financed according to the settlement we get from him and his Government. If he wants to see—[Interruption.] If he wants to see more money into education, can I suggest he actually lobbies—because he’s more effective than his parliamentary colleague—his colleagues in London to get more money into education across the UK and particularly to Wales? We could do a lot more with a fairer settlement. A £1 billion bung for Northern Ireland—not a word, not a word, from the party opposite; not a word. Let’s see Wales get the same fair play and let’s see whether the Welsh Conservatives can stand up against their colleagues in Westminster.

Leader of the UKIP group, Neil Hamilton.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. This afternoon—[Interruption.] I knew that the Chamber was circular, Llywydd; I didn’t realise it revolved as well. This afternoon, we shall hear the outline budget from the finance Secretary, but his room for manoeuvre is obviously limited by the nature of the funding of the Welsh Government. Ninety-two per cent of the money that Welsh Government spends currently comes from the United Kingdom Government by block grant. So, the success of the Welsh economy and the ability of the Welsh Government to spend depends crucially upon the health of the UK economy, which, in turn, depends crucially upon the economic policies of the Government at Westminster. Does he think that the consequences for Wales of the kind of spending plans that Jeremy Corbyn outlined last week in Brighton would, in the long term, benefit the Welsh economy? They’ve been added up to about £312 billion. It must be one of the most expensive speeches in human history. That’s £4.15 billion per minute, £69.3 million per second. Such a speech programme would actually bankrupt the UK economy, and that can be nothing less than disastrous for Wales.

It has never been cheaper to borrow. In 1945, a Government came to power in the UK, presiding over a wrecked country and a wrecked economy, with far less money at its disposal. Yet it managed to create the national health service, managed to put industry back onto its feet. It managed to ensure that people’s standard of living began to rise. It dealt with a country that had been destroyed because of the effects of war. If they can do it, then a Labour Government can do it now. We’ve had seven years of austerity and nothing has changed for the better. It’s got worse and worse and worse. Seven wasted years: it’s time for a change.

I don’t want to debate economic history with the First Minister, but, immediately after the war, we did, of course, have the Marshall aid programme and actually there was a very substantial reduction in the proportion of debt to GDP during the course of the Attlee Government from 1945 to 1951. When Tony Blair came to office in 1997, the national debt stood at £359 billion and, in his first term of office, he actually reduced it further. In 2001, that was reduced to £317 billion. Then Gordon Brown turned on the spending taps, and we all know what happened with the financial crisis in 2008. The national debt—[Interruption.] The national debt now stands—[Interruption.] The national debt now stands at nearly £2 trillion and we’re spending, every single year, £56 billion on debt interest alone. If the Welsh portion of that debt interest, which would be one twentieth—that’s about £2 billion a year—was available to the Welsh Government to spend on the health service, social care, education, whatever, Wales would be very much better off than it is now.

All Governments have to borrow. Well, there are very few Governments that don’t have to borrow—usually those that are oil rich. The reality is you borrow to invest. What we’re seeing at the moment is a Government that is bumping the British economy off the ground. We know that, as far as injections of money are concerned, that’s not happening. The economy is not being stimulated. Now, he doesn’t want me to lecture him on economic history—I will, and recent economic history, which he will remember. Because he seemed to suggest that Gordon Brown was responsible for the world financial crash in 2008. The reality is the crash was caused by irresponsible banks selling financial products to people who they knew full well would not be able to repay them. Then they bundled those debts and sold them onto other banks, infecting the entire system. That’s what happened. We are still living with the consequences of that. It’s quite clear to me, then, that the old ways of doing things cannot be followed in the future. We need a Keynesian injection of cash into the economy in order to make sure that we create more employment, that we put more money in peoples’ pockets, and stimulate the economy in that way. Because it’s quite clear that, over the past seven years, what’s been done isn’t working.

You would think, from what the First Minister just said, that there hadn’t been a Labour Government from 1997 to 2008 and the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not Gordon Brown, in charge of banking regulation, whereas we know that he believed in a light-touch regulation of banking, so he was a contributor to the financial crisis, which ultimately engulfed him. Jim Callaghan knew what it was like to cope with a financial crisis. I’m sure the First Minister will remember very well that in 1976 he appeared at a rather different kind of Labour Party conference and said:

‘We used to think that you could spend your way out of a recession and increase employment by…boosting government spending. I tell you in all candour that that option no longer exists, and in so far as it ever did exist, it only worked on each occasion…by injecting a bigger dose of inflation into the economy, followed by a higher level of unemployment as the next step.’

Jeremy Corbyn, if he ever did learn that lesson, seems to have forgotten it. His role as a kind of moth-eaten Santa Claus, dipping into a bottomless bag of presents to dish out to gullible children, is not the way forward for any sensible or realistic political party that has any designs upon holding the highest offices in the land.

We have revealed to us this afternoon the UKIP strategy for dealing with appealing to young voters. ‘You are all gullible children’ is the way that they’re going to be described in the future, so I can’t see many of them voting UKIP in the future.

In the 1970s, there were particular challenges with stagflation, as he should remember, because of the soaring price of oil as a result of the 1973 oil crisis. That knocked the usual economic cycle out of sync and, as a result, we saw rising unemployment and rising inflation at the same time, meaning that the traditional way of injecting money into the economy to deal with high unemployment—[Interruption.] I can give the leader of the opposition a lecture on economic history, if he wants, as he knows less than nothing about it—[Interruption.] And so the circumstances of the 1970s are very, very different. But what I can say to him about 1976—. Here’s a statistic for him: 1976 was the time in history when Britain was most equal—when Britain was most equal. Since then, the Tories have made it more and more and more unequal, and that’s what a Labour Government will change.

Young women are more likely to be represented in single-parent households and part-working households, which are more at risk of living in poverty. We are providing a range of support to build prosperity by helping them overcome barriers to employment and to maximise their employability and access decent, well-paid work.

Diolch yn fawr. The First Minister will be aware that, last week, in the Labour Party conference, Angela Rayner, the shadow education secretary, suggested that a new Labour Government would commit to ending period poverty in schools. Does the First Minister have any intention of introducing such a measure in Wales?

Yes, I did note the announcement. It is something I know that we will look at as a Government to see how it can be dealt with in the most effective way. But it is a concept that needs to be examined very closely in order to make sure that it can be dealt with effectively in Wales.

First Minister, last week, I visited Severn Trent’s testing labs in Bridgend—you may know them already—and most of the senior team there were women. They weren’t educated recently in Wales, I’m afraid, so it doesn’t help you on Andrew’s question, but, even so, it is a great example of women getting into good STEM careers. They’re also a good example of where, in a facility where you would normally expect a degree level of education, their interest is now turning to the further education sector to see whether students from there can be brought into appropriate roles, and, as we know, people from poorer backgrounds tend to use FE a little bit more. Welsh Government announced in January that the Chief Scientific Adviser for Wales was setting up an internal working group developing the ‘Talented Women for a Successful Wales’ report findings. So, I’m wondering whether you could provide us with an update on that on that, when we might be seeing some results on the back of it.

I will write to the Member with a date as to the publication of that document. In terms of the pumping station, I’ll be there on Friday so I’ll be able to hear at first hand what they have already said to her.

In a letter to the Chair of the Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee on 17 July, the Cabinet Secretary for the economy said this: it would not be wise to publish a national action plan for poverty. Isn’t this an entirely shocking statement? No particular action plan. No targets for the mitigation of poverty. No monitoring, because there is nothing to monitor, despite the fact that over 30 per cent of children live in poverty in Wales. Do you agree with me that this is a clear sign that this Labour Government has turned its back entirely on poor families in Wales?

‘No’ is the answer to that. Poverty is something that’s being dealt with across Government; it just doesn’t come under the portfolio of one Minister, because we know how important it is. If you look at what we published last week then it’s obvious that we consider poverty as something that it’s vital we resolve in Wales, and the way of doing that is to ensure that people have the skills that they need, that they have the opportunities that they need, and that they can have free childcare—and that’s something that we put in our manifesto in the election and we’re moving forward to act on that—and that there are jobs available to them that are well paid. We don’t have every lever within our grasp, because we know that there is much around employability and payment that is in the hands of the United Kingdom Government, but we must ensure that we can do everything possible in Wales in order to address poverty.

First Minister, the child poverty action group has identified very early on that the way that universal credit is structured poses a real risk to the financial autonomy of women in the household. It actually undermines their ability to be autonomous and to have financial independence.

We now know from Citizens Advice Cymru that some people in the pilot areas, some women, are giving up work due to childcare issues, as a direct result of the design and the roll-out of universal credit as it is. And we now know, of course, this week, according to the Government’s own figures, that over 80 per cent—over 80 per cent—of recipients of universal credit that is being rolled out are now falling into rent arears. The Government’s own pilot areas are showing that it is an unmitigated disaster and it is driving young women, but also all people, into poverty. Could I ask the First Minister what further representations he can make to the UK Government? Because the impact in all of our communities is going to be significant.

Well, we’ll continue to make those representations, but we’ll have to get in a queue. I mean, their own MPs are saying that the roll-out should be stopped. If I could sum up the attitude of the Conservative Government, it would be this: lessen the financial burden on the rich—cut tax—and increase the financial burden on the poorest—getting rid of tax credits, the bedroom tax, universal credit. We know, of course, that on top of that they do these things incompetently, and that’s what the current roll-out of universal credit is doing. The leader of the opposition finds it funny. When we talk about welfare, he finds it funny. Well, why doesn’t he go and talk to people who are affected by this? Why doesn’t he go and talk to people about the threat of homelessness? Why doesn’t he go and talk to people who find themselves in a position where they’re going into rent arrears? Then he might learn what real life is actually about. Because we deal with these issues on a regular basis, on a constituency basis, and we see the inhumanity of universal credit, along with so many other of the policies developed by a Conservative Government that benefit only the richest.

Devolution of funding for rail infrastructure remains with the UK Government. They have refused to devolve that. Despite this position, since 2011, the Welsh Government has invested around £200 million into a programme of rail infrastructure improvements, including additional and enhanced rail services in the mid and west.

I thank the First Minister for that response. We welcome the Welsh Government’s funding for a feasibility study to reopen the Aberystwyth to Carmarthen railway line. I’m sure he’ll agree with me that the best way to revive railway lines that were closed largely in the 1960s under the Beeching plan would be to produce low-cost opportunities for the trains and carriages that would work on the track. Because it’s the operating costs that are going to be the big stumbling block. There’s been an estimate of a £700 million total cost to reopen this particular line. But there have been some very encouraging studies done of no-frills trains being manufactured using lightweight materials and running at low speeds, which may be introduced in the next two years as the result of a £4 million trial. So, will the First Minister do everything he can to encourage the introduction of this new technology that will offer the opportunity to open up perhaps many more lines in rural Wales that were closed years ago?

No. What he’s talking about is light rail. It’s a model that’s used for suburban railways and for short journeys. I don’t think a 50-mile journey between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth is best served by a light rail carriage with hard seating, for example, without the kind of facilities you’d expect from a longer distance train. And, of course, with light rail, you end up in a situation where, it’s true, it’s cheaper, because the signal requirements are not the same, for example, but the comfort levels are way, way lower and I don’t think people in the west of our country should have a train service that is far less comfortable than would be expected along an equivalent route in England. If we’re going to move forward—. It’s a significant challenge—I don’t think we can underestimate it—a significant challenge and a significant cost to reinstate the Aberystwyth to Carmarthen line, but if it’s going to be done, it’s got to be done properly.

First Minister, I was pleased that the Cabinet Secretary confirmed that Carno station will be included in the current stage 2 assessment process for new stations in Wales. A petition will also be submitted to the Assembly tomorrow from the Carno station action group, 10 years after the first petition, urging the Government to reopen Carno station within a five-year timescale. Now that the Cabinet Secretary has announced that Carno will be considered, will you outline what the next steps are during this process, and do you feel that five years is a realistic timetable for the reopening of Carno station?

Just to inform the Member, the next stage is that, as he knows, the Cabinet Secretary has decided to include Carno in the current round of stage 2 assessments. What does that involve? It involves obtaining information from Network Rail on deliverability and operational considerations on the prioritised stations. In addition, a standard assessment model has been run to assess the anticipated demand at the proposed stations as well. I know that the Cabinet Secretary has asked officials to engage with the action group as part of the stage 2 process. So, that’s where we are now, but he will know, of course, what our intention is. There are many unknowns. When you deal with Network Rail, it’s not always clear what the challenges are. We’ve found that in the past, where problems have been identified that were not known at the time that an announcement was made. But it is our intention, he will know, to reopen Carno, pending, of course, the assessment.

As I understand it from what the First Minister and the Minister for the economy have said in the past, the current situation is that the franchise will commence without the full powers or the full budget having been devolved to the Welsh Government, and therefore the Welsh Government to all intents and purposes will be an agent for the Westminster Government. Now, if that is the case, can I ask you plainly in light of what happened in terms of electrification to Swansea, do you trust in the Westminster Government to transfer full powers in time and, importantly, to transfer the full funding additionally?

If they don’t do that, we won’t be able to move forward—it’s as plain as that. We have done everything that we need to do, and so now they must take action. But there is no indication at present that there will be a problem. We wish the franchise to progress as it should in April. We’re also talking to the unions to ensure that they understand what we’re trying to do. It would be much easier had they devolved the funding and the powers to us from the outset, particularly the power to instruct Network Rail. We don’t have that at the moment, so we have to consider new ways of doing things. But what is important is that we can act on behalf of the people of Wales in a way that wasn’t possible previously.

First Minister, there was an awful lot to welcome in the transport Minister’s latest statement on the next franchise, and what was particularly welcome was the commitment to keep a guard on every single service, something that people have campaigned quite heavily to see, and they welcome it. The other commitment was that the new rolling stock should be maintained by workers, ideally, here in Wales. Very recently, I had a tour around the investment that’s been made in the Machynlleth depot, and met some of the 33 highly skilled employees that reside there and work there. So, going forward, First Minister, can I ask that we will do all that we can to ensure a positive future for that that we’ve already invested in, in both Machynlleth station and the people who work there?

Absolutely. If I remember rightly, Machynlleth had a depot in the 1980s, then it closed, then it reopened, because it was needed, clearly, to service trains on the centre of Wales and Cambrian Coast lines. So, yes, we want to make sure that not only do we keep our network of depots, but we increase the number in the future, because we know that there will be new rolling stock, there will be new modes of transport that we will look at, and it’s important, then, that the equipment is maintained in Wales as far as is possible.

It’s important to consider the performance of the Welsh economy using a basket of indicators and not look at one individual measure. Of course, ‘Prosperity for All’ shows the way forward. The plans that will follow will provide greater detail.

I thank you for that answer, First Minister, but in measuring not only wealth creation, but also health, education, housing provision et cetera, is Ron Davies, the former Labour Welsh Secretary, correct when he says that, after 20 years of a Labour-controlled Welsh Assembly, Wales is now poorer than it was 20 years ago? This former Labour luminary went on to say that he is not able to name a single initiative that has improved the lives of the people of Wales. Surely, First Minister, you have to agree that this is as damning an analysis of Labour policies since devolution as any expressed in this Chamber.

‘No’ is the answer. Now, where do we start? Let’s start with Jobs Growth Wales, shall we? The fact that so many people were helped to get into jobs, young people were given training. Let’s look at the help that was given to workers to keep their jobs when the recession hit hard in 2008-09. Let’s talk about the people who are alive because of the Human Transplantation (Wales) Act 2013, supported cross-party across this Chamber. Let’s look at the fact we have the best foreign direct investment figures for 30 years. Let’s look at our employment levels. I suspect, really, that Ron needs to read a few more papers.

The Federation of Small Businesses has claimed that Welsh Government offices overseas have failed in their aim of boosting exports to those countries. Figures suggest that exports to those countries have, in fact, fallen between 2013 and 2016, down 13 per cent to the United States, down 22 per cent to Belgium and 55 per cent to Japan. First Minister, what plans does the Welsh Government have to review the effectiveness of its overseas offices in boosting trade with the countries in which they are located?

He’s fallen into a trap there, set for him by the UK Government, because what has happened is that the methodology has changed, so that—if I remember rightly—if you have a factory in Wales that is exporting, but its headquarters are in England, it’s counted as an English export. That’s the problem. So, all of a sudden, we see these sudden changes in the export figures, not because physically fewer goods are being exported, but it’s because they’re counted as having come from England because their headquarters are in England. We know that many organisations in Wales that manufacture don’t have their headquarters in Wales.

He asks a question: what are we doing to boost our presence overseas? We are moving ahead with a strategy to do just that. The balance that has to be struck is between: do you boost an existing office or do you open a new office? We commissioned work from the Public Policy Institute for Wales; they gave us information as to how we should approach that. Over the next few months, Members will hear of new office openings and, of course, boosting of staff abroad in order to make sure that we boost our presence, working quite often with the Department for International Trade—in fact, most often with DIT—but in those markets where Wales has a strong presence and needs to strengthen its presence in the future.

Isn’t it true, though, First Minister, that despite what you said about unemployment levels—and that is welcome; they dipped below the UK average for a period in the early 1990s as well, didn’t they? But the problem is in terms of income, in terms of prosperity. You can choose any number of a basket of indicators, whether it’s average earnings, household disposable income, gross value added per capita, income per hour worked, et cetera. We have gone backwards compared with where we were at the beginning of devolution, and that wasn’t what was promised. So, where are we going wrong and what is the indicator—how are we going to measure the, hopefully, success that will come at some point in the future?

It’s not that we’ve gone backwards, and that people are somehow poorer than they were. What is correct to say is that, as our gross domestic product—or if you want to measure gross domestic household income as well— has gone up, it has not improved at the same rate as other parts of the UK. That’s the accurate description. He asked the question: what do we do about it? At the heart of it all is skills—it’s skills. What happened at the beginning of devolution is we did see a lot of those businesses that, I think, came here because of the money and provided unskilled work—they left. They went to Hungary. A business in my own constituency went to Hungary. They went to lower cost economies, because all they wanted to do was to manufacture cheaply. Now, we can’t play that game, nor should we try and do it. So, the focus now, heavily, is on skills. One of the questions we’ve always been asked by overseas investors is, ‘Have your people got the skills that we need in order for us to be able to function in Wales?’ Increasingly, of course, the answer is ‘yes’.

We work very closely with further education colleges and we work with our universities in a way that, 10 years ago, wasn’t happening. Our universities were not interested in working towards economic development at that point; they saw themselves purely as academic institutions. In fairness to them, they’ve changed. It will take some time for the fruit of that work to come through, but we are seeing investors coming to Wales that, bluntly, wouldn’t have come 20 years ago—high-end investors who are paying more in terms of the jobs that they create. What’s key now is to keep on moving on that track, not just in terms of FDI. He will make the point, I understand, in terms of encouraging SMEs in Wales. It’s not a question of one or the other, and that’s exactly what we want to do as well, working again with the universities and others, making sure that young entrepreneurs who have good ideas get the support they need to put those ideas into practice. Increasingly, across Wales, we are now seeing those businesses starting to be created and to grow.

On 26 September the Cabinet Secretary for Education launched ‘Education in Wales: Our national mission’. That reaffirms our commitment to building a transformational curriculum in order to deliver a better education system for Wales.

I broadly welcome the Welsh Government’s approach to implementing the recommendations of Professor Graham Donaldson, but Members will be aware of Professor Donaldson’s comments that were reported by the BBC this morning, in which he remarked that ‘progress remained good’, but also cautioned against

‘any loss of momentum in the whole dynamic of this reform’.

What discussions has the Welsh Government had with Professor Donaldson with regard to the changes that were announced by the Cabinet Secretary last week? And what would be the First Minister’s response to Professor Donaldson’s concerns about a potential loss of momentum?

Well, Professor Donaldson actually oversees the implementation board. He agrees that we’ve made the right decision to introduce the curriculum as a phased roll-out rather than a big bang. The approach will mean that all schools have the time to engage with the development of the curriculum and be fully prepared, of course, for the changes. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development have already said that we need to continue our drive to create a curriculum for the twenty-first century, and that’s what we will do, but at the appropriate pace.

First Minister, while we welcomed the postponement of the implementation of the curriculum, one aspect that still concerns us is the fact that secondary schools will be required to deliver two curricula for pupils in those schools for a period of five years. Now, that’s going to cause absolute havoc and I believe it’s a recipe for chaos for, particularly, newly qualified teachers coming into the system, who will have been trained to deliver a new curriculum but are having to deliver the old, and for the already burdened profession that we have out there, 70-odd per cent of which said that they felt overworked and stressed because of their workload. So, what are you going to do to make sure that schools are geared up to deliver two curricula to the pupils in those schools and ensure that pupil attainment doesn’t dip as a result, and that staff aren’t overworked more so than they are now?

Well, if that was a concern, then the teaching unions wouldn’t support this, but they have. They have supported the phased implementation. Teaching skills are transferable. It’s not the case that somebody is trained to teach a particular curriculum. They have teaching skills that they adapt according to the curriculum that’s before them. It’s hardly unknown, of course, for schools to teach different curriculums at the same time. When the national curriculum came in, schools had to gear up for that. There was often overlap at that point. Foundation phase was the same. My father worked in education in the 1980s and I can tell you, things used to change almost on a half-yearly basis, which the teachers had to deal with. So obsessed were Ministers at that time—and they weren’t Welsh Ministers; they didn’t have control over education then, over the syllabus—teachers found themselves having to satisfy the whims of Ministers who wanted to change things all the time. Now, that surely is not the best approach. It’s hugely important that we don’t introduce a curriculum until the profession is ready. They’ve indicated that they’re content with this approach, and that is why we’ve taken the approach that we have.

Betsi Cadwaladr University Local Health Board, supported by our Train, Work, Live campaign, is actively recruiting additional nurses.

At the last count, 92 nurse posts at Wrexham Maelor Hospital were vacant, with a number of nurses approaching retirement age also. Now, the shortage of nurses means that specialist nurses regularly now have to work on general wards and it’s a daily crisis in the hospital, which is the largest in north Wales. The expensive foreign recruitment of the health board in India and Barcelona, through a private agency, has been an utter failure; only four nurses from India have managed to pass the language test. So, given the failure of your Government to plan the workforce over a number of years, and having placed Betsi Cadwaladr in special measures over two and a half years ago now, do you take responsibility for this awful situation?

We see that things are improving. For example, there’s been an increase in the number of nurses training in north Wales. That figure is now higher than in any year over the past decade. So, we have invested in recruitment and also, of course, in training. That means that there’s been an increase of 13 per cent in nursing places in Wales over this financial year. We’ve put a £95 million investment into training, and that means that 3,000 new students can now study healthcare programmes in Wales. It is challenging, of course, because people don’t wish to come to the United Kingdom any longer because of Brexit, and they feel that they wouldn’t be welcome now. Of course, that is something that happened last year, but in order to deal with that, we understand that we need to train more nurses in Wales. That is why we’ve seen a significant increase in the numbers being trained.

Well, of course, the submission is welcome. It’s important that the public inquiry is open and detailed. That, of course, is what is happening at the moment.

Thank you. In its evidence to the M4 public inquiry, the Government acknowledged that a new motorway will inflict long-term harm, but this would be outweighed by the short-term economic benefits. The Government’s own independent adviser, the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales has now said that this is incompatible with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. The watchdog of the Act says that that these trade-offs are no longer lawful in Wales. Would the First Minister agree to set up an expert group to quickly design a solution to the congestion on the M4 that is compatible with a law that we passed?

Well, that is precisely what’s happening now because we have got an independent inquiry that is looking at the M4. It was designed to be as broad as possible—so it didn’t just look at one particular scheme—and that’s what it’s doing. So, it’s important that that inquiry is able to report dispassionately and independently, considering all the evidence before it.

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item on the agenda is the business statement and announcement, and I call on the leader of the house, Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd. There’s one change to today’s agenda—the time allocated to the draft budget has been extended to 90 minutes. Business for the next three weeks is as shown on the business statement and announcement found among the agenda papers, which are available to Members electronically.

Leader of the house, could we have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for health, please, in relation to a report about the realignment of district general hospitals in the Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board area and the Cwm Taf Local Health Board area? To date, I do not believe a statement has been forthcoming. This does have quite large implications for people in the west of the Vale of Glamorgan who use the Princess of Wales Hospital as their main district general hospital, and GP surgeries in particular in the western Vale who refer to the Princess of Wales Hospital. To give security of understanding of how these proposals might or might not progress, a Government statement would be welcome to actually see what the thinking is on the rationale behind any proposed changes in the current configuration of the health boards that run the Princess of Wales Hospital and the Royal Glamorgan Hospital, i.e. Cwm Taf health board and Abertawe Bro Morgannwg.

Well, of course, these are matters that are out for consideration in terms of consultation, and those options and suggestions were made clear in the recent statement and White Paper. So, clearly, there is an opportunity to consider this in terms of the importance, which is delivering a service to the local people.

Can we have a statement from the Welsh Government on the planning crisis in the county borough of Caerphilly? There is no active local development plan at the moment and, as a result, the planning system is heavily skewed in favour of developers and, indeed, inappropriate unsustainable development. Recent adjudications by the planning inspector have highlighted the fact that the five-year land supply requirement trumps all other considerations, including the much celebrated well-being of future generations Act. So, can we have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary in order to suspend the need for Caerphilly to demonstrate the five-year land supply until a sustainable local development plan is in place in that county borough?

Well, of course, this is a matter for Caerphilly County Borough Council. Clearly, they are aware and are engaged in this issue and, of course, there’s a robust discussion and debate locally about it. And, of course, that is what we’ll take forward in terms of the Cabinet Secretary’s engagement with it.

Can I ask for two Government statements? The first from the Cabinet Secretary for Education in relation to the steps taken by the Welsh Government to tackle lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender bullying in schools. I acknowledge the readiness of the Cabinet Secretary to meet with myself and Hannah Blythyn to discuss this issue. She’ll be aware of the report published in the last week by Stonewall Cymru, which discloses that more than half of LGBT young people in Wales, and 73 per cent of trans young people in Wales, still face bullying at school, with very serious consequences in many examples. The report calls on a number of recommendations on the part of Welsh Government and local authorities, and I’d welcome a statement in relation to what steps the Government is taking on an issue the Government acknowledges is significant.

And a second statement, please, in relation to what support the Welsh Government is giving to the Swansea city of culture bid, which we hope will benefit the broader Swansea bay region. The current UK City of Culture, Hull, has seen significant investment in its region as a consequence. Our region has suffered a Conservative betrayal in relation to electrification, and we fear that will happen in relation to the lagoon, so we’d welcome a statement on Government support for that bid.

I thank Jeremy Miles for both those questions. I think Members will be aware of the latest ‘School Report’ 2017 by Stonewall Cymru, and it is encouraging to note that, in fact, that report shows that the number of lesbian, gay and bi pupils bullied because of their sexual orientation has fallen by almost a third. But we obviously recognise there’s much more we have to do to prevent potentially long-term educational and emotional damage that bullying can cause. The Cabinet Secretary for Education’s been very clear that she expects schools to adopt a zero-tolerance approach to all forms of bullying, including homophobic, biphobic or transphobic bullying, and we recognise, of course, in terms of that school report, and the existing anti-bullying guidance, that that requires us to take into account the latest report and whether updating is required.

On your second point, of course the Welsh Government fully supports the city and county of Swansea’s bid to become UK City of Culture for 2021. It would, obviously if successful, provide Swansea with significant funds. We’ve already provided additional in-kind support to help Swansea with the practical challenges of delivering the year, for example in tourism and marketing expertise, and of course it complements the city deal and accelerates the city’s regeneration. And, of course, post Brexit, it will show the world that Wales remains outward-facing and open for business. So, the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure will join Swansea council, and senior officials, when the City of Culture assessment panel visits the city on 23 October. I was very pleased to be in Swansea last week, last Thursday, when the bid was formally put in by the leader of the council, with his cabinet and partners, when I visited the Tabernacle in Morriston in Mike Hedges’s constituency to celebrate the fact that they’ve been awarded the Sacred Wales honour.

May I ask for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for economy on support for businesses in Newport? In March this year it was revealed that Newsquest was closing its sub-editing hub in Newport with the loss of 14 jobs, in spite of receiving more than £340,000 in grant aid from the Welsh Government. Then, in July, Essentra announced plans to close its packaging factory, putting hundreds of jobs at risk. They had previously received more than £0.5 million pounds from the Welsh Government. Leader of the house, can we have a statement from the Cabinet Secretary on the terms and conditions on which Welsh Government grants are made to companies and whether he believes they need to be reviewed to ensure their objectives are achieved and the maximum benefits for the taxpayer is obtained? Thank you.

I know the Cabinet Secretary would want to update not only on the investment in Newport and support for business, but also on the good news that has been announced recently in terms of development, which will benefit the local economy. Of course, his officials are closely engaged, when businesses have difficulties, particularly those businesses where we have already supported them in terms of their development.

In September, I attended the Fair Funding Wales anti-austerity rally at city hall in Cardiff, along with other Members from this Assembly, and more recently leaders and mayors throughout the UK went up to Westminster in order to have a meeting, they hoped, with the Government about the issue of fair funding, which did not take place, and of course today we have a statement on the draft budget by the Cabinet Secretary after nine years of austerity, of continuous cuts. And so, given the fact that, by 2019-20, the Welsh Government’s revenue budget is due to be down by £1.2 billion, can the leader of the house suggest any way forward, through the business of this house, that we can bring this issue further to the front?

I thank Julie Morgan for that question. And, of course, immediately after our business statement, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, as you said, will be publishing the Welsh Government’s outline draft budget for 2018-19, making an oral statement. We’ve repeatedly called—certainly led by the Cabinet Secretary—on the UK Government to end its damaging and flawed policy of austerity. And it was good to see partners coming together—leaders and mayors, and, indeed, Assembly Members, certainly—supporting that call, that anti-austerity rally, at city hall in Cardiff. But we do have the first opportunity this afternoon to debate the draft budget, on the day it’s published. And there will be a further opportunity to repeat our call to the UK Government to choose a different path, to end austerity.

The Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee visited the SOLCER house in Bridgend last week. Not only did we learn the results of the performance of this fantastic house as a power station, which is now generating more electricity than it’s using for nine months of the year, we also learnt about five different retrofits that Cardiff University and the other partners had undertaken, in five very different types of housing. And, certainly for affordable sums, they were able to completely transform these otherwise very-difficult-to-heat homes, including one that was a void—had been void for many years—and is now attracting a premium rent because of the quality of the housing it offers.

So, I’m fully aware that Arbed has done a great job—over £70 million over several years, and some 20,000 homes, I think, have been improved—but I wondered if we could have a statement from the Government on how the Warm Homes programme of the Welsh Government is going to tackle or accelerate the strategy, now that we know how we can retrofit existing homes, given that 80 per cent of the houses that are going to be lived in in 2030 have already been built. Not only do we need to build energy-efficient homes, but we need to, obviously, tackle the fuel poverty that many of our communities are suffering. So, I wondered if we could have a statement on how we can accelerate that programme, in the light of new understanding of how we can go about it.

The second point I wondered if we could have a statement on is that there was, last week, a report on the take-up in different local authorities of council tax discounts for carers of disabled and very sick people by local authority. And there was a huge differential between one local authority and another—in some cases, up to 77 times the take-up. So, I wondered if it’s possible to have a statement on the take-up in Wales, by local authority, of the council tax discount for carers, so that we can see which local authorities are properly promoting it.

Thank you, Jenny Rathbone. I think you’ll be very pleased to hear, following your committee visit to the SOLCER house, learning about those different types of retrofitting, in line with local vernacular, that we are investing £104 million in Welsh Government Warm Homes over the next four years, to improve a further 25,000 homes. And we’ll continue to look at options to increase the scale of our own energy-efficiency programmes. And, of course, recognising our decarbonisation ambitions can’t be achieved through Government funding alone. This requires collaboration across all sectors, to increase the uptake of energy-efficiency measures, particularly amongst those able-to-pay households. So, that’s something that the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs is looking at carefully, in terms of how to best drive this change, and increase activity in this area.

On your second point, I think the report you referred to was the MoneySavingExpert report. It does provide additional insight into how council tax is managed across local authorities, and the Cabinet Secretary will be outlining his plans for local government finance next week, because we’ve just published research into the approaches that local authorities are taking in handling council tax debt, and the Cabinet Secretary is considering the range of evidence in this field, and we’ll be taking a number of steps to make our commitment to council tax fairer.

Thank you, leader of the house.

The next item, therefore, is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for finance on the draft budget for 2018-19, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary to make the statement. Mark Drakeford.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Today, I lay the Welsh Government’s draft budget before the National Assembly. It’s a budget crafted in a period of austerity that has by now lasted longer than seven years, and under the shadow of further cuts to come. Today, for the first time, I published alongside the budget a report from the chief economist for Wales about future public finances and our economic prospects. It provides some stark messages: if the United Kingdom Government continues on its present path, then we will face a further extension in a period of austerity already unprecedented in length and depth.

Llywydd, dyma'r cefndir llwm i baratoi cyllideb Cymru heddiw. Wrth i'r anawsterau ddyfnhau, rydym yn parhau i fod yn ymrwymedig i wneud popeth a allwn i helpu ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus i ateb yr heriau gwirioneddol y maent yn eu hwynebu heddiw, gan gymryd camau nawr i wella'r rhagolygon ar gyfer y dyfodol.

Yn unol â'r weithdrefn newydd y cytunodd y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol hwn â hi ar gyfer cyllideb eleni, mae'r wybodaeth sydd gerbron Aelodau'r Cynulliad heddiw’n nodi prif flociau adeiladu'r gyllideb: o ble mae'r arian yn dod a sut y caiff ei ddyrannu i wahanol adrannau'r llywodraeth. Yn hwyrach y mis hwn, bydd y Llywodraeth yn cyhoeddi mwy o fanylder na'r hyn a ddarparwyd yn flaenorol, gan esbonio sut y mae Gweinidogion portffolio unigol yn bwriadu defnyddio'r adnoddau sydd ar gael iddynt. Llywydd, rwyf wedi gwrando'n ofalus iawn ar y galwadau gan y gwasanaeth iechyd, awdurdodau lleol ac eraill sy'n darparu gwasanaethau hanfodol ledled Cymru ynglŷn â phwysigrwydd gallu cynllunio’n bellach na 12 mis i’r dyfodol. Er gwaethaf yr ansicrwydd gwirioneddol yr ydym yn ei wynebu, ac sydd wedi dylanwadu ar y gyllideb hon, rwyf wedi gallu amlinellu cynlluniau refeniw ar gyfer y ddwy flynedd nesaf a chynlluniau cyfalaf ar gyfer tair.

Wrth osod blociau adeiladu ein cyllideb, Llywydd, yn gyntaf rwy'n troi at fater pwysig cronfeydd wrth gefn. Fel yr wyf wedi’i drafod yn flaenorol gyda'r Pwyllgor Cyllid, rwyf wedi cymryd ymagwedd arbennig o lym at gronfeydd wrth gefn yn ystod dwy flynedd gyntaf tymor y Cynulliad hwn. Er bod dyraniadau yn ystod y flwyddyn wedi'u gwneud o gronfeydd wrth gefn at ddibenion hanfodol, fy mwriad oedd defnyddio cymaint â phosibl o gronfa wrth gefn newydd Cymru, a drafodwyd yn rhan o'r fframwaith cyllidol. Mae'r cytundeb hwnnw'n golygu y gallwn fynd ag uchafswm o £350 miliwn ymlaen i'r gronfa wrth gefn honno o fis Ebrill nesaf ymlaen, a gwneud hynny heb rwystr gan y cyfyngiadau yr ydym wedi eu hwynebu o orfod cadw at fecanwaith cyfnewid cyllidebau Trysorlys y DU. Diolch i gymorth fy holl gydweithwyr yn y Cabinet, rwyf wedi llwyddo i gynllunio'r gyllideb hon ar y sail bod cronfa wrth gefn Cymru ar ei huchafswm, neu’n agos iawn at hynny, ar ddechrau'r flwyddyn ariannol nesaf. Yna, gallaf ddefnyddio manteision y rheolaeth ddarbodus hon i helpu i ddiogelu ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus rhag y gwaethaf o'r toriadau yn y blynyddoedd anoddach sydd o'n blaenau.

Yn benodol, Llywydd, rwy'n bwriadu cymryd dau gam. Rwyf wedi penderfynu lleihau lefel yr arian wrth gefn yn ystod y flwyddyn, y byddai'n rhaid imi ei gadw fel arall. O ganlyniad, rhyddhawyd £40 miliwn mewn refeniw ym mhob blwyddyn i’w fuddsoddi mewn gwasanaethau cyhoeddus. Ar yr un pryd, bydd lefel cronfa wrth gefn Cymru yn caniatáu imi ryddhau £75 miliwn arall yn 2019-20, mewn ffordd a reolir, i ategu ein cyllid refeniw.

Heb y penderfyniadau hyn, Llywydd, byddai gwasanaethau cyhoeddus Cymru yn wynebu gostyngiadau pellach o £115 miliwn yn 2019-20. Mae hyn bron yn union y swm y mae'r Canghellor yn bwriadu ei dorri o’n cyllidebau yn y flwyddyn honno, o ganlyniad i'r gwerth £3.5 biliwn o doriadau heb eu dyrannu sy'n dal i hongian dros ein gwasanaethau. Rwy’n ailadrodd, unwaith eto, fy ngalwad arno y prynhawn yma i beidio â bwrw ymlaen â'r toriadau annheg a gwrthgynhyrchiol hynny. Ni fydd trethdalwyr Cymru yn cyfrannu dim llai yn y flwyddyn honno nag y maent yn ei wneud nawr, ond byddant yn cael eu twyllo o ganlyniad i'r camau y mae'r Canghellor yn dal i fwriadu eu cymryd.

Llywydd, rwy'n troi nawr at wariant cyfalaf. Rwy’n ailadrodd y neges yr wyf i a Gweinidogion cyllid o'r Alban ac o Ogledd Iwerddon wedi’i rhoi i dîm y Trysorlys yn Llundain: tra bod cyfraddau llog yn parhau i fod yn hanesyddol o isel, dyma'r amser i fenthyca i fuddsoddi yn ein dyfodol ar y cyd ac i greu'r amodau lle y gellir sicrhau ffyniant.

Yn ei ddatganiad hydref y llynedd, aeth y Canghellor ryw ffordd i atgyweirio'r difrod a wnaeth ei ragflaenydd. Rwy’n ei annog i wneud mwy eleni. O ganlyniad i'r cyfalaf ychwanegol a'r ffactor anghenion newydd yn fformiwla Barnett, bydd ein cyllideb yn 2019-20 at ddibenion buddsoddi hanfodol nawr 20 y cant yn is nag yr oedd yn 2009-10, yn hytrach na 27 y cant, ond, mae gostyngiad o 20 y cant ar adeg o angen brys yn doriad mawr iawn wir.

Felly, rydym wedi parhau i adeiladu ar y sylfeini a sefydlwyd gan fy rhagflaenydd, Jane Hutt, i ddatblygu ffyrdd newydd ac arloesol y gallwn lenwi'r bwlch cyfalaf hwnnw. Yr egwyddor sy'n sail i hyn oll yw y byddwn bob amser yn defnyddio'r ffurfiau cyfalaf lleiaf costus i gyd cyn symud ymlaen at ffynonellau eraill. Yn unol â'r egwyddor hon ac yn y gyllideb hon, byddwn yn defnyddio gwerth £4.8 biliwn o gyfalaf confensiynol, gan gynnwys cyllid grantiau a thrafodion ariannol a ddarperir drwy'r grant bloc. Yna byddwn yn benthyca £375 miliwn mewn cyfalaf—£125 miliwn y flwyddyn dros y tair blynedd nesaf—y tro cyntaf inni ddefnyddio'r pwerau benthyca newydd sydd ar gael yn uniongyrchol i Lywodraeth Cymru. Hyd yn oed ar ôl gwneud hynny, byddwn yn mynd ymhellach ac yn lliniaru'r pwysau cyllidebol ar gyrff cyhoeddus eraill a chymdeithasau tai i'w galluogi i wneud gwerth £400 miliwn o fenthyca ar gyfer buddsoddiad cyfalaf hanfodol.

A, Llywydd, pan fyddwn wedi cyflawni hynny i gyd, awn ymhellach eto. Byddwn yn sicrhau buddsoddiad gwerth dros £1 biliwn drwy'r cynlluniau model buddsoddi ar y cyd, sydd mor bwysig yn ein gwasanaeth iechyd, yn ein gwasanaeth addysg ac mewn trafnidiaeth. Y tu hwnt i hynny hefyd, byddwn yn ceisio tynnu i lawr cymaint o'r £208 miliwn o gronfeydd strwythurol yr UE sydd ar gael inni ar gyfer prosiectau cyfalaf, a byddwn yn bwrw ymlaen i geisio cymeradwyaeth i brosiectau allweddol pellach yn ystod y cyfnod nesaf, gan gynnwys metro de Cymru.

Yr hyn sy’n ganolog i hyn oll yw sut y mae’r penderfyniadau cyllido cyfalaf yr ydym yn eu gwneud yn cael effaith gronnol ar refeniw. Mae penderfyniadau hanesyddol, gan gynnwys PFI, a wnaethpwyd gan fwyaf cyn datganoli ei hun, yn golygu bod angen ychydig dros £100 miliwn mewn refeniw ar gyfartaledd ym mhob blwyddyn o'r gyllideb. Mae'r penderfyniadau a wnaethpwyd yn fwy diweddar i alluogi buddsoddiad arloesol mewn seilwaith cyhoeddus yn ychwanegu £30 miliwn arall at y swm hwnnw.

Mae hynny i gyd, Llywydd, yn dod â mi at ein hadnoddau refeniw. Ers datganoli pwerau treth, mae'r trefniadau ariannu ar gyfer Llywodraeth Cymru wedi newid. Bellach mae gennym y pŵer i godi refeniw yn uniongyrchol i ariannu gwasanaethau cyhoeddus drwy drethi datganoledig. Serch hynny, bydd mwyafrif helaeth y cyllid ar gyfer Cymru yn parhau i fod drwy'r grant bloc o'r DU, sy’n dal i gyfrif am bron i 80 y cant o'r refeniw sydd ar gael yn 2019-20.

Mae'r gyllideb ddrafft hon yn gweithredu am y tro cyntaf o dan y fframwaith cyllidol y cytunodd Llywodraethu Cymru a'r DU arno fis Rhagfyr diwethaf. Mae'r trefniadau hyn yn golygu y bydd Cymru'n cael £47 miliwn ychwanegol dros gyfnod y gyllideb hon, ac mae’r holl arian hwnnw wedi cael ei ddefnyddio i gefnogi ein gwasanaethau cyhoeddus.

Llywydd, mae hon yn foment hanesyddol inni yng Nghymru. Hwn fydd y tro cyntaf i ni, fel Aelodau'r Cynulliad Cenedlaethol, fod â’r pwerau i osod cyfraddau ein trethi ein hunain. Gyda'r pwerau newydd hynny, wrth gwrs, daw mwy o gyfrifoldebau, ac wrth inni ddechrau’r cyfnod newydd hwn o ddatganoli, byddwn yn darparu sefydlogrwydd a sicrwydd i drethdalwyr a dinasyddion Cymru. Nid yw hynny'n golygu bod rhaid inni gadw'r trethi fel y maent heddiw; mae gennym gyfle nawr i ddefnyddio'r offer newydd hyn i wneud newidiadau i helpu i symud Cymru ymlaen.

Llywydd, yn y gyllideb hon, rwy’n gwneud penderfyniadau ynglŷn â'r ddwy dreth gyntaf i'w datganoli i Gymru. Rwy’n mynd i ddechrau â’r dreth gwarediadau tirlenwi. Gallaf gyhoeddi heddiw y bydd y cyfraddau safonol ac is yn parhau i fod yn gyson â threth y DU am y ddwy flynedd nesaf, gan ddarparu'r sefydlogrwydd y mae busnesau wedi dweud wrthym mor glir bod ei angen arnynt. Rwy'n bwriadu gwneud y gyfradd ar gyfer gwarediadau anawdurdodedig yn 150 y cant o'r gyfradd safonol. Cymru yw'r wlad gyntaf yn y Deyrnas Unedig i osod cyfradd uwch ar gyfer gwarediadau tirlenwi anawdurdodedig, gan greu rhwystr ariannol ychwanegol i bobl sy'n gwaredu gwastraff yn anghyfreithlon, a bydd y penderfyniad hwn yn ategu'r rheoliadau a osodwyd heddiw gan fy nghyd-Aelod, Ysgrifennydd y Cabinet dros yr Amgylchedd a Materion Gwledig, a fydd yn galluogi rhoi rhybuddion cosb benodedig am droseddau tipio anghyfreithlon ar raddfa fechan. Rwyf hefyd yn cadarnhau fy ymrwymiad y prynhawn yma i ddyrannu £1.5 miliwn y flwyddyn i gynllun cymunedol y dreth gwarediadau tirlenwi yng Nghymru am bob un o'r pedair blynedd nesaf. Mae hyn yn sicrhau ein bod yn cadw ein hymrwymiad i gymunedau y mae gwarediadau tirlenwi’n effeithio arnynt, ac yn darparu ffrwd ariannu sefydlog i'r cymunedau hynny am y pedair blynedd nesaf, er ein bod yn disgwyl i'r refeniw a ddaw o'r dreth hon leihau’n raddol dros y cyfnod hwnnw.

Llywydd, rwy’n troi nawr at dreth trafodiadau tir. Rwyf wedi penderfynu cyflwyno trothwy cychwyn newydd, uwch i brynwyr tai yma yng Nghymru. O 1 Ebrill 2018 ymlaen, bydd trothwy cychwyn treth trafodiadau tir yng Nghymru yn symud o £125,000 i £150,000—y gyfradd gychwynnol uchaf yn unrhyw le yn y Deyrnas Unedig. Bydd hyn yn golygu na fydd y prynwr am y tro cyntaf cyfartalog yng Nghymru yn talu dim treth o gwbl wrth brynu cartref. Yn wir, bydd y prynwr tŷ cyfartalog yng Nghymru yn talu bron i £500 yn llai o dreth nag y byddent o dan drefn bresennol treth dir y dreth stamp. Yn wir, nawr bydd naw o bob 10 prynwr tŷ yn talu llai neu'r un faint o dreth yng Nghymru o dan y dreth trafodiadau tir. Bydd y penderfyniad yr wyf yn ei gyhoeddi heddiw yn golygu y bydd y rhai sy'n prynu'r eiddo drutaf yng Nghymru yn talu mwy, ond mae hynny'n rhan annatod o unrhyw ymagwedd flaengar tuag at drethiant.

I droi yn awr at fusnesau, Llywydd, bydd penderfyniadau a wnaf heddiw’n golygu mai yng Nghymru fydd y gyfradd gychwynnol isaf o dreth trafodiadau tir i fusnesau yn unrhyw le yn y Deyrnas Unedig. Mae hyn yn golygu y bydd busnesau naill ai'n talu dim treth neu lai o dreth nag o dan dreth tir y dreth stamp wrth brynu unrhyw eiddo hyd at £1.1 miliwn. Bydd hyn o fudd i fusnesau bach a chanolig ledled ein gwlad—llif bywyd economi Cymru. Fel gydag eiddo preswyl, rwyf wedi ailgydbwyso trethiant ar adeiladau busnes i wella blaengaredd.

Llywydd, yn ogystal â gosod cyfraddau’r trethi newydd, rydym wedi cynhyrchu rhagolygon refeniw am y tro cyntaf. Hoffwn ddiolch i Brifysgol Bangor am wneud gwaith craffu a sicrwydd annibynnol ar y rhagolygon hynny. Rhagwelir y bydd treth gwarediadau tirlenwi’n cyfrannu £28 miliwn at gyllideb Cymru yn 2018-19, gan ostwng i £26 miliwn yn 2019-20. Rhagwelir y bydd treth trafodiadau tir yn codi £266 miliwn yn y flwyddyn ariannol nesaf, gan godi i £291 miliwn yn 2019-20.

Ym mis Gorffennaf, Llywydd, gwnaethom ddechrau dadl genedlaethol yn gofyn i bobl gyflwyno syniadau am drethi newydd posibl yng Nghymru. Cafwyd nifer sylweddol o ymatebion, a hoffwn ddiolch i bawb sydd wedi cymryd rhan a helpu i lunio trethi Cymru yn y dyfodol. Heddiw, gallaf gyhoeddi'r pedwar syniad treth newydd y byddwn yn gwneud gwaith pellach arnynt cyn inni gynnig un syniad i Lywodraeth y DU yn gynnar y flwyddyn nesaf.

Mae'r galw cynyddol am ofal cymdeithasol yn rhoi pwysau sylweddol ar gyllideb Cymru. Felly, rwyf am archwilio ysgogiadau ariannol posibl, gan gynnwys trethi, i gefnogi darpariaeth gofal cymdeithasol yng Nghymru, gan adeiladu ar waith yr Athro Gerry Holtham. Byddwn yn archwilio effeithlonrwydd treth bosibl i roi terfyn ar fancio tir a threth gwaredu plastig yng Nghymru, a byddwn yn gweithio gyda llywodraeth leol i archwilio sut y gellid defnyddio treth ar lety twristiaeth i gefnogi'r diwydiant lleol ac annog swyddi a thwf yng Nghymru.

Llywydd, byddaf nawr yn nodi sut y byddwn yn defnyddio ein hadnoddau cyfalaf, refeniw a chronfeydd wrth gefn ar draws y Llywodraeth. Mae'r cyhoeddiad hwn yn ystyried ein cytundeb cyllideb dwy flynedd gyda Phlaid Cymru, lle mae nifer o'r mesurau y cytunwyd arnynt yng nghytundeb y llynedd yn cael eu gwneud yn rheolaidd, ac sy'n cynnwys buddsoddiadau pwysig eraill mewn meysydd y cytunwyd arnynt ar draws y gyllideb. Hoffwn gymryd y cyfle hwn i gofnodi fy niolch i Adam Price a'i dîm am yr holl amser y treulion nhw gyda ni i gytuno ar hyn dros gyfnod yr haf.

O ganlyniad i hynny oll, bydd cyfanswm y prif grŵp gwariant iechyd, lles a chwaraeon nawr yn £7.5 biliwn yn 2018, gan godi i £7.8 biliwn yn 2019-20. Bydd y prif grŵp gwariant hwnnw’n cynnwys £450 miliwn ychwanegol dros ddwy flynedd i'r GIG yng Nghymru. Bydd yn cynnwys £16 miliwn ychwanegol y flwyddyn i gefnogi'r gronfa driniaeth newydd, a gallaf ddarparu £90 miliwn ychwanegol ar gyfer rhaglen gyfalaf GIG Cymru dros y tair blynedd nesaf.

Bydd cyfanswm y prif grŵp gwariant llywodraeth leol, gan gynnwys trethi annomestig, nawr yn £4.5 biliwn yn 2018-19, a bydd yn parhau i fod yn £4.5 biliwn yn 2019-20. Bydd hynny'n cynnwys diogelu cyllideb rheng flaen ysgolion a gofal cymdeithasol, a bydd yn darparu £12 miliwn ychwanegol dros y ddwy flynedd nesaf ar gyfer gwasanaethau digartrefedd drwy'r grant cynnal refeniw. Mae hyn i gyd yn golygu y bydd llywodraeth leol yng Nghymru unwaith eto yn mwynhau setliad llawer mwy ffafriol na'u cymheiriaid dros y ffin yn Lloegr.

Llywydd, mae cyfanswm y prif grŵp gwariant cymunedau a phlant nawr yn £874 miliwn yn 2018-19, ac yn £777 miliwn yn 2019-20, i gynnwys buddsoddiad ychwanegol gwerth £70 miliwn dros ddwy flynedd i ehangu ein cynnig gofal plant blaenllaw, i sicrhau na fydd dim toriadau i'r grant Cefnogi Pobl, ac i ryddhau £340 miliwn ychwanegol mewn cyfalaf dros y tair blynedd i adeiladu 20,000 o gartrefi fforddiadwy. Bydd yn buddsoddi £14.9 miliwn ychwanegol mewn cyfalaf dros y cyfnod hwnnw i gefnogi adfywio ein cyfleusterau cymunedol, a gallaf ddyrannu £1 miliwn ychwanegol yn y ddwy flynedd ar gyfer y gronfa cymorth dewisol, yn uniongyrchol i helpu rhai o deuluoedd tlotaf ein gwlad.

Bydd cyfanswm y prif grŵp gwariant economi a seilwaith nawr yn £1.2 biliwn yn 2018-19 ac yn codi i £1.3 biliwn yn y flwyddyn ganlynol. Bydd hynny'n darparu £220 miliwn dros ddwy flynedd i gefnogi ein penderfyniad i greu 100,000 o brentisiaethau pob oed dros gyfnod y Cynulliad hwn. Bydd yn cynnwys £50 miliwn dros dair blynedd i ddatblygu gorsaf reilffordd a chyfleuster parcio a theithio newydd yn Llanwern, ac rwy'n bwriadu clustnodi arian yn y cronfeydd wrth gefn i brynu cerbydau newydd ar gyfer masnachfraint newydd Cymru a’r gororau, yn amodol ar ganlyniad y broses gaffael barhaus.

Ym maes addysg, bydd cyfanswm y prif grŵp gwariant nawr yn £1.6 biliwn yn 2018-19 ac yn y flwyddyn ganlynol. Bydd hynny'n ein galluogi i fuddsoddi £50.5 miliwn i godi safonau ysgolion dros y ddwy flynedd, i gynnal ein lefel buddsoddiad yn y grant amddifadedd disgyblion ac i fuddsoddi swm newydd o £40 miliwn dros ddwy flynedd i gyflymu rhaglen ysgolion yr unfed ganrif ar hugain, gan ddod â band A y rhaglen honno i ben hyd yn oed yn gyflymach nag y byddem fel arall wedi gallu ei gyflawni.

Bellach mae cyfanswm prif grŵp gwariant yr amgylchedd a materion gwledig yn £344 miliwn yn 2018-19 a £322 miliwn yn 2019-20, gan gynnwys darparu gwerth £150 miliwn o fuddsoddiad drwy ein rhaglen arloesol ar gyfer rheoli perygl llifogydd ac arfordiroedd a £7.5 miliwn o gyfalaf ychwanegol yn 2018-19 ar gyfer mesurau atal llifogydd wedi'u targedu. Rwy'n bwriadu darparu swm pellach o £5.4 miliwn dros y tair blynedd i gefnogi'r rhaglen datblygu gwledig i sicrhau y gallwn wneud y mwyaf o gyfleoedd arian cyfatebol i gefnogi ein cymunedau gwledig wrth inni baratoi i adael yr Undeb Ewropeaidd.

Bellach mae cyfanswm y prif grŵp gwariant gwasanaethau canolog a gweinyddu yn £297 miliwn yn 2018-19 a bydd yn gostwng i £286 miliwn yn 2019-20.

I gloi, Llywydd, hoffwn gofnodi fy ymrwymiad i wasanaethau cyhoeddus yng Nghymru drwy ddweud, os bydd Llywodraeth y Deyrnas Unedig yn penderfynu peidio â bwrw ymlaen â'r gwerth £3.5 biliwn o doriadau heb eu dyrannu, y byddaf yn anelu at ddefnyddio cymaint â phosibl o'r adnoddau a fyddai ar gael wedyn i'r Cynulliad Cenedlaethol hwn rhwng y gyllideb ddrafft a phan fydd rhaid imi osod y gyllideb derfynol ddiwedd mis Rhagfyr eleni. O ganlyniad, mae'r gyllideb sydd gerbron y Cynulliad Cenedlaethol heddiw’n nodi cyfres feiddgar a chytbwys o gynigion sy'n cyflawni blaenoriaethau'r Llywodraeth Cymru hon a blaenoriaethau'r bobl yma yng Nghymru. Byddwn yn defnyddio ein pwerau i fuddsoddi yn ein gwasanaeth iechyd, i ddarparu 20,000 o dai fforddiadwy newydd, i greu'r cynnig gofal plant mwyaf hael yn unrhyw le yn y Deyrnas Unedig ac i gychwyn ar ein cyfrifoldebau treth newydd mewn ffordd sy'n rhoi'r help mwyaf i'r bobl sydd ei angen fwyaf. Rwy’n cymeradwyo’r gyllideb i'r Cynulliad Cenedlaethol.

Cabinet Secretary, thank you for your statement on the draft budget and for the meeting you had with me earlier today. Can I also welcome the new way of doing the budget, with the changes that have been made to the format of this statement today and paving the way for tax devolution next year? This has been a key call from the Finance Committee, and from the Chair of the Finance Committee, for some time, with the advent next year of tax powers.

This budget is, as you’ve said, being formed against the backdrop of a new fiscal framework, which is ensuring additional revenue for the Welsh Government—revenue above what you would have received without the fiscal framework. I appreciate your comments about how, because of cutbacks, we are still, I think you said, 20 per cent down on funding. That is far better than the 27 per cent that we would have been facing without the advent of the fiscal framework, so that’s to be welcomed.

Can I firstly turn, though, to your announcement on the rates and bands of the new taxes, because that’s new information, information that I and the rest of the Chamber’s been calling for for a long time? The publication of that is good news and it is to be welcomed for those organisations that need to have stability and certainty when it comes to planning the tax landscape.

If I can turn to land transaction tax first, and the new starting threshold of £150,000, £25,000 higher than in England I believe you said, and £5,000, I believe, higher than in Scotland, that is to be welcomed. Welsh Conservatives have for a long time now been calling for additional help certainly for those first-time buyers in Wales and those at that end of the housing ladder, so that is to be welcomed. There was of course a nip in the tail, so to speak—a sting in the tail—in that that money does need to be recouped and you did announce that there would be a new higher rate. So, can I ask you what assessment has been made of the impact that that will have on the Welsh economy, particularly when it comes to the border areas of Wales? I think you said that Bangor University has been employed doing forecasting for the Welsh Government. Will you be publishing the details of that forecasting at any point, and will we be able to see the exact effect that that independent analysis believes those changes to bands will have on the economy? Clearly, this is just the start of tax devolution, so, over the months and years to come, this will become even more important.

You mentioned the land disposal tax as well and I think, in terms of the environmental benefits of adjusting that tax, you will have the support of most parties, if not all parties in this Chamber, and we want LDT to succeed as much as possible and indeed be better, if possible, than in other areas of the UK.

Now, you mentioned the tourist tax, and it would be remiss of me not to mention this. I hope that that’s just a working title and that that’s not going to go forward in the future. Now, clearly, it is not in the interests of anyone in this Assembly or anyone in Wales for us to discourage tourism. We know how dependent the Welsh economy is on tourism. It is one of the key pillars of the Welsh economy and it is therefore vitally important that not only does any tourist tax, if and when it is developed—[Interruption.] That not only does any tourist tax not have a negative impact in terms of the way that it is set out, but also that the perception is not given out by the Welsh Government, not created by the Welsh Government, that Wales is not open for business when it comes to our tourist economy. So, I think that you have given us an indication of the way you see taxation in Wales going, Cabinet Secretary. I think it’s very important that that is qualified as soon as possible and that people who want to come to Wales to visit, for whatever length of time that may be, are not discouraged from doing so, so we do need to see some clarity as soon as possible on that.

You said in opening your statement that this is very much giving the higher level, the bigger picture, of taxation. You expect detail to follow in the weeks and months to come, and the Finance Committee will no doubt be scrutinising the draft budget over that length of time. So, if I can turn to the way that this budget will deliver on the Welsh Government strategy, the ‘Prosperity for All’ strategy, the First Minister has said that this

‘would drive integration and collaboration across the Welsh public sector, and put people at the heart of improved service delivery.’

This is a noble aim to which I’m sure we would all aspire. With this in mind, can you tell us how this is reflected within the funding streams for this budget and what protections has the Cabinet Secretary—what protections have you made—to ensure certain important projects are ring-fenced within the streams?

Now, clearly, we have another deal before us between Labour and your partners in this budget, Plaid Cymru, something that we’ve got used to over recent years, something that Wales has had to get used to, whether it liked it or not, and part of a two-year budget deal that will tie the hands of the Welsh Government for that time. But will the Cabinet Secretary respond to Plaid Cymru’s claim that over 50 per cent of its spending commitments, or £500 million, have been secured in full or in part over the last two budgets? This doesn't really tally with comments you made over the weekend, so I would appreciate some clarification on this please, Cabinet Secretary. It’s vitally important that the people of Wales believe that this budget deal has been done in the best interests of Wales—in their best interests—and not something that has been rushed through for the sake of a quick political fix, which I’m sure you would want to avoid the accusation of.

Also, if Plaid’s comments are correct, how many spending commitments has the Welsh Government had to give up in order to accommodate Plaid support for this budget? And can you give us details of the commitments that have been shelved? Because, surely, as you would admit, Cabinet Secretary, something has to give. You’ve said that budgets are tight, so you can’t fund everything, so we’ve got a new agreement with Plaid Cymru. Which priorities of the Labour Party in Wales have had to be sidelined or shelved? If I can turn to the—

Will the Member give way?

Yes, I give way.

I just wondered if the Member would like a penny, because it’s more than he’s ever got out of any budget deal with any Government in Wales.

It’s always nice to hear the—[Interruption.] I’m not sure—[Interruption.] I’m not sure—[Interruption.] I’m not sure whether that’s a Plaid comment—

Okay. The intervention has—

[Continues.]—or a comment from the Chair of the Finance Committee.

The intervention has been made. Allow the spokesperson for the opposition to continue, please.

Thank you. If I could turn to some of the specifics and our national health service, the NHS is a key priority for the people of Wales and Welsh Conservatives believe that it should be our key priority too. We are, of course, still playing catch up because of the lack of real-terms budget protection over a number of years, but we are where we are. The ‘Prosperity for All’ document states that the Welsh Government will ensure that organisations delivering health and care services will pool their budgets. So, has the current budget accounted for delivery of this aim? I’d be grateful if you could tell us if the organisations that have been involved have been fully informed of how they are intended to implement this.

Whilst I welcome the ongoing commitment that the Welsh Government has announced to a new treatment fund, we still don’t believe that makes up for the lack of a cancer treatment fund, which we have long called for in Wales. At the same time, we know that, across the border, the UK Government has recently announced 2,000 additional nurses, consultants, and therapists for child and adolescent services, and is introducing waiting-time standards for mental health services. Can the people of Wales expect the same level of investment, and how much of the £40 million promised in the budget will allow for such changes in Wales as well, and, crucially, will this be suitably ring fenced?

It’s well known that health boards across Wales are carrying some eye-watering levels of debt. There doesn’t seem to be any real light at the end of the tunnel when it comes to effectively managing this debt. How confident are you, Cabinet Secretary, that the health board deficits, such as the £49 million at Hywel Dda Local Health Board—I could go on—will receive the money that they need through the health budget and that we won’t see spiralling debt in future?

Just turning to transport and infrastructure, the Cabinet Secretary has outlined the tightness of budget and you’ve said about how you intend to use capital funding borrowing powers. There clearly is a shortness of cash there, but we hope that you’ll be able to meet those aims. And, if I could turn to the M4, it is interesting that it’s not that long ago that I remember Plaid Cymru saying that the Welsh Government’s commitment to the black route as its favourite option would be a deal breaker in terms of any future support for a budget. That’s probably more of a question for Plaid than it is for you, Cabinet Secretary, but, that said—and I’m sure you will say that this is currently a matter for the public inquiry—there clearly isn’t deep support for a new motorway, a key plank of the Government’s transport policy, underlying this deal, so is this really a sound basis on which to proceed, and has this deal been stress tested?

To close, Llywydd, and, on a positive note, I welcome the ongoing commitment to a development bank. Welsh Conservatives have long supported the restructuring of Finance Wales, and I hope that this delivers the dividends that we all want it to do. In conclusion, I look forward to working with the other members of the Finance Committee and with yourself to fully scrutinise this draft budget over the weeks and months ahead. And I hope that, at the end of it, Wales will have a draft budget and a finalised budget that will truly deliver for the needs of the people of Wales.

It’s true to say, of course, that Wales has always been a nation where the need outstrips the resource that we have to meet that need. And that’s certainly true now for the reasons outlined by the Cabinet Secretary: austerity as a result of the policy emerging from Westminster.

But it has been true for a longer period than that. Historians call Wales a ‘late nation’ in the sense that we haven’t been able to build the infrastructure necessary to be a prosperous nation. Establishing a budget is one of the most important responsibilities we have in this place because, of course, we must prioritise this work of rebuilding the nation and tackling the need to put right the problems of the negligence that’s existed over generations.

That is the spotlight that we in Plaid Cymru place on this as we hold the Government to account where necessary, but also work together where there is common ground. I came into politics to make a difference, and that is what Plaid Cymru has done through the agreement that we have reached once again with the Labour Government. If truth to be told, I would prefer to be in the Cabinet Secretary’s seat, and I very much hope that Plaid Cymru will lead Government at some point, because there are issues that we disagree on vehemently.

There are areas where I didn’t manage to persuade the Cabinet Secretary. At the moment, of course, there’s this whole question of the pay cap in the public sector, the question of tuition fees and increasing the debt burden on students. There, we disagree with Government and, for that reason, of course, we’re not going to be supporting this budget, and we will continue to disagree on those areas and others. But where there is common ground, then we are willing to co-operate with people from other parties for the benefit of Wales, and that is what the people of Wales expect from us, if truth be told: mature politics, politics that looks to the long term. Wales cannot wait three and a half years for an election in order to get a new Government in place to build the foundations that are needed for the longer term. So, I make no apology at all for playing our part in building that better Wales that we all want to see.

Mae nifer o feysydd lle na all Cymru aros am newid Llywodraeth, ac, felly, mewn Senedd lle nad oes gan y Llywodraeth fwyafrif, mae'n ddyletswydd ar bob un ohonom, fel seneddwyr, i wneud ein rhan i roi ar waith mewn gwirionedd y math o bolisïau yr hoffem eu gweld, y cawsom ein hethol arnynt, a dyna'r hyn yr ydym yn ceisio'i wneud yn y cytundeb sydd gennym ac sydd wedi'i nodi. Rydym wedi gwneud y pwynt yn glir ar sawl achlysur yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf bod rhaid inni sicrhau na ddaw Cymru, mewn microcosm, yn fersiwn o broblem y DU o or-ganoli, gor-grynodi, cyfoeth mewn un gornel o Gymru. Hoffem weld llwyddiant yn y gornel honno o Gymru, ond hoffem ei weld wedi’i ledaenu'n gyfartal, ac mae hynny hefyd yn golygu bod angen buddsoddiad cyhoeddus yn yr ardaloedd hynny hefyd. Ac eto, yn y cytundeb cyllideb hwn, fe wnaethom geisio pwysleisio cael y buddsoddiad hwnnw ym mhob rhan o Gymru.

Felly, mae gennym y £4 miliwn i gychwyn datblygiad trydedd pont Menai, mae gennym ddatblygiad y ganolfan gofal iechyd integredig yn Aberteifi, £15 miliwn i wella'r cysylltiadau rhwng y gogledd a'r de, ac uwchraddio gwasanaeth TrawsCymru yn ogystal, wrth gwrs, y gwaith sy’n parhau ar astudiaeth ddichonoldeb rheilffordd Aberystwyth-Caerfyrddin, fel y nodwyd yn gynharach, a'r amgueddfa bêl-droed genedlaethol yn y gogledd-ddwyrain hefyd. Ac, yn wir, os ydym yn tynnu tollau ar bont Hafren yn y gornel honno o Gymru, mae'n iawn hefyd ein bod yn dilyn yr egwyddor ac yn cael gwared ar y tollau ar bont Cleddau yn y de-orllewin hefyd.

Mae'n dda gweld ymrwymiad i sicrhau bod metro de Cymru yn cyrraedd pob rhan o'r Cymoedd yn ei ardal, ac felly'n edrych ar ymestyn a chysylltu â'r Rhondda Fach, a chreu metro newydd hefyd ar gyfer bae Abertawe a Chymoedd y de. Felly, mae sicrhau bod hon yn gyllideb i Gymru gyfan yn egwyddor graidd inni, a dyna'r hyn yr ydym yn ceisio'i wneud gyda'r cytundeb, ond mae hefyd yn fater o fuddsoddi yn ein dyfodol, felly mae'n dda gweld £40 miliwn ychwanegol yno ar gyfer addysg uwch ac addysg bellach. Yn sicr, pobl ifanc yw ein hadnodd pwysicaf—mae hynny’n wir am unrhyw wlad ac yn sicr yn wir amdanom ni. Hefyd, mae £6 miliwn ar gael i ffermwyr ifanc i sicrhau bod gennym ddyfodol i'r sector hwnnw sy’n seiliedig ar newydd-ddyfodiaid i'r diwydiant. Yn y gogledd, mae £14 miliwn ar gyfer hyfforddiant meddygol a chronfa ddatblygu ar gyfer hyfforddiant meddygol i israddedigion, sy’n adeiladu ar y £7 miliwn ar gyfer y llynedd.

Mae ein cytundeb hefyd yn ymwneud â syniadau newydd—syniadau newydd sy'n ceisio llunio atebion i rai o'r problemau hirdymor yr ydym yn eu trafod yn y Siambr hon, gan edrych ar arloesiadau newydd o fewn iechyd a gofal cymdeithasol. Mae'r cynllun treialu Buurtzorg a fydd yn arwain at hyfforddi 80 o nyrsys ardal newydd, yr economi sefydliadol, sydd wedi cael cefnogaeth drawsbleidiol eang—mae yma yn y cytundeb â Phlaid Cymru fel y gallwn ddechrau'r gwaith, nid dim ond siarad amdano, ond dechrau’r gwaith o roi hynny ar waith mewn ffyrdd pendant, gan ddechrau gyda gofal a chaffael fel elfennau i ganolbwyntio arnynt yn y sector.

Felly, mae nifer o feysydd yma y teimlwn hefyd nad ydynt wedi cael digon o fuddsoddiad yn y gorffennol, ac rydym yn ceisio unioni’r cydbwysedd. Iechyd meddwl—rwy'n meddwl bod yna gonsensws eang bod hwnnw'n sector nad yw wedi cael y gefnogaeth y mae'n ei haeddu, ac felly, eto, wrth wraidd y cytundeb, £40 miliwn ychwanegol ar ben yr £20 miliwn o’r llynedd, ond nawr, yn hollbwysig, yn gyllideb sylfaenol, fel y bydd yno, yn barhaus i’r dyfodol, fel y dylai fod os ydym am fodloni gofynion y sector pwysig hwnnw yn ein gwasanaeth iechyd cyhoeddus. Mae amaethyddiaeth a thwristiaeth yn cael arian ychwanegol. Yn aml maent wedi bod yn sectorau sinderela yn ystod y blynyddoedd diwethaf. Mae angen inni eu gweld wir—. Maent wrth wraidd yr economi wledig, ac mae'n dda gweld arian ychwanegol yma o ganlyniad i flaenoriaethau Plaid Cymru yn y gyllideb hon.

Mae £15 miliwn o arian ychwanegol cyffredinol ar gyfer y Gymraeg, ac os ydych yn cyfrif yr holl feysydd ychwanegol sy'n gysylltiedig â'r Gymraeg, mae’n fuddsoddiad ychwanegol o £20 miliwn. Arian ychwanegol—dyna sut yr ydym am gyflawni'r targed uchelgeisiol y mae'r Llywodraeth wedi'i nodi o ran y filiwn o siaradwyr Cymraeg erbyn 2050.

Will you take an intervention?

I certainly will.

Thank you. I’d be grateful to understand from the Plaid finance spokesperson—. I appreciate the finance Secretary, when he outlined the budget, said he was looking to explore specific tax measures within the tourist sector to raise money. He wasn’t looking to alleviate taxes in the tourism sector; he was looking to raise money. Given that you’ve had in-depth discussions with the Government, what is your understanding of the Government’s ambition in this particular sector, on the tourism industry in Wales?

Well, the additional money that was referred to was for marketing. I would like the Conservative Party to point out the areas that all these positive ideas that Plaid Cymru have brought to the table—which one of them do you disagree with? Do you think that there should be less money for the tourism sector?

We wouldn’t have a tourism tax.

In terms of the tourism levy, I think this is an idea that deserves to be explored. It is used widely—[Interruption.] It is used widely throughout most economies. Many of them have bigger tourism sectors than us and they use it to invest intelligently in the skills and infrastructure necessary to have a successful tourism economy. It’s called investing in the future of your country, and you should try it sometime, rather than just carping on the sidelines. Why don’t you see a positive vision for the future of Wales and bring your ideas here to this Chamber? That’s what you’re elected for. As a result of this deal and last year’s deal, and the compact that we originally signed, Plaid Cymru ideas from our manifesto will have been delivered in part or in full to the tune of £565 million. Actually, most of our major financial commitments from our manifesto from 2016 will have been delivered in part or in full. That is democratic politics in action, I would respectfully suggest to the leader of the Conservative Party. He should try it sometime. We are paid not to issue soundbites and press releases; we are paid to try and do our bit to make the lives of the people of Wales better. That is why we’re here in this Chamber, and I am not going to apologise to him or to anyone else for doing our job.

Perhaps I’ll try and calm things down a little in my usual way. I would like to thank the Cabinet Secretary for the courtesy that he has shown to me, also, in telling me the broad outlines of the statement this afternoon when we spoke this morning. I agree with my new neighbour, Adam Price—[Interruption.] I don’t know whether I should now call him my honourable friend or whether—[Interruption.] Near neighbour. There is a kind of cordon sanitaire between us, in the form of Simon Thomas. [Laughter.] But I’m delighted to join my fellow nationalists, anyway, on this side of the Chamber—[Interruption.]

Stick to the subject.

I agree with the point that Adam Price made with such passion a moment ago, that it is right for parties in this house to work together for the benefit of Wales. So I was a bit surprised, actually, when the Cabinet Secretary did ring me this morning, because on the radio on Sunday morning, he said he has little limited contact with the Conservatives and can’t ever imagine having conversations with UKIP. Anyway, I’m very pleased to see that he’s recanted within a couple of days from that rather extreme opinion.

This debate, to an extent, is one of shadow-boxing, because although I appreciate that the deal that Plaid Cymru have done with Labour has enabled them to make a real contribution to this budget in detail—£500-odd million is not an insignificant sum—but the Welsh Government’s budget, of course, is £15 billion to £16 billion and they are constrained, in any event, in what they can do with it by the obvious things that have to be funded by any Government. The element of discretion in the Welsh budget is inevitably very limited, although that will certainly become greater when we do actually get tax devolution in two years’ time. Then, there will be more options that the elected politicians of Wales will be able to choose from amongst in (a) the levels of taxation and (b) what we do with it. But the background to this budget is, of course, set out in what the Cabinet Secretary says about the policy of the UK Government. He says:

‘If the UK Government continues on its present path, we face a further extension in a period of austerity already unprecedented in length and depth.’

He also says, in the same paragraph in this statement, that a report from the chief economist for Wales about future public finances and our economic prospects shows some stark messages. The one message that I get from the pack that came with the document with all the details about the budget in it today, and the chief economist’s report—it has at the end of it, on page 27, this from the Office for Budget Responsibility:

‘new unfunded “giveaways” would take the Government further away from its medium-term fiscal objective and would only add to the longer-term challenges. In many recent fiscal events, giveaways today have been financed by the promise of takeaways tomorrow. The risk there, of course, is that tomorrow never comes.’

From the way in which the Welsh Government speaks about the economy, anybody would think that spending bills never come home to roost. We’ve been down that dolorous path many, many times in the course of my lifetime. Eventually, the chickens do come home to roost and you have to be able to pay back the money that you borrow. Very often, of course, the payback time comes when it’s extremely inconvenient, and indeed sometimes impossible, to do so. Once a Government loses its credit rating and its ability to borrow at reasonable rates, then those who suffer most in those circumstances—all historical precedent shows this—are those, actually, who are the most vulnerable in society. I give way to Mike Hedges.

Hasn’t the Conservative Government in Westminster already lost its AAA rating?

Yes, it has. I’m glad to have that reinforcement of the point that I am making. It’s as a result of profligacy in recent years that the Government has lost its AAA rating. I gave the figures in my questions earlier on to the First Minister. We now have a national debt of £2 trillion a year. It’s costing us nearly £60 billion a year to finance it. The money that we are spending on debt interest is money that would otherwise have been available to spend upon real, front-line public services. So, the idea that you can borrow forever and never have to worry about how to finance it is fantasy economics, as the people of Venezuela, Zimbabwe and many other countries know to their cost. And therefore, it’s perhaps fortunate that the Welsh Government doesn’t really have any extensive borrowing powers, and that they don’t have full responsibility for the budgets over which they preside, because if they were able to do that, then they might replicate some of the worst examples in the British Government since the war. So, all talk of austerity actually is very misplaced. We’ve had the opposite of austerity for the last seven years, it’s just that we are paying the price, for years and years before that, of massive overspending on the basis that tomorrow never comes. So, that is the reality of life. We have to pay eventually for overspending. We cannot go on overspending forever. I give way.

Thank you, Neil, for giving way. I just wanted to make the observation that Moody’s, in their downgrading, about a fortnight ago, of the credit rating of the UK—they’ve also positively ascribed that to the very specific issue of uncertainty over Brexit. I wonder whether he has any comments to make on that—the downgrading from Moody’s they have directly ascribed to uncertainty over Brexit.

I don’t think I shall get tempted, Llywydd, to go down the byways of Brexit in the budget debate.

I want to deal also with the point that comes out of the statement and the outline proposals in the budget about what the Cabinet Secretary says about the deal between the UK Government and Northern Ireland. It’s inevitable, in these circumstances, that a price is going to be extracted for their political support. Exactly the same thing has happened in this Chamber between Labour and Plaid Cymru. For Northern Ireland, there is an extra £1 billion a year, and good luck to them. I wish we could do that as well. If only Plaid Cymru had played the positive role at Westminster that the Democratic Unionists had played, they might be able today to crow about extra money for the Welsh Government too. I appreciate that their views on Brexit are very different from those of the Government, but I don’t think it lies in the mouths of Welsh Ministers to complain about what has happened at Westminster when they are responsible for exactly the same kind of deal here in Cardiff.

I do actually welcome the role that Plaid Cymru has played in the development of a part of this budget. I think it is a good thing that all parties of this house should work together in these ways. That, I think, is what the people of Wales expect of us as well. I know that the future is not going to be easy. The Cabinet Secretary did refer, in the course of his statement, to the prospect of unallocated cuts by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the year 2020, and we don’t know, as yet, to what extent those cuts are going to fall upon areas of devolved policy. If they fall in areas like defence, which I think is unlikely, then we will get off lightly. If they fall on health and education, or something like that, then we will suffer very substantially indeed, possibly, and I would very much regret that. But I’m afraid that the reality of the economic circumstances in which we have to live is that we’ll need to get used to this for the foreseeable future.

We can all wish that we had an unlimited bank account, but no government can possibly have that. The trajectory upon which the national debt is now set is for it to fall as a proportion of GDP, and that is actually the only way in which sustainable public finances can be preserved for the future. We could all wish that every year would be easier, but once you get debt levels down, they do become easier. The first Blair Government certainly understood this, because the national debt figure that they inherited in 1997 was preserved because they maintained Kenneth Clarke’s tight policies—fiscal policies—when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer for the first administration, in order to get themselves elected for the second time. They actually finished the first Blair period of office with a lower national debt than that with which they started, but then Gordon Brown embarked on a totally different trajectory for the next two Parliaments, with the catastrophe that we all ended up with in 2010 and the inheritance of the Conservative Government, which it’s still trying to grapple with today. I believe they could have been tougher in the way that they treated the public finances.

We have proposed cuts to the non-humanitarian part of the aid budget to help with that. We proposed, of course, getting out of the EU, which will enable us to reduce public spending. The future is bright, actually, outside the European Union. Look at the investments that have been taking place in Britain, or have been announced by big firms, such as Müller with £100 million just a couple of weeks ago, and Dyson, also, with £3 billion in its technology park, and so on, and so forth. I believe the future can be bright for Wales, but only with a Government that understands the importance of entrepreneurship, to raise the tax base in this country, by raising the economic potential and productive capacity with which the taxes that we will need to spend in the future can be raised. And I see no sign of that, sadly, from this Welsh Labour Government.

So, we will not be supporting this budget, in due course, but I very much look forward to going through it on a line-by-line basis in the Finance Committee, and, indeed, in this Chamber in the months ahead.

Can I first of all thank the Cabinet Secretary for his speech and what he said to us today? I think the direction that he’s laid out is one that is for the benefit of the people of Wales. And I think that, sometimes, we all must remember this: that we may come here and bring our egos out, to make ourselves feel good, but the reality is that what we’re here for is to benefit all the people of Wales, and that seems what this budget is going to do, within the serious constraints set by the Westminster Government.

And I want to address three points. First is the continuation of austerity, secondly is the tax raising, and thirdly is proposed expenditure. We know austerity does not work—we’ve had eight years of it. I mean, how many more years do we have to have of it before we find out it doesn’t work? It’s almost like a man or a woman banging their head against the wall and working out that it’s not doing their head any good. I mean, after eight years of doing it, you’d have thought they’d have realised that banging their head against the wall hasn’t done any good. Unfortunately, they’re a a Government that doesn’t seem to learn from what they are doing.

Growth varies between being sluggish and non-existent. Public expenditure falls in real terms. Austerity is by any definition not working. But are we surprised? It has never worked. I can think of no example—so I’d accept if any of you wanted to tell me one—where austerity has brought growth to an economy. And we need growth. Five per cent growth in our economy is where we ought to be, where we need to be, and, if we intend to have a wealthy nation, where we’ll have to be.

And it’s not just us. If I can take an example from that well-known Marxist country, America, Hoover in 1930s America used austerity to turn a recession into a depression. How did America come out of it? Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced a New Deal. What did the New Deal consist of, which he brought in on his inauguration in 1933? [Inaudible.]—of the federal Government was needed to get the country out of the depression. The first days of Roosevelt’s administration saw the passing of banking reform laws, emergency relief programmes, work relief programmes, and agricultural programmes. Later, a second New Deal evolved, including union protection programmes, a social security act, and a programme to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers. Does anybody who’s given any thought to this not think that we now need a new deal in Britain? And I’m sure that Jeremy Corbyn’s the man who’s going to be giving it to us in the very near future—the new deal that we need.

Because we’ve got to get ourselves out of this recession. [Interruption.] If David Melding wants to look back, he can find that I was one of the first politicians in Wales to support Jeremy Corbyn, and I’ve consistently supported him, and I think he’s doing a wonderful job, and he will do an even better job when he’s Prime Minister, which I hope will be very soon.

Does the Cabinet Secretary agree that we need a new deal for Britain, in Westminster, where we have more money put into the economy, so we can get the economy moving, and start making Wales a wealthier place?

I welcome the introduction of the two new taxes, and the setting of their rates. Land transaction tax replaces stamp duty. One of the weaknesses, and I’m sure one that the Cabinet Secretary accepts, is it is a highly volatile tax. It is a highly cyclical tax, and in good years, we can take a lot more than we expect, but it can fall off a cliff in bad years. It can drop by about 50 per cent between a good year and a bad year, as we know from the 2008-9 period, when it went down by almost half. So, it is a highly volatile tax.

Can I just welcome the changes that the Cabinet Secretary is introducing? Increasing the starting rate can only help the poorer people in our society who are trying to get onto the housing ladder. And a progressive taxation system, I think that’s something we haven’t heard for a very long time, is being implemented, and that is something I think is really important. The more people have got, the more they ought to pay. It shouldn’t be a system where you can avoid paying, and stamp duty is one of those taxes that is very, very difficult to avoid. So, let’s have a progressive taxation system where we end up with those who have the most paying the most.

Landfill disposals tax is one producing reducing returns. I very much welcome the unauthorised rate. I think if there’s one thing that really will stop people tipping on unauthorised sites is the fact they’re going to pay more when they get caught than they are on authorised sites. We’ve had problems—I think many of us in our own constituencies have had problems—of people opening up farmland and other land where they’ve allowed people to tip and they get fines, which are substantially less than what the land tax would have been. So, they were quids in, as it were. Now, under the new system, when they get caught they’re going to pay more than if they’d gone to a proper site. I think that is something that sends a message out on our commitment to the environment. And can I just say thank you very much to the Cabinet Secretary for that?

The last point I wanted to make is that capital is so very important and I really look forward to the use of capital money in building new schools so that it reduces the revenue costs of running those schools.

Of course, in 2010, the UK budget deficit was the worst in the G20, behind only Ireland and Greece in the EU. Though, if we’d sought to increase the deficit faster, we’d have had greater cuts imposed upon us. If we’d sought to reduce the deficit more slowly—sorry, the other way around. If we’d increased the deficit by spending more, we would have had higher debt If we had borrowed, or sought to borrow to spend more, we’d have had bigger cuts imposed on us. After all, those high-deficit nations, which rejected austerity, got it in full measure. The top tax rate since 2010 had been higher every month in all but the last month of Labour’s previous 156 months in power. The top earners are now paying a higher proportion of tax than ever before on record.

But moving to this report, the chief economist for Wales, as the Cabinet Secretary has indicated, has produced a report alongside this. This says that home building has important longer run economic effects and Wales has not been building enough new homes. It also refers to the UK not building enough homes, but, clearly, that has been a significant problem with house building falling to the lowest level since the 1920s in the first decade of this century. It also says Wales has seen rapid growth in housing costs over recent decades and evidence suggests a low supply responsiveness, i.e. not building enough is a large part of the problem, applying to both private sector and housing associations. Of course, during the first three Assembly terms, the number of new social homes provided in Wales fell by 71 per cent as waiting lists multiplied. By 2009-10, Welsh Government had the lowest proportional level of housing expenditure of any of the four UK nations. By 2012, the ‘UK Housing Review’ said it was the Welsh Government itself that gave housing lower priority in its overall budget. In 2013, Wales was the only part of the UK to see house building go backwards and it’s continued to lag behind since.

The Welsh Government has an unambitious target to build 20,000 affordable houses, which of course doesn’t mean social houses, it just includes a small element of social housing. It includes assisted home purchase and intermediate rent for people who earn higher than the levels of people who would be eligible for social housing and otherwise at a time when successive reports by independent bodies have said we need between 12,000 and 15,000 houses, or new homes, should I say, annually in Wales if we are to break the housing crisis, which didn’t exist in 1999. So, what consideration has the Cabinet Secretary given to how to break that housing crisis with a new housing deal for Wales that engages the whole sector?

Eight years after a Wales Audit Office report found that Communities First had failed to operate with effective corporate governance controls, financial and human resources controls and audit trails, six years after the Wales Council for Voluntary Action report, ‘Communities First—A Way Forward’, which said the missing ingredient was community engagement, and after £0.5 billion of expenditure on the programme, the Welsh Government announced this summer that the scheme would not be replaced, the record of its work in Wales in most deprived areas had been mixed, and that the figures aren’t moving.

So, how does the Cabinet Secretary, in terms of how to allocate budgets, respond to the statement at the launch of the Co-production Network for Wales last May, May 2016, by the director of social housing for Monmouthshire, who said, ‘We used to tell people what they can have. We now ask them what they want to achieve’, moving from needs-based to strength-based approaches? I know personally the Cabinet Secretary believes strongly in this, but I don’t believe that perhaps in the budget allocations they fully reflect the need to move to a process that tackles a situation in which people and communities can feel passive recipients of services rather than active agents in their own families’ lives.

In terms of prevention and early intervention, which are key to the Welsh Government and opposition agendas, and to your own legislation, there’s no actual definition of prevention in the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. The Red Cross has highlighted that, in England, they’ve been monitoring the prevention duties, looking at how local authorities are implementing them, and highlighting concerns and problems there. But how has the Welsh Government estimated what funding local authorities in Wales will need to meet their prevention duties, and how has this been reflected in the draft budget? And how is the Welsh Government working with front-line providers and people who work with them who receive the services to ask how by perhaps investing more in those services you can reduce multiples more in terms of cost to statutory service? Thank you.

I want to make a few comments, if I may, on the priority that Plaid Cymru placed on protecting budgets for Supporting People programmes. It is shocking that it took the Plaid Cymru intervention to secure the continuation of this funding.

Over the past few weeks, I have met with a number of organisations in my constituency working in the field of homelessness—the Wallich, Digartref Ynys Môn and Gorwel all do exceedingly important work in very difficult circumstances, providing support and shelter to people who have found themselves in a place where they have nowhere else to turn. The services that they provide are already under pressure because of the financial situation, a situation that was supported, thanks to Plaid Cymru interventions, in previous budget negotiations. But introducing a cut at this point of some 10 to 15 per cent in their budgets, as the Government had clearly proposed, and had told the sector that they were going to introduce those cuts, was at risk of truly undermining their ability to assist some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

Gallwn i fod wedi gwrthwynebu unrhyw gytundeb cyn-gyllidebol gyda'r Llywodraeth Lafur ac yna ymosod arnyn nhw pan, yn anochel, aethant ymlaen i dorri cyllideb Cefnogi Pobl. Ond nid oeddwn yn barod i wneud hynny pe gallem mewn gwirionedd, ym Mhlaid Cymru, wneud y gwaith a gwneud enillion go iawn ar Cefnogi Pobl, neu iechyd meddwl, neu nyrsys ardal, neu drafnidiaeth, neu lu o faterion eraill. Gwrthwynebwyr fel y Torïaid a fyddai’n chwarae'r gemau hynny, gan weiddi o’r cyrion—ennill dim, dim dylanwad, a bod yn amherthnasol. Roedd arweinydd y Ceidwadwyr yn chwerthin yn gynharach wrth ddweud bod Plaid Cymru wedi’u gwerthu eu hunain am fag o sglodion. Gwnaeth ymyrryd yn y ddadl hon, ond nid oedd ganddo'r parch i aros yma am weddill y ddadl hon. Ond dewch imi ddweud hyn wrth arweinydd y Ceidwadwyr: mae ei fag sglodion ef yn do dros ben person digartref. Mae ei fag sglodion ef yn gymorth i helpu person ifanc sy'n agored i niwed i geisio cael ei fywyd yn ôl ar y trywydd iawn. A fy neges i arweinydd Torïaidd sy’n fwy cyfarwydd â phlatiad o dalpiau tatws melys mewn cartref cynnes cyfforddus yw: ceisiwch weld y byd go iawn, a cheisiwch weld sut y mae Plaid Cymru'n helpu'r rhai sydd â gwir angen am gymorth.

Ni ddylai fod wedi cymryd tîm negodi Plaid Cymru i sicrhau'r arian hwn, ond dyna a ddigwyddodd. Does bosib na ddylai Llafur fod wedi bod yn gwneud hyn. I'r rhai sydd ar y meinciau cefn sy'n awgrymu, ‘Byddem wedi gwneud hyn beth bynnag’, dywedwyd wrth y sector am ddisgwyl y toriadau hyn. Roedd yn sefyllfa ryfeddol lle’r oedd Aelodau Llafur yn ein lobïo ni i lobïo'r Llywodraeth Lafur i amddiffyn y darn hollbwysig hwn o gyllid. Ond roedd angen Plaid Cymru i negodi hyn, ac rwy'n ddiolchgar iawn i'n tîm negodi am hynny.

Dylai Llafur fod wedi rhagweld effeithiau peidio â pharhau â'r arian hwn. Mae digartrefedd ar gynnydd. Mae hynny’n gost ddynol ofnadwy i'r rhai yr effeithir arnynt, ond mae hefyd yn gost ariannol ofnadwy. Gall hyd yn oed y Gweriniaethwyr yn yr Unol Daleithiau nawr weld bod gwario ar leihau digartrefedd yn arbed arian i'r sector cyhoeddus yn y tymor hir. Rwy'n falch ein bod wedi dod i'r cytundeb hwn ar y gyllideb, os dim ond er mwyn gwarchod cyllidebau Cefnogi Pobl—dal Llafur i gyfrif fel gwrthblaid effeithiol tra'n gwneud enillion go iawn i'r rhai sydd ei angen fwyaf.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for his statement and the opportunity to contribute to this debate? For my relatively brief contribution I want to highlight a very important principle that’s contained and underpinned in this budget and the key elements of that which help to make the Welsh Government spending effective, and that is something that the First Minister alluded to earlier on, and that’s the principle of early intervention. So, whether it’s early intervention in the Supporting People programme or in the investment to shift our health services to community settings, in preventing adverse childhood experiences, or preventing violence against women, I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary will agree that the more we invest our budget in early intervention and support, then we will see better outcomes for people.

We also save money by reducing the number and frequency of costly life crises as a result. This approach, underpinned by this important principle, is embedded in our policies in Wales and, in my view, it stands in stark contrast to the actions of the Tory Government in Westminster. It is in contrast to so many elements of the welfare reform programme, which we know is putting huge pressures on individuals and families. It is in contrast to the huge cuts to council budgets in England and the associated loss of vital support services there. Those cuts are, of course, counterproductive and more costly to the public purse as we all have to deal with the consequences.

We should be proud that, in Wales, in spite of the cuts of around £1.5 billion to our budgets, we choose to stand by vulnerable people in their time of need. And as we begin the process of scrutinising this two-year budget deal, let’s clearly recognise that the politics of austerity, as Mike Hedges alluded to earlier on, continue to create a tough climate for our public services. So, can I ask the Cabinet Secretary if he agrees with me that, like Wales, the rest of the UK needs a change of direction and some fresh hope? Because this path of continuing austerity is unpicking the very social fabric that holds our communities together. I have little doubt that the architects of this despair, the party represented on the benches opposite, will continue to roll out their criticisms of Welsh Government, demanding more spending and better services, but offering no solutions of their own. This will ring hollow until such time as they help us to turn the tide of austerity around and demand of their Government that Wales is properly funded.

Again, can I also ask the Cabinet Secretary whether he agrees that, in the light of the continuing threat to the very fabric of our communities, it is the principles that underpin much of this draft budget are good for Wales?[Interruption.] I’m just about to finish. So, in finishing, Llywydd, can I congratulate the Cabinet Secretary for concluding an agreement with Plaid Cymru that enables us to meet the priorities of the Welsh Labour manifesto and that continues to take Wales in the right direction, despite all the inherent injustices that Tory austerity has foisted upon us?

Can I thank the Minister for his statement this afternoon? I think it is important that statements are made in this Chamber. I was very pleased that he didn’t reveal his hand on things like the tax issues up until immediately before Plenary. I think that’s really very, very good of the Minister to take his responsibility so seriously towards this Chamber.

Now, that’s not to say that I’m entirely happy of course with the budget proposals that he has laid, and I’m particularly concerned about the proposals for a tourism tax and that he’s going to look at that and begin to scope some work out upon it, because we know the value of the tourism industry to Wales: it’s incredibly important, in particular in north Wales, including in my own constituency, and we know of the difficulties that seaside resorts have had over the years, along the north Wales coast in places like Colwyn Bay, Llandudno and Rhyl. Some sort of tax on accommodation, which I think is what you’re talking about, could lead to absolutely devastating consequences for those towns, and I believe would suck the lifeblood out of many communities in north Wales that rely on the visitor economy. So, hanging up a sign saying, ‘You’re not welcome’, I think, is something that is an extremely detrimental thing that you may be planning to do. I’m happy to take an intervention.

Thank you very much for taking the intervention. I was just wondering, on the point that you’ve just made there, whether you’ve said that the Wales Tourism Alliance, which of course is the body representing most tourism views in Wales, makes exactly the same point that you do.

I think that the Wales Tourism Alliance is absolutely right, and you don’t have to just speak to them. You can speak to any individual business that relies on tourists in terms of its viability and you will know that many of them have been on the brink for many years. We’ve enjoyed some success in tourism. [Interruption.] We’ve enjoyed some success in tourism—I haven’t got time. We’ve enjoyed some success in tourism in recent years with record-breaking numbers of tourists coming to Wales. That’s something we should celebrate, but we hamper that success if we start taxing people simply for wanting the opportunity to come and stay in our communities.

I do wonder why you haven’t looked at other potential tax revenues. One of the things that I suggested in the past is a tax on chewing gum: a chewing gum levy. We’re all fed up of seeing chewing gum stuck to streets, causing a mess on our roads. That’s expensive to clear up. Why aren’t you considering sensible proposals on that? Why aren’t you looking at a fast-food wrappings levy? Why aren’t you looking at things like ATM receipts, which are spurging out of our cash machines and ending up—in the majority of cases—on the floor beside those cash machines? These are simple things that you could look at which I don’t think anybody in this Chamber would necessarily object to.

Can I turn also to some of the things in north Wales that are included in the budget documents? I was very pleased to see reference to north Wales. It’s usually, of course, overlooked in Government documents in this Chamber, but I was very pleased to see a reference to improvements being made on the A55 and the A548. Both roads, of course, are in desperate need of investment and we’re regularly seeing the lack of investment and the impact that that is having in terms of traffic flows on those roads. But I wonder which parts of the A55 and the A548, because there is a tendency from this Government to simply spend in Labour constituencies, frankly, which I think is unacceptable. We’ve seen that in terms of investment proposals in the road infrastructure in north Wales, with the north Wales metro: all of that stops in just Labour constituencies. Well, what about further west? What about Clwyd West? What about Aberconwy? What about Ynys Môn? What about parts of Gwynedd that also require some desperate investment? Perhaps you can clarify what the situation is in respect of those areas.

I notice also that you are seeking to make significant investment over the next few years into our flood defence infrastructure. That’s something that I think is absolutely necessary. We’ve seen the devastating consequences of flooding in communities in recent years. The place that is the most vulnerable in terms of flooding along the north Wales coast is Old Colwyn, in my own constituency. The sea defences there protect the A55 trunk road and they also protect the rail infrastructure, the north Wales main line. There aren’t many homes that are threatened with flooding in Old Colwyn, which is why there’s been no investment in the flood defences there, even though it has been necessary. So, I wonder what action you are taking, along with your Cabinet colleagues, to make sure that the road and rail infrastructure and other key infrastructure are also protected from flooding, and that that is recognised when you’re making decisions about flood protection investment. So, perhaps you can tell us about that.

So, in short, there are some things that I do welcome in your budget, but I’m very concerned that you’ve suggested, even approached the subject of a potential tourism tax. I think there are other ways to raise money that our constituents would not object to.

Vikki Howells.

Thank you, Llywydd, for calling me to speak today. This debate marks yet another development in the devolution journey that started a little over 20 years ago. Indeed, despite the sober warnings from the Cabinet Secretary, I do find much to be hopeful of, both in terms of the distance that has been covered and of the spending proposals that he has outlined. The Cabinet Secretary has laid down a clear plan for the setting out of governmental spending plans, improving levels of scrutiny and accountability.

I also welcome the principles of co-operation and collaboration that have underpinned the budget, bringing together different parties and perspectives to get the best results for Wales. This approach was also reflected in the close working between the three devolved administrations, showing the maturity of the devolution process as it comes of age. Nowhere is this clearer than in the Cabinet Secretary’s remarks on the future use of the tax-raising powers the Assembly will possess in around six months’ time, and in the Welsh Government’s continuing work to develop a new made-in-Wales tax proposal.

As the chief economist reminds us, there are serious decisions we will need to make about how these new powers can best be used to support public services in Wales in the face of changing public expectations and the blinkered approach of the UK Government, with its single-minded obsession with austerity. I therefore welcome the Cabinet Secretary’s comments that he will look to reduce the level of in-year contingency and reserves that would otherwise have been held, releasing much-needed revenue spending to invest in the services we rely on.

I want to briefly touch on a few specific elements of the proposals the Cabinet Secretary outlined. Regarding the communities and children MEG, I welcome the investment in our progressive childcare offer. We can be proud that our proposals represent the most generous deal of its nature anywhere in the UK, and show that the Welsh Government is committed to supporting Welsh parents and families. The pilot in Rhondda Cynon Taf that covers my constituency is already making a difference, although I am keen to see what lessons will be drawn about how we can ensure all who are eligible take part.

Elsewhere under this headline, I welcome the renewal of the Supporting People grant, which we know makes such a difference to tens of thousands of vulnerable Welsh citizens. Similarly, I know that one of the proposals that will be most welcome to groups in my constituency of Cynon Valley is the additional funding to support the regeneration of community facilities. In an area like Cynon, many of these buildings are little short of historic, with proud links to the mining heritage of the communities they are found in, and it is right that we make sure they meet current needs.

For anyone who has heard me raise concerns about Valleys lines rail services, I’m sure it will come as no surprise that I am very supportive of the releasing of funds to buy new rolling stock. Purchasing this stock will save money in the long term, and will also remove a crucial barrier to the negotiation of the new Wales and borders franchise. The renewed commitment to the mutual investment model that will be used to fund the dualling of the A465 and the renewed commitment to the south Wales metro both show that transport infrastructure for a twenty-first century Wales remains a central Welsh Government goal. Elsewhere, I know that a commitment to invest in charging points for electric vehicles has been made, and that’s another key component of future transport infrastructure. I look forward to further information on this proposal, as it is released in due course, to make sure that we get the details right to meet future demand.

The continued focus on education is also to be welcomed, in particular the plans to accelerate the twenty-first century schools programme. Cynon Valley has benefited to the tune of over £100 million in investment under this policy—more than any other constituency in Wales—so I know at first hand how important this scheme can be. I recently visited Aberdare Community School, a twenty-first century school, on the anniversary of the devolution referendum. It was great to discuss with pupils there how devolution has enabled us to carve out our own path in Wales, and this school, and this policy, is one example of this, where our spending decisions are sharply contrasted with a UK approach that cancelled plans to build schools and refused to invest in the next generation.

I’d just like to ask some questions and raise some issues with regard to some of the budget negotiations with Plaid Cymru. I would like to echo what has been said already: as somebody who has been here for 10 years now, I think it’s important that we try to find common ground where we can, and utilise our abilities as politicians to come up with solutions as well as to scrutinise. Therefore, I welcome in this budget deal the £30 million investment that was announced for the creation of a new power plant for Tata.

This has been something that has been campaigned on for quite some time by local activists and politicians of different colours and I think that this is something that we should be proud of. I would like to have some more information as to whether the Welsh Government has talked to Tata about this particular commitment, particularly in relation to the other investment that Tata has promised to the unions and to the workforce. I think it’s important, if the Welsh Government are providing £30 million of investment for a plant of this nature, that we find the money from Tata for the rest of it and that we ensure that Tata are committed to the area. I think this shows a clear sign that that is the case, but I think that it is important, especially with changes to the pension fund and the potential joint venture, that we see it in light of Tata being here for the long term. I was wondering whether the Cabinet Secretary could also confirm that other funding commitments made by the Welsh Government, amounting to almost £13 million, will not be affected by this announcement in relation to Tata Steel. But I would like to put on record my thanks for putting this as a priority.

My other question is in relation to the journalism fund. Again, I’m very thankful for that—£100,000 for one year and £100,000 for the second year. I’ve already been speaking to people in the sector about what that would mean. So, I’m wondering how the sector can help to shape that and to ensure on record that that fund would be for hyperlocal journalists and not for large-scale media organisations that may already be benefitting from another scheme—the BBC scheme, for example. I would want this to be specifically for start-ups so that, for example, the Port Talbot MagNet in my area would not have ended, it would have been able to have been sustainable. That’s the type of thing we really need to ensure for a natural and grass-roots journalism sector in Wales to flourish.

With regard to the investment in music in education, I believe it’s £2 million over two years. That’s something, again, that I’m very grateful for. Again, how can we be involved in shaping where that funding goes and how it’s spent? As you will know, the committee that I chair have carried out an investigation into music in education and we’re coming up with our final conclusions. I’m sure people from all parties here in the Chamber would be willing to come up with ideas for how that money can be spent in the most efficient way so that we’re not duplicating work that’s already being done on the ground.

To finish, I’d like to say also that I’m welcoming of the £14 million extra for mental health. While I think that mental health has been supported more in recent years, it’s always to be welcomed. What I’d like to see happening is—we’re talking about the budget and we’re talking about money, but, ultimately, sometimes I think it’s about how we use the money we’ve got in a better way. So, even though this is new money, how can we change structures and how things work within mental health so that it is truly reflective of what people need on the ground? The one example I’ll give is perhaps we could think about this money going into mental health support for the BME community and asylum seekers. I was, again, I mentioned, last week with people from the BME community in Swansea, and they were saying that some people are being refused access to GPs simply because the GPs are refusing to get a translator there. We’ve had an asylum seeker commit suicide a few weeks ago in Swansea because of not being able to access treatment. So, if we’re going to think about how we use this money creatively, can we think of it with that in mind?

I’d just like to finish by echoing Rhun’s point with regard to Supporting People. I don’t want to have an argy-bargy about who kept Supporting People but I want to thank the negotiating team for keeping that money, because I, in the last few weeks, have met lots of different people from lots of different walks of life who will be very, very happy with today’s announcement. That’s what it’s about for me. People can say what they like, but, actually, that will mean that there will still be people helping those who are in crisis situations on the front line. So, if all I can appeal for is, when we’re discussing this in future years, that they don’t feel that every year their budget is threatened and that they can have some comfort in the system for future years—[Interruption.] Well, I’d love to stop austerity, Lee. I’m not criticising you in this regard. I’m just saying if we can perhaps have a conversation so that they feel that they’re part of ongoing discussions with the Welsh Government and that we can make sure that that programme is supported in the future.

I’d like to follow-up on the austerity point, because, of course, that’s the backdrop to this whole budget discussion. When the UK Government keeps insisting on sticking to those punishing austerity measures, then clearly things are going to have to be cut. Now, let’s not forget why we’ve got these austerity measures. They were meant to ensure that we reduced our deficit and our debt levels, but the reality is that, since 2010, our national debt level has increased by over £800 billion to over £2 trillion—this is under you guys since 2010—and that this Conservative Government—

Will you give way?

I will. Let me just finish my point, because I’ve got a lot more to come—[Interruption.] This—[Interruption.]. This Conservative Government—. Hey, when you’ve finished. Thank you. This Conservative Government has borrowed more money than every Labour Government in history. Go on.

The reason it’s had to borrow more money is because of the huge record-breaking deficits that Gordon Brown left in the Treasury—

It’s not; it’s absolutely not.

[Continues.]—and in the public finances. That’s why we’re trying to turn that around. You actually want to borrow more. It would have accelerated under you.

Darren, did you—

Carry on, Eluned Morgan.

Did you actually listen?

The deficit adds to the debt—

Eluned Morgan.

Did you actually listen to what I said?

I did.

You have borrowed more money than every Labour Government in history. It is your policy, and austerity is not working—[Interruption.] Now, the Welsh Government—[Interruption.] The Welsh Government can only spend money that it’s given by the UK Government, although in this historic year we will as a—[Interruption.] Darren, please—

No, no, no, no. You don’t need to tell Darren Miller to shut up. I will. [Laughter.] Darren, shut up. [Laughter.] Eluned Morgan.

Thank you, Llywydd. Now, this is a historic year because, for the first time now, we are introducing these tax-raising or tax-changing powers. I very much welcome this—[Interruption.]

Eluned, will you take an intervention?

Oh, not another one. No, I won’t if you don’t mind.

You don’t have to take the intervention, Eluned Morgan.

Thank you. The welcome news that—the news that the finance Secretary has announced that we are now going to have the lowest starting rates of land transaction tax in the UK. And I felt a real buzz in the Chamber when that was announced. We felt like a really grown-up Parliament, and that’s what I want to see this place becoming. I would like to know from the finance Secretary how much that will cost. I’m not sure if he did outline that, but I think that would be useful.

Now, let’s not forget that these austerity measures are continuing at a time when wages have been stagnant for 10 years. And, on top of this, during those 10 years, while the Tory Government’s been in charge in Westminster, gas bills have gone up by 49 per cent, water bills have gone up by 25 per cent, rail fares have increased by 27 per cent, private rent has increased by 25 per cent, and food has gone up by 21 per cent. None of these are luxuries. None of these are luxuries. But rather than stand by the poorest in society, what’s the Tory Government decided to do? It’s decided to punish the poor with the introduction of universal credit. Four hundred thousand families in Wales will be £3,400 a year worse off by 2020 because of the introduction of that new measure.

Now, in England, the Tory Government has written off the poor. Those cuts have led to an increase of 65 per cent in the homelessness levels in England. That is not the case in Wales. We’ve brought in this new law, giving Welsh local government new responsibilities in relation to homelessness, and the Supporting People programme has been crucial. Anyone who could have doubted Mark Drakeford’s personal commitment to this issue needs to be reminded of his long-standing action in relation to homelessness, his tireless efforts to help establish and found Llamau, and his long-held passion and activity to ensure support for the homeless. There are no cuts to the Supporting People programme and I didn’t think that Mark Drakeford, with his long history, would have undertaken those. So, I am delighted to see that, and an additional £20 million to alleviate homelessness.

Now, there’s going to be ample time to chew over the detail of the budget, but I do think it’s worth noting that £240 million extra to take the pressure off our hard-working staff in the NHS. Of course, the ideal would have been to give our NHS workers and other public sector workers a pay rise that they undoubtedly deserve, but, with a set and limited budget, the only way to do this would’ve been to have cut services elsewhere. So, if Plaid is so anxious to introduce this pay rise without receiving the additional money from the UK Treasury, you have to outline which hospitals you’re going to close in order to make that happen. And as for the Tories saying that the debt levels in Welsh hospitals—. Do you know what the debt levels in English hospitals are? It’s £2.4 billion. Don’t come over here telling us about debt levels in hospitals.

I think it’s very important, the fact that we are helping to secure funding for care; it’s a crucial area, and I am delighted that the finance Secretary will be exploring the issue of taxation in this area. This is something that we will be looking at in the Finance Committee and I hope that we’ll come up with some interesting ideas on that in the next few weeks.

The one area in particular that I’d like to thank the finance Secretary for is his commitment to abolish the tolls on the Cleddau bridge by 2020. This is an issue on which the Labour Party locally has campaigned for years, and I’m delighted that he’s been able to deliver on this. It’s going to make a real difference to people and businesses living around the Haven. I’m also delighted to hear that extra money has been allocated to draw down funds from the EU rural development programme, but I do wonder if the finance Secretary could clarify whether we will receive, in the next few weeks, some more clarity on the competing structures for economic rural development in Wales.

The finance Secretary has also set out a two-year budget. I’d just like to know: does that mean that we’ll see exactly the same next year, apart from a few little tweaks? And does that mean that we, as a Finance Committee, will be redundant next year? What does that actually mean in terms of how the mechanism works? Now, I know that balancing the books at a time of austerity is a difficult proposition, but I would like to thank the finance Secretary for sticking to those commitments that he and we made in the Welsh Labour manifesto, and following through on promises that we made to the Welsh public and to the electorate.

Finally, Joyce Watson.

Thank you—diolch, Llywydd. Cabinet Secretary, there’s an awful lot to go through here, but there is one thing that is abundantly clear and that is that this budget has been designed to look after those people who need that support the most, to support the people in Wales against the austerity that is emanating from the Tory Government in Westminster. And it’s a Government that is absolutely determined to make life difficult for the poorest within society. I think the universal credit roll-out that is—[Interruption.] No, I will not. I’ve just started speaking. You can sit down.

You just don’t mean to take an intervention. That’s all you need to say.

[Continues.]—the universal credit that is going to see people without money for six weeks to be dismissed by a Prime Minister, when she was interviewed on that principle, saying, ‘We’ll work something out’. Well, I’m glad that she can work something out, because I know one thing: when you have no money whatsoever for six weeks to feed yourself, to pay your rent, or to send your children anywhere, you will not manage and you will not be able to work anything out. So, in terms of the protection of the £1 million for the discretionary assistance fund, which is only really a stitch, but a critical stitch and safety net, which was scrapped by the Tories in England and restored by a previous Welsh Labour Government, I welcome that and I wonder how many people that will support.

The other issue that I am more than pleased about is—. And I was a former Pembrokeshire county councillor, and I do have an inside track record on the long and the dubious history of the toll on the Cleddau bridge, so I welcome scrapping that. And there is a history about how that money was both raised and how it was spent. So, looking ahead, I welcome, in the first place, the fact that that local tax will be removed—removed from the people who go to and from work, and from the businesses that operate either side of the county. I do appreciate that time is needed to make transitionary arrangements, but given that the council can budget knowing that maintenance costs will transfer to Welsh Government in two years’ time, given the historic question of how the revenue has been spent over the years, do you think that it might be a good idea, even a gesture of goodwill, if Pembrokeshire council were to ring-fence the toll revenue from now until it’s scrapped and consult ratepayers as to how that money should be spent? This has been a huge area that has been contested by myself and other Labour leaders on Pembrokeshire County Council year in and year out. I look forward to your response.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary to respond to the debate.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, and thank you to all those who’ve taken part in the very wide-ranging discussion of the budget. I’ll do my best to reply to as many of the points that have been raised as possible, and do so rapidly.

What seems like a long time ago now, Nick Ramsay began the discussion. I thank him for the welcome he provided to the new budget process. I acknowledged in my opening remarks the impact of the fiscal framework. I’m happy to confirm for the Member that the Bangor University report is available to Members and available in full and available today. As far as the two new taxes are concerned, I suspect he will have recognised the 150 per cent rate for unauthorised tax disposals in LDT, because he put exactly that rate to me in the Finance Committee at a point when I was not able to confirm it. But it is confirmed at that rate today.

Can I just say to Members of the Conservative group here that I think they need to stand back a little bit from some of the language they’ve used in relation to a tourism tax? What I’ve done this afternoon, Llywydd, is what I said; I’ve announced a shortlist of possible proposals for further work, and this is one of the things that many people have advocated. Adam Price was absolutely right when he pointed out that this is a tax used in many, many parts of the world, usually navigated at a local level. The reason for the tax—from those people who advocate it—is in order to be able to invest in facilities that then lead to more tourists in that area. That’s the point of a tourism tax. It’s not to frighten off tourists; it’s to create the conditions in which the tourism industry can go on thriving and doing more. So, that’s the case for it, we’ll explore it further. It’s certainly not to be just written off as though it had no merit at all. It may not make it onto the shortlist, but I do think that the idea that it isn’t worth exploration is to overstate the case.

Cabinet Secretary, would you take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

I hear what you’re saying about talking about just exploration of a tourism tax at this point in time, however, do you recognise that there is a danger that a perception will go out that there is a tax on tourists coming to Wales that doesn’t exist across the border in England? In areas like my own, along the border areas, we need to guard against that sort of perception going out. So, I think that we do need to make sure that it is just exploration at this stage.

Llywydd, I don’t say that those points are not points that need to be considered, but all I have said today is that we intend to consider things, and we will consider the positive case that has been made and we will take into account those arguments that tell us why we might need to proceed carefully. I just wanted to be clear about the status of what I had announced this afternoon.

Adam Price made a series of important points about the agreement that has been reached with Plaid Cymru. We are a Government without a majority. The First Minister said, back in the early summer of 2016 when this Assembly term began, that a Government in our position needs to be able to listen to ideas from other parts of the Chamber and to try to reach agreement where that is possible, and the very careful work that’s gone on over the summer has allowed us to do that. We don’t agree on everything, as Adam Price set out, but the things we have been able to agree on are important, they will make a difference, and they were outlined by him.

Llywydd, I listened, all the way through, to what Neil Hamilton had to say. I almost stopped at one point, but I did continue listening. I think it’s the sort of contribution where the idea of a ‘stream of semi-consciousness’ is the best way to describe it. I did nearly stop listening at the point when he tried to persuade me that I was living in an era of fiscal profligacy and that what people in Wales have had to endure for the last eight years is—and I think I’m quoting him exactly—‘the opposite of austerity’. Well, it does not feel like that, I can tell him, to people who live in my constituency who find that their wages have not gone up over that period, that their services have had to be cut back, and that their prospects of anything better are receding ever further into the future.

I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary will accept that you can’t borrow in unlimited sums indefinitely, and, therefore, a judgment has to be made, sometimes, as to when the rake’s progress has to stop. Interest rates have been at historic lows. They’re already on the rise in the United States; they may well shortly be on the rise in this country. How do we then pay the bills at a time when we haven’t repaired the roof, when the sun ceases to shine and the rain pours?

Llywydd, we are incredibly lucky in our time to have benefited from the investment decisions that people who went before us were willing to make. Had they listened to Neil Hamilton, they would simply have stopped doing all the things that we now rely on. It is possible, in a way that I think the Member never seems to understand or recognise, to borrow to invest, because investment creates the conditions of economic success, and that economic success then allows you to pay back the money that you have borrowed. That is the simple lesson that progressive Governments throughout the last 100 years and more have understood, and we say that it needs to be better understood today.

Mike Hedges made a series of very important points. He understood absolutely that you can invest your way to success, not just in places, but, as he said, in people too. A new deal for Britain is exactly what we need to get our economy onto that track. As far as tax volatility is concerned, he will know that the fiscal framework gives us access to a £500 revenue reserve to allow us to smooth out tax volatility from one year to the next. I’ve made no plans to use that reserve in the budget in front of the Assembly, but it is there should it be needed in the future. The way that we have used our capital in this budget is exactly the way in which Mike Hedges advocated. I’ve said to all my Cabinet colleagues that I will place a priority upon capital investment plans that release revenue in the future, and that is why buying rolling stock in the way that Vikki Howells outlined is so important.

I was grateful to Mark Isherwood for the things that he said about housing, because I want to say to him that this budget has the needs of housing right at its very heart. Whether that is the Supporting People programme, and the £10 million in each of the next two years that we are able now to invest in homelessness services; whether it is the actions we are taking to build 20,000 affordable homes; or whether it’s the announcement I’ve been able to make today about taking first-time buyers in Wales out of tax altogether—all of those things are about making sure that on housing, which affects every family in the land, we are able to do more to help people in that position.

Dirprwy Lywydd, Rhun ap Iorwerth highlighted a number of important aspects in the deal that we have been able to strike between Labour and Plaid Cymru. I have to disagree with him on only one point, but it’s an important point, and it’s the only point, I think, in this debate where I feel I must make sure that the record is properly understood. Rhun said that it was inevitable that without a budget agreement there would have been cuts in Supporting People. I want to be absolutely clear to the Chamber that there was no such inevitability. Supporting People is a programme, like all the others, that comes under pressure when we are having to create a budget in the difficult circumstances that we are. I was very glad that we were able to come to the agreement that we did. I thought Bethan Jenkins put it in exactly the right way, as far as Supporting People is concerned. It’s been a shared priority across this Chamber for many, many years. It’s appeared in three budget deals altogether. It was a matter of absolute concern to me. I’m really pleased that together we’ve been able to support it, and that’s the position that we have reached. I just want to make sure we’ve got that clearly set out.

You know full well that the sector have been told to expect this cut of 10 to 15 per cent.

I spend my time having to tell people who provide services on which our fellow citizens rely that they have to prepare for the tougher times and harder choices that lie ahead. I’ve said it countless times in this Chamber, so I understand that people out there understand the conditions in which this budget is being created and would have been anxious about what that might mean for them. Luckily, by acting together in the way we have, we now know, and can give for two years a certainty—because Bethan asked about making sure we could offer more than one year—we now have two years of certainty for people in the sector that that budget is protected, and as a result of this budget, another £10 million in both years is being made available to bolster the services that we provide in the homelessness field as well. And £4 million of that will go through my colleague Carl Sargeant’s budget, where he will be able to spend that money with housing associations and with the third sector, providing the services that we know—. Homelessness is more than bricks and mortar; it’s about attending to the real difficulties that people face—of mental health, of substance misuse, of alcohol difficulties and so on—that come with being in that awful set of circumstances. The money we will provide, through Supporting People and through this budget, will allow us to do more to help people out there. That’s why, when Dawn Bowden and Joyce Watson and Eluned Morgan all referred to the social fabric, the money that we’ve been able to find for homelessness, for the discretionary assistance fund, is so important.

Let me very briefly, Llywydd, say something to Darren Millar. There are other ideas on our tax list; a fast food packaging levy is there in the list that I outlined today. I’m sure, Llywydd, the last time I looked, the Menai bridge was in north-west Wales, and had he looked carefully at the agreement with Plaid Cymru, he would’ve seen that we have found money to accelerate the commitment the First Minister made in the Eisteddfod in August to the third Menai crossing. My colleagues will publish the detail of the budget in three weeks’ time, and he will see then the plans that we have, both for the £150 million flood defences and for the improvements to roads in the north of Wales.

There is more, of course, that could be said, but we are at the start of a process, not the end. I am grateful to everybody who has commented on the budget this afternoon, and I look forward to the period of scrutiny that will now follow.

Thank you very much.

Item 4 on the agenda is the statement by the Minister for Social Services and Public Health on the Welsh Government’s response to the independent review of Sport Wales, and I call on the Minister for Social Services and Public Health to make the statement—Rebecca Evans.

Thank you. In July, I received and published the independent panel’s report on their review of Sport Wales, with a firm commitment to consider the report and its recommendations over the recess and make a statement on the Government’s response in the autumn.

I welcome the review and its recommendations, and I thank everyone who participated in the process. I am particularly grateful to the independent panel members who volunteered their time to complete the review, and for doing so with integrity and professionalism. The resulting report is an evidence-based reflection on the role and purpose of Sport Wales, and how its stakeholders and partners perceive it. It includes recommendations for both Welsh Government and Sport Wales. I agree with the findings of the review and I am pleased that Sport Wales has responded positively to it. The Chair has written to me setting out how the organisation will address the findings and recommendations, some of which they have already started to implement, and I met with the Chair last week to further discuss their response. I have full confidence in Sport Wales to build on the foundation of success recognised in the report and to unite the sport sector to deliver tangible and long-lasting benefits to the people of Wales.

Today, I am responding to the report’s key recommendation for Welsh Government by making this statement to provide clarity, definition and direction about what we expect from Sport Wales and the sport sector, including how we expect them to work, and how we expect them to contribute to our national strategy, ‘Prosperity for All’.

We often talk about the power of sport to unite a nation, and we’ve been fortunate to see it many times in recent years. There’s nothing like sporting success to bring us together and give us the cause to celebrate our culture, heritage and language. Sport nurtures talent and delivers success, and that success is enjoyed by spectators and supporters, as well as the athletes and teams themselves.

The review of Sport Wales rightly recognises the role that the organisation has played in supporting elite athletes and national governing bodies to deliver medal successes for Wales and Great Britain. They should be commended for that, and for the contribution that this makes to our economy and our global image.

Grass-roots sport provides everyone with the opportunity to be active and to enjoy the physical and mental health benefits of sport. According to the national survey for Wales, people participating in sporting activities are more likely to meet the physical activity guidelines. And people who play sport and take part in physical recreation are also less likely to smoke, more likely to eat five fruit and vegetables a day, and less likely to be obese.

The challenge we have as a nation, and one that sport cannot address alone, is that only a third of the population is physically active to the recommended levels. As a Government, we will encourage and support a substantial increase in people’s physical activity as part of our approach to promoting good physical and mental health. To do that, we need sport to continue to play its part and to demonstrate its impact. But, like many other pursuits and pastimes, it has to continue to be relevant and resilient. It has to create an offer for all ages and abilities at times and in places that are convenient. The offer has to be flexible enough for people to build it around the other commitments in their lives. Sport has to embrace and harness technology to engage and re-engage people, and to maintain their interest and enthusiasm for as long as possible. Sport Wales has a crucial role to play in delivering this sporting offer, and our investment through Sport Wales is critical to the future well-being of the nation.

Over the term of this Government I will continue to invest in sport, through Sport Wales, but I will expect the sector to adapt, to become more resilient and to demonstrate better its contribution to our well-being goals and our objectives. The priorities I expect Sport Wales to focus on are: getting more people active at every stage in their lives—while they’re at school, when they leave education, when they get a job, if they have a family of their own, and when they retire; providing children with the best start in life, by helping schools to teach them skills and give them the knowledge, motivation and confidence to be, and stay, active; investing effort and resources where they’re needed most, where there are significant variations in participation and where there is a lack of opportunity or aspiration to be active; helping sport to continue to nurture, develop and support talent to deliver success that inspires people and reinforces our identity as a nation. This includes schools and employers, the media, local government and the third sector. It involves maximising the potential of our active travel strategies. It means our healthcare providers making every contact with a patient count, and we know that brief interventions to promote healthy lifestyles and support behaviour change can be more cost-effective than prescribing drugs to lower cholesterol levels, for example.

‘Prosperity for All’ makes our intention to work differently very clear. We expect the public sector bodies we invest in to do the same. We expect a collaborative approach from all agencies involved in the promotion of healthier lifestyles, and we expect them to draw on Wales’s significant natural resources to increase people’s physical activity. Sport Wales and Public Health Wales were purposely brought together under one portfolio. I expect them to continue to work together in the coming months to develop long-term priorities and actions to contribute to our action plan to deliver the objectives of our national strategy.

Education is a key driver for change, and its role is acknowledged in our national strategy. Our schools, colleges and universities have a captive audience to influence, and they have facilities that can and should be shared with their communities. Our local authorities make a considerable investment in facilities and activities to encourage participation in physical activity, and their continued commitment is vital. Their and our investments in infrastructure are crucial if we are to engage and encourage active lifestyles and active travel.

Sport is only one domain in the spectrum of physical activity. A second is physical recreation, such as walking, cycling, running and swimming. Others include more routine activity, such as active travel to work or school, and activities such as gardening, DIY and housework. Sport Wales will continue to focus its effort and resources on the sport and physical recreation domains, to increase further the number of people who participate on a frequent and regular basis. Public Health Wales will continue to promote healthy lifestyles, including the importance of physical activity, and Natural Resources Wales will invest in our natural environment to support the infrastructure necessary for people to be physically active outdoors.

But for us to achieve that step change to reduce health inequalities and to buck the trend in ill health and early mortality, we need all partners working together. For that reason, we have asked Sport Wales and Public Health Wales to be jointly responsible and accountable for the development of a combined set of actions in our ‘healthy and active’ action plan that will increase people’s physical activity levels, and they’ll work with Natural Resources Wales to do that. The actions will be framed by the national strategy and will include: common and consistent measures, performance indicators and shared objectives; clarity of the roles of key agencies and the resources available to support our policy objective to increase physical activity levels; and identified areas where resources and interventions will be aligned to achieve common outcomes.

As with all our goals and objectives for this Government term, the responsibility for increasing physical activity lies with us all in Government. But we will only achieve our aims by working across portfolios, and with all our public, private and third sector partners. So, today I am making clear my intent to maximise sport’s contribution to creating a physically active nation and to provide the mandate for joint actions to deliver a substantial increase in people’s physical activity. I am making clear the value of sport to individuals, communities and our nation, and we will continue to invest in it, to maximise its benefits for us and for future generations. Thank you.

I’d like to thank the Minister for her statement, which underscores, I’d say, the need for much closer working between Sport Wales and the Welsh Government. I also welcome the recommendations in the report. Serious questions were raised by this review as to why Sport Wales was allowed to become so dysfunctional. It is now clear that a greater degree of closer integration between Sport Wales and the Welsh Government is needed. Historically, this has not happened, and Sport Wales has for far too long, I’d say, been allowed to operate at an unacceptable distance from ministerial oversight, which has been to the detriment of the public whom it exists to serve.

Can I ask the Minister: what oversight will you have going forward of Sport Wales’s activities and governance and what does success look like, Minister? What does success look like? Your statement contains a lot of warm words, but no key performance indicators and no targets for which we, as Assembly Members, can hold you and Sport Wales to account. The review recommended that the Welsh Government provides greater guidance on what is expected of them, and there is some uncertainty as to which document should provide the strategic direction for Sport Wales. Can you comment, please, on that as well?

You referred only briefly to the ‘Prosperity for All’ document. Would the Minister consider bringing forward an updated strategy that brings together and refreshes the themes in ‘Climbing Higher: Creating an Active Wales’ and the elite sport strategy, to clarify the overall remit of Sport Wales?

At a time when we’re near the bottom, I’m afraid, of the league tables for diabetes and obesity, and only a third of the population is physically active, it is clear that Sport Wales must have a greater focus on its remit to enhance community sport and public health as well as focusing on elite sport. So, to that end, and given that the report notes that there has been very little joint working between the two teams who lead on these areas in Sport Wales, what considerations have you given to the recommendations that the Welsh Government reviews the community sport and activity programme? Why do you feel that a single organisation is a better model than two separate organisations, one focusing on community sport and a separate elite sport organisation? I’m also aware there’s a great deal of consensus in this Chamber around the national football museum for Wales, potentially located in Wrexham, or indeed why not Newtown, as a founder member of the Football Association of Wales, but certainly in that region of Wales. I wonder if you could provide any update on the potential of this proposal, which of course would help to promote sporting excellence and create jobs and support the tourism industry in that particular region.

Finally, Minister, the report recommended that the Welsh Government should provide longer term budgets for Sport Wales, to offer three-year funding settlements to enable Sport Wales’s partners to develop their business plans more efficiently. Have you discussed this with the Cabinet Secretary for finance and how will you take this particular recommendation forward?

Thank you very much for those comments. I probably—well, I certainly wouldn’t agree with your opening comments regarding the relationship between Welsh Government and Sport Wales. I don’t think they paint a fair reflection and they certainly don’t paint a fair reflection of Sport Wales as an organisation. I’ve been clear all along, with all of the history that we’ve had with the board at the end of last year and at the beginning of this year, I’ve been very clear that Sport Wales as an organisation itself was never dysfunctional. The issues I had really were about the working of the board, which got to a point where it couldn’t continue its work and it needed fresh leadership. So, I think that we need to separate those two issues very carefully, because, actually, during this very difficult period for the organisation, Sport Wales has been continuing day in, day out to undertake some excellent work right up and down Wales. So, I think it’s important to recognise that there is a difference between the organisation itself and the workings of the board, where I had the concerns.

But regarding governance, and, again, this is an area that was looked at by the new interim chair when he first came into post—. He was very clear that he didn’t have concerns about the governance arrangements or the financial arrangements of the organisation. Again, those arrangements are robust. The Welsh Government, as you’ll be aware, has frequent performance meetings with the individuals concerned in the organisation in terms of making sure that we do have that strong governance. We also issue the remit report as well, which sets out clearly the direction that we expect the organisation to take. And, as you’d expect, I meet regularly with both the chair and the chief executive of the organisation as well.

In terms of the strategic direction, you’ll see that one of the key recommendations for Sport Wales itself within the independent report is the creation of a new long-term approach, a new long-term strategy for sport in Wales. That should respond to the direction that we’ve set out today and set out in previous discussions with the organisation about a greater focus on tackling some of the inequalities in health that we have in Wales—inequalities, perhaps, in opportunities to access sport, whilst also continuing the excellent work that they do alongside the sport governing bodies in terms of putting us on the world stage with some of our absolutely excellent achievements that we’ve had at elite level as well.

It’s also important that Sport Wales includes some robust outcomes, metrics and performance frameworks, with ownership clarity and a transparent investment process within that piece of work. That’s one of the items that is specifically referred to within the independent report as an action for Sport Wales to take forward as well.

In terms of the community sport and activity programme, we’re having some discussions at the moment with Sport Wales in terms of how we would take that forward, perhaps looking at delivery on a more regional basis in order to make the most of the different partnerships that do exist within our communities. I’ve asked my officials to work with the organisation to bring these discussions, I suppose, to a conclusion, because I do realise that this is something that we really need to be making progress on now as well. So, I would hope to be able to say more on that in the near future as well.

In terms of the suggestion as to whether or not we should have two organisations, so an organisation focused on grass-roots sport and an organisation focused on elite sport, I know that’s something that has been discussed and considered over a period of time now, and it was one of the issues that the independent review panel looked at. Their strong and clear recommendation was that, actually, there should not be a split between the elite sport and the grass-roots sport in terms of where they sit within an organisation. I think one of the reasons for that is the importance, really, of having those grass-roots pathways all the way up to elite sport as well, so to maintain a clear line of sight between talent spotting at the grass roots and then ensuring that these people have the opportunity to go on and do us proud on the international stage as well.

The national museum, yes, that’s something that Welsh Government has committed to, and I can confirm that the Cabinet Secretary for economy is currently undertaking a feasibility study for that as well. And I think that’s answered all the questions.

We obviously can’t overemphasise the importance of getting our sporting offer right in Wales, not only for national well-being and celebrating our heritage and so on, as the Minister says, but more importantly as a means of getting us healthier, and as we look forward to the formation of the first obesity strategy for Wales—it’s come about as a result of our amendment to the Public Health (Wales) Bill—we know that getting people physically active and engaged in sport also is a must.

I’d like to draw attention and just ask a few questions about things that are not in the statement, if I could. Firstly, if I could ask the Minister to comment on what is expected of Sport Wales now in terms of tackling a number of inequalities. Gender inequality in sport as a first one: the need for more women to get involved in sport and exercise, and what Sport Wales should be doing, for example, fair funding; ensuring safe facilities; challenging stereotypes. The same could be said about disabilities. I don’t think I’ve heard what is expected now of Sport Wales in terms of tackling inequalities there. Also tackling racism: certainly a barrier still towards the uptake of sport. Inequality, I think, is only really mentioned in the context of Sport Wales being asked to invest resources where they’re needed most in terms of tackling social inequalities, but there are other examples of inequalities—some I’ve mentioned there. Also, there are inequalities caused by charging for facilities. So, perhaps I could ask for a comment about means of reducing those costs where possible.

The statement also says Sport Wales has to work with a whole range of partners: schools, employers, active travel, third sector and so on. How do we make sure, though, that that actually leads to more sporting opportunities being provided? It’s not just about having meetings between those bodies. Who will be ensuring that these new partnerships actually lead to more happening on the front line, as it were, and whilst the more partners we have taking part in the provision of sporting opportunities the better, where does accountability lie if everybody is to take more responsibility? And, finally, sport is all too often a victim of tightening purse strings at local government level, and of course I sympathise with councils trying to make ends meet, but I wonder what measures you are investigating to help local authorities make investments in tough financial times, for example, with additional funds, perhaps, made available where current sporting facilities are safeguarded for the use of local communities.

Okay, thank you very much for those questions. I was very pleased to be able to work with Plaid Cymru to include that amendment within the Public Health (Wales) Act 2017 in terms of introducing a national obesity strategy for Wales. I’m pleased to inform you as well that it’s one of the areas of the Bill that I do take as a priority. So, it will be one of the Parts of the Bill that I’m really keen to give a very early commencement order date for as well. So, I’m prioritising that particular part of the Bill.

With regard to women and girls, Sport Wales continues to target investment in opportunities for women and girls, particularly through their Calls for Action programme, and they’ve invested around £1.5 million specifically in projects to increase female participation. I was also really pleased to see in August that they launched Our Squad. That’s a campaign aimed at celebrating active women and girls from right across Wales, and signposting new participants to new opportunities as well. That campaign is also about challenging some of the stereotypes about women in sport, and about what kind of sport is a suitable sport for women and so on. It’s about giving women role models and a vision for themselves to see themselves in a different way in a sporting context as well.

One of the projects that tackles the issue of getting more women involved, but also women specifically in more disadvantaged communities, is the Us Girls Wales movement, and that was set up by StreetGames Wales and funded by Sport Wales. That continues to increase participation in sport by young women in those more deprived communities across Wales. Again, that’s a really positive programme as well.

As I said in the statement, it’s not all for Sport Wales. Actually, I think that the sport governing bodies and other sporting associations have a really strong and important role to play in this as well. I know that the Welsh Rugby Union, for example, are doing some good work to try and encourage more women to think about taking up rugby. Equally, in football as well, the Football Association of Wales has done great work encouraging girls to take up sport. Actually, the game is growing at a much faster rate for women and girls in Wales at the moment than it is for boys, so I think that’s really positive as well.

In terms of disabilities and the role of Sport Wales there, I’m really pleased to have announced recently that the new vice-chair of Sport Wales is Pippa Britton. Pippa Britton is also chair of Disability Sport Wales, so that gives those two organisations a really close link. Disability Sport Wales has supported over 1 million opportunities for disabled people to take part in sport and physical activity, and they have 17,500 members attending over 750 clubs and sessions across Wales. But, their real ethos is about inclusive sport, and that’s something that I thoroughly support, in terms of making all sporting opportunities open to people with disabilities as well. So, it’s not about having particular clubs and so on—actually, it’s about having a truly inclusive ethos as well. Disability Sport Wales also has around 5,000 coaches and volunteers supporting young people to undertake sport in the community, and I think that’s certainly to be commended as well.

In terms of facilities, the Welsh Government’s keen to give local authorities opportunities to develop their facilities. We do this knowing that people are operating in a very constrained financial time. So, our interest-free capital loans scheme has generated over £5 million of investment in sports and leisure facilities this year in Conwy, Wrexham and Cardiff, and that’s one of the examples of the innovative ways that we’re trying to maintain and enhance our facility infrastructure for sport and physical activity.

Equally, through our twenty-first century schools programme, we’re trying to ensure that our investment in schools is actually an investment in the wider community as well. So, we’re trying to ensure that that investment is there after school hours for after-school clubs and for the adults in the community to use as well. I’ve been really pleased to see the leadership that the Welsh football association, the Welsh Rugby Union, Hockey Wales and Sport Wales have shown, in terms of their third generation collaboration group. They’ve invested, between them, more than £2 million in school sports facilities. So, despite increasingly austere times, there is good investment going on in facilities.

You’ll be aware also that Ken Skates has asked for a facilities review—so, looking at the more elite-level facilities that we have in Wales—in order to try to attract further high-profile major events to Wales in future, because we’re certainly getting a reputation for being fantastic hosts for those kinds of events.

Minister, I’m very pleased about the direction of travel and your statement today. In Newport, as I know you’re aware, we’ve been working towards bringing leisure, sports, health, local authorities, the voluntary sector, professional sports clubs and grass-roots sports together, with a series of meetings to try to get a more active local population and to try to address that wider health and quality of life agenda that sport lends itself to. I do believe there is a need to refocus Sport Wales, Welsh Government and others’ efforts in Wales towards that wider agenda, because we do have a lot of health challenges. I think many would recognise that if we are to get on the front foot with health and have a more preventative agenda, then this is exactly the set of policies and strategy that we need to consider and follow. So, I’m very pleased about that.

I wonder if you could say a little bit about how Welsh Government, Sport Wales and others might encourage local initiatives like the one taking place in Newport, whether it’s through new developments such as well-being bonds or any other opportunity, to look at where there is good practice and to support it and hopefully then roll it out further afield. I wonder if you’d also recognise initiatives such as the one by Newport Live, which is a very active and strong partner in that local development in Newport, as the trust taking forward leisure services. They’ve recently launched a swimming initiative, Draig Dŵr, which Jayne, Jessica Morden, as MP for Newport East, and I attended last week. It’s a programme to engage people more actively and strongly in swimming, to then progress and set goals for themselves, to benefit from coaching and tips to improve their technique and to monitor and facilitate that progress. That’s just one of a number of initiatives that Newport Live are taking forward at the current time, which makes them a very active and strong partner in that local initiative.

I wonder also if you would agree that park runs right across Wales are a very strong model of how you can use engagement techniques, such as websites, such as allowing people to monitor their progress by timing their runs, and having a range of social activity, how perhaps we could look at that model for running and see if it fits other physical activity, which would help us get the more active population we want to see.

On active travel, Minister, I wonder if you could just say a little bit about how you’re working with ministerial colleagues across Welsh Government to ensure that active travel is effective and does deliver on this agenda. I was very pleased to hear you mention it in your initial statement.

Finally, on community-focused schools, it’s long been a belief of mine that community-focused schools should be more universally available right across Wales. If they were, I think it would make it much easier to engage our local population around physical activity and make the progress that we’d like to see. So, again, I wonder if you could give us a flavour of how you’re working across Welsh Government to make sure that community-focused schools are available right across Wales and the norm rather than good practice.

Thank you very much for those questions and comments. Having heard you speak previously with such passion about Newport Live and the potential that it has and what it’s already delivering, I was really pleased to go along and see what they did for myself. I was just as impressed as I expected I would be after hearing you speak about them. At the same time, over one side, we had people training at an elite level and also we had groups of schoolchildren doing activities and learning about healthy eating and so on. So, it had really the whole spectrum just on one site. It was really inspirational and exciting. It’s certainly something I would encourage other areas to look at and learn from what’s been happening in Newport Live because it really is quite exciting.

You mentioned well-being bonds and this is one of our programme for government commitments. We’re developing the ideas at the moment for well-being bonds and, again, this is something that I know that you’re keen that Newport Live has a discussion about, to see what we can learn from them as we start developing that. There are different models that we’re looking at at the moment. So, we could be looking at loans, for example, or payment-by-results models. There are different models out there, but at the same time there aren’t any set and established ones that we know absolutely will do the job that we’re after. So, I’m keeping a very open mind as we develop those Wales well-being bonds.

Park runs, I’m really glad that you mentioned those because, again, they bring together people of all levels of experience: people who were previously inactive but turning up because it’s in a park, it’s a local, well-known, fun environment with welcoming people and so on, right up to people who just do 5, 10, 20 km and don’t even break a sweat. So, it brings people of all abilities together and I really welcome that. Another good example would be the Breeze cycling groups for women. That’s specifically bringing women together in a really safe environment, often beginners again, taking that first step into physical activity, and that’s another great example of work that’s already happening up and down Wales.

Active travel: that is extremely important in terms of creating the infrastructure for physical activity, because I think there are two sides to this. There’s creating or giving people the inspiration, but then also giving people the opportunity, and the infrastructure’s part of the opportunity. Our integrated network maps will be submitted by each of the local authorities to Welsh Government by November of this year, and I’ve been very clear with them. Indeed, I’ve written to them to stress the point again fairly recently that, actually, those integrated network maps have to be about active travel rather than just aspirations for more recreational routes in future, because, if we are going to change the way that we do move and that we undertake our travel and our short journeys then, actually, we have to be very clearly focusing on active travel routes.

In terms of our work across Government, I’ve been working closely with the Cabinet Secretary for Education to see what more we can do to use our school assets that we have and what we can do in the school day to encourage children to become more active as well. We’ve had some really good success in terms of the daily mile. Now, thousands and thousands of children in Wales are doing the daily mile every day. We know that it has great impacts on the children’s behaviour in school, on their attention in class and so on. The teachers love it; parents love it. Parents say, ‘If you weren’t doing the daily mile in school, we’d be doing it anyway now because I’ve seen the difference that it makes for my child in the way that they’re learning in school as well.’ So, there are lots of innovative ideas happening at the moment and a real keenness to work across Government on this important agenda.

Thanks to the Minister for her statement. There have obviously been some issues over the running of Sport Wales, which Russell George alluded to earlier, and we, as Members, don’t have the inside information to understand all of what it was about. But it seems to me that part of the problem with the organisation in the past year or so has quite probably been about its remit. Now, we did touch on this earlier on today, but I will just quickly go over a couple of the points that have been mentioned. Traditionally, Sport Wales tended to specialise at the elite end of sport and it’s only in much more recent times that it’s been given any kind of responsibility to oversee grass-roots sport. It seems to me that, although it may sound like a good idea to group the two sectors together, in practice they are very different, and this can cause problems for an organisation like Sport Wales.

Now, there was some evidence in the independent review that some stakeholders believe that Sport Wales prioritises elite sport at the expense of the grass-roots level. My first question was going to be: given that situation, did you still think it was viable to have one organisation representing both the elite and grass-roots levels? I think you answered that, to be fair, in your fairly strong response to Russell George’s questions. But, given that there is this idea from the stakeholders that the elite level tends to get the priority, how can we overcome this? And how can you ensure that there is equal consideration given to the grass-roots level as well as to the elite level? If there are disputes over spending, over resourcing, how is that going to be resolved? Now, you did mention in your response to Russell that we needed to create a pathway to elite sport for everybody. And, yes, of course, the elite athletes have to start somewhere. I think in reality, perhaps, the children who eventually make it to the elite level of sport will generally be the ones coming from families who already have a keen interest in developing their children’s sporting activities. But what we have to ensure is that we increase the take-up of ordinary physical activities by the rest of the population or, as the Welsh Government’s ‘Taking Wales Forward’ programme puts it, increase the physical activity levels of Welsh citizens in those groups that currently have very low physical activity levels.

Now, John Griffiths spoke about park runs, and I think that’s exactly the kind of activity that we should be encouraging, so I’m also encouraged by your supportive remarks, and I hope that, in future, initiatives like parkrun, if they need financial support, hopefully they can get it, although I guess, with parkrun, perhaps the one thing that they may not need a lot of is financial support. But things like active travel, that certainly will need help with resourcing.

This brings us on to the issue of the difference between sport and physical recreation. The 1972 royal charter that established the predecessor body to Sport Wales clearly uses the term ‘sport and physical recreation’. But more recent documents associated with Sport Wales have only sometimes used both terms. Sometimes, they only mention sport in relation to Sport Wales, but contain no reference to physical recreation. Now, the report states, and I quote:

‘This inconsistency is very confusing for Sport Wales’ partners, some of whom claimed the organisation is “changeable” and lacking in clarity of purpose. It is equally confusing for Sport Wales’ staff’.

So, my next question is: does the Minister think that Sport Wales staff themselves are given a clear enough steer by their parent body on where their remit lies? And does the Welsh Government need to clarify somewhat the position? There is also another issue, which is the gap between sport and health. The danger is that the all-embracing approach could leave Sport Wales’s best efforts falling in the cracks between sport and health.

Now, the stated intention in 2015 was to develop a new strategy that aligns Sport Wales’s measures with the chief medical officer’s physical activity guidelines. However, quoting again from the report,

‘despite the introduction of a Memorandum of Understanding with the NHS Confederation very little progress had been made to establish a platform…between the sport and health sectors.’

Now, I see that, in the Minister’s statement today, she does mention Sport Wales and Public Health Wales and the idea of working jointly together towards joint targets. But, just to clarify that point, does the Minister think that the Welsh Government needs to give us more information on how exactly sport and health should interact? And which body does the Minister think should be taking the lead for researching and overseeing physical activity—Sport Wales or Public Health Wales? Thanks.

I thank you very much for those questions. I think you’re right in the sense that the review itself did recognise that there is some work for Sport Wales to do in terms of its relationships with stakeholders and how they manage those relationships. So, one of the recommendations for Sport Wales within the review was for it to consider how it manages those relationships with the national governing bodies and local authorities so that the level of check and challenge is proportionate and balanced with providing advice and added value. So, hopefully, that will address some of those issues in terms of an understanding of the role of Sport Wales and how it relates to its partners.

I also like the recommendation in the report that suggests it considers adopting a formal relationship with further education and higher education for gathering insight, commissioning research, and discussing areas for collaboration as well. I think that’s a really positive step as well.

I agree: sport should be for everyone. So, we shouldn’t have a situation where it’s only those people who’ve been supported by sporty parents from a very young age and guided into a particular sport that are able to take advantage of all the knowledge and the pathways that are available. Actually, it should be for everyone. So, when there is young talent identified, be it at school or in a local club, for example, those pathways should be there to take them if they want to, and if they have the skills and desire to, all the way through to the elite pathway as well. And the national governing bodies do have those really strong, robust pathways in place as well. So, the aim, really, is to ensure that, as we get more people more active, those people will have that opportunity to rise up the ladder if they so wish.

In terms of the definition, I hope I’ve been able to provide some clarity in the statement today that we’re talking about sport and physical recreation, so active recreation, as well. I don’t expect sport or Sport Wales to start getting people active who live completely sedentary lives at the moment. I don’t think that’s either fair on them as an expectation, or even realistic or achievable. Where I see the role there, I see a role there very much for Public Health Wales and the NHS more widely, so looking at the role of the directors of public health within the health boards and so on. I think there are roles there, using those short interventions and so on, to be having conversations to get people along the first step of that journey.

So, I hope that there’s a clear, I suppose, role set out there for Sport Wales. But, in terms of the platform that you referred to between sport and the health sectors needing to be much more clear in future, I think that the purpose behind the response, really, today was to mandate Public Health Wales and Sport Wales to work more closely together in future, so to work together to inform our ‘healthy and active’ strategy in terms of the actions that need to be undertaken and by whom, and what the outcomes we expect of them are as well.

I had the opportunity to meet with the incoming chair of Public Health Wales yesterday, and I took that opportunity to stress the importance that we put on the role that Public Health Wales has in terms of increasing physical activity, but particularly amongst those who are the furthest from activity at the moment.

Thank you. And, finally, Hannah Blythyn.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you, Minister, for updating us here today. I’ve got a few points and questions to raise in respect of your statement today, the review, and some wider issues as well. In your statement you’re right to recognise the role of sporting success to unite and excite the nation, and the review also rightly acknowledges the role Sport Wales has played in supporting and nurturing our elite athletes and helping us bring home medal successes. Of course, we should want to and should build on this, but Sport Wales also needs to reach out across communities and across the country, as we’ve been discussing today. I think it’s really important to make sure we’ve got that equity of support and opportunity to access services, as well as investment, not simply in and around the capital and south Wales. Many people in my area will often have difficulty accessing those opportunities in Cardiff, just because of the geographic distance; you’re not going to travel three and a half hours for a one-hour training session or whatever, and there are obviously cost barriers involved with that. I know it’s relatively easy to travel to access facilities in the north-west of England, but I think there are opportunities to look at how we can develop those services that are already there in north-east Wales, and perhaps, further down the line, to see further investment to enable opportunities and to support younger people in particular in the region.

Minister, the review refers to Sport Wales—. I welcome the comments today in terms of looking at delivery on a more regional basis, and I hope that those concerns could be taken on board as part of that. The review refers to a sport north Wales initiative, and how plans are currently on hold. I wonder if there’s any update on that and, obviously, if you agree with me that we need to make sure we ensure that equity of opportunity across the nation.

I’m also pleased to a see a strong emphasis on partnership working between local government, the third sector, and education facilities, particularly including greater links with schools, and I know, in a previous response, you said about how we invest in schools and encourage collaboration. I’m aware that there’s sometimes some understandable trepidation on the part of schools in terms of opening up their facilities to the community. I wonder what role there is for Sport Wales or other similar bodies in acting as a facilitator to actually address any of those issues, and if we can find ways to share best practice when it has been successful and where, ultimately, it could be in the schools’ interest if they’re able to raise revenue from opening up their facilities as well.

Last but by absolutely no means least, Rhun ap Iorwerth touched on the issue of gender equality in sport, and I think I want to really raise and emphasise today the role Sport Wales and other national sporting bodies across the piece in Wales should be playing in both getting more women involved in sport, but also giving equal recognition, treatment, and parity of support for women’s sport in Wales. We need to be clear, over and over again, that sport is not just for the boys, and elite sport is not just about the men’s teams. Whilst I recognise there have been multiple drives and campaigns to get more girls and women active and involved in sport, they are always going to have a limited effectiveness if we don’t have that visibility to aspire to on the public stage. Young girls can’t aspire to be national rugby players for Wales or to be elite footballers if they haven’t got—you know, they can’t see that that is an aspiration that they themselves could reach one day. It’s 2017 and I’m sure you’ll agree, Minister, that action is needed to deal with this, and what action can be taken to make sure that we provide a platform, a better platform, for women, and better support for women’s sport in Wales?

Thank you. Finally, Minister.

I thank you very much for those questions and comments. You particularly referred to the importance of having the right mix of facilities in the right parts of Wales, and that’s certainly something that the Cabinet Secretary for economy’s facilities review is looking at, in terms of what do we have at the moment in Wales already, but where does the investment need to be in future in order to both attract those major events, and also then to have the right infrastructure for sporting opportunities available for people within our various communities in Wales. I agree that we do need to make progress on that regional approach, so this is one of the priorities that my officials and I are taking forward in partnership with the interim chair of Sport Wales in terms of bringing that particular piece of work to a conclusion, because I think it does hold lots of opportunities for us. So, I think that we need to move on with looking at that regional approach and what we can do best there, because I know that the partners locally are very keen to get working together, and I think that is, in itself, a really positive sign.

I would encourage all schools to consider what they can do in terms of opening up their facilities outside of the core school hours for the community. As you say, there are opportunities, certainly, to ensure that they support the physical activity of the community more widely. I think, sometimes, the issue is perhaps that school governors are a bit too cautious. So, I think that Welsh Government, and sporting organisations as well, can be sending a message that, actually, this is something that we welcome and would expect schools to do as part of their role at the heart of their communities.

I will certainly join you in absolutely celebrating the success of our women sportspeople, at all levels, as well. I agree with you that they need to be given the kudos and respect and sheer admiration for their achievements in just the same way as we would admire men for their sporting achievements as well. So, we need to be working on that as individuals, celebrating the successes that we see locally, but also encouraging the media as well to continue to promote women in sport.

Thank you very much, Minister.

Item 5 is the statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Rural Affairs on the bovine TB eradication programme. I call on Lesley Griffiths to introduce her statement.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Members will recall my statement in June where I set out my plans to enhance the TB eradication programme in Wales, and 1 October marked the start of an enhanced approach to TB eradication—one that has proved successful in other countries that have either eradicated this disease, or are well on their way to doing so.

This regionalised approach to disease eradication, with the creation of low, intermediate and high TB areas across Wales, enables us to deal differently and proportionately with the disease in each of our TB areas on a targeted basis, depending on the local disease risks and drivers. This approach also enables us to focus our efforts on protecting and expanding the low TB area and driving down disease and reducing the size of the intermediate and high TB areas.

In June, I launched our enhanced TB eradication programme and first delivery plan, which provides details of evidence-based controls that are being applied in each region from this week. All cattle keepers in Wales have been advised by letter of the TB area in which their farm is located, and my officials have undertaken a full programme of engagement with key stakeholders, including farmers, vets, auctioneers and valuers.

Through the regionalised approach to TB eradication, we’ve established a low TB area. Epidemiological analysis of surveillance data shows the majority, if not all, TB breakdowns in the low TB area are the result of undetected infection brought in through cattle movements from other areas. This evidence of non-endemic disease in the low TB area means we are now in a position to change the way we deal with testing. One of the main changes is the removal of the pre-movement testing requirement of cattle moved within or from the low TB area. Pre-movement testing has been in place in Wales since 2006 and it still remains a valuable tool in the intermediate and high TB areas in order to identify infection before it spreads.

However, we have introduced post-movement testing for cattle brought in from a higher disease area. We recognise no TB test is perfect, so introducing an additional test at the farm of destination provides double assurance of the TB status of cattle moved into the low TB area. We will monitor and review the success of this policy before considering whether it is appropriate to expand its roll-out to the intermediate TB area next year.

Exempt finishing units in Wales are currently being phased out due to the relatively high number of TB breakdowns in this type of operation and the inherent risk of disease spread. To put this change into perspective, there are around 20 EFUs currently in existence in Wales and all operators have been contacted in respect of the options available to them.

To protect the Welsh Government from the cost of the highest value animals, a cap on TB compensation of £5,000 payable per animal has been introduced. The proportion of animals affected by this change will be small. Last year, of the total number of cattle valued for TB purposes, only 68 animals—less than 1 per cent—were valued at over £5,000. If a cap had been in place last year, a saving of just under £200,000 would have been made—a saving that is important in the context of the loss of European Union funding post 2018.

Provision and implementation of bespoke action plans for persistent TB breakdowns lasting 18 months or longer continues. These are being drawn up, in consultation with the farmer, by the Animal and Plant Health Agency and the farmer’s private vet, at the farmer’s request. Approximately 40 action plans have been agreed so far, with more being added each month. At the same time, some persistent breakdown herds are coming off restriction and are dropping off the list. However, at any one time there are between 50 and 60 persistent TB breakdowns open and these are located in the intermediate and high TB areas.

Through the action plan process, a series of measures are being deployed in order to help clear up infection. These include more sensitive TB testing, removing inconclusive reactors and requiring an additional TB test prior to allowing cattle to be moved after restrictions are lifted. Biosecurity requirement notices can also be issued in order to raise biosecurity standards on farm to the required level in order to mitigate against persistence of disease.

In certain persistent TB breakdowns where it is viewed badgers are contributing to the persistence of disease in the herd, the action plans will include measures to address this route of infection. Following sett surveys, these measures will include trapping and testing badgers on the TB breakdown farm and humanely euthanising badgers found to have TB. Test-negative badgers will be released following them being microchipped, and blood will be taken for further testing.

I’ve continued to monitor the badger vaccine situation carefully, as I believe badger vaccination does have a role to play in our TB eradication programme. At the time when the supply situation for humans resolves and I can be sure we can ethically source vaccines, I will consider how vaccines might be best utilised as part of our TB eradication programme.

I cannot stress enough the importance of clearing up these long-standing TB breakdowns, some of which have been under restrictions for 16 years or more. On average, the cost of testing in these herds and compensation of cattle slaughtered is £179,000 per herd. We will be closely monitoring the impacts of all these measures and aim to be in a position to review the boundaries of the TB areas once we have the full calendar year data set for 2018.

Work on modelling and target setting continues. This work is due to report at the end of the year, when we will be establishing a formal eradication target for Wales as a whole and interim milestones for each of the TB areas. Alongside these enhancements, the annual TB herd testing regime continues across Wales. We have almost eight years of annual testing data under our belt in Wales, and this sustained high level of active surveillance provides indisputable assurance of the true TB status of cattle herds in Wales, with 95 per cent of our cattle herds TB free.

In order to build on our knowledge of bovine TB in badgers and other susceptible wildlife, I am pleased to announce the continuation of the all-Wales ‘badger found dead’ survey, following a successful procurement exercise. The Wales Veterinary Science Centre has been awarded the contract for this work, the scope of which has been expanded to include collection and post-mortem examination of any other wildlife species in addition to badgers.

The TB statistics remain encouraging. The number of new TB incidents is down by 40 per cent since 2009, the lowest level in 12 years. Even though the trend appears to be in a plateau currently, periods of levelling off are to be expected as part of the overall long-term pattern. This is why we have enhanced our programme to further drive down the disease.

I would like to thank the farming industry, and veterinary profession and other stakeholders for their continued cooperation and engagement as our programme develops and progresses towards our ultimate goal of achieving a TB-free Wales.

Can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her statement this afternoon? For the record, I’d like to, once again, state that my parents-in-law’s farm has been affected by bovine TB in recent years.

Of course, today’s statement confirms that work on modelling and target setting continues, and I welcome the fact that there will be more formal targets announced at the end of this year. However, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can confirm that these targets are being developed in partnership with the agricultural industry to ensure that they are proportionate and robust.

The Cabinet Secretary has my broad support for the Welsh Government’s proposals to start removing this disease from the wildlife population. I’m pleased that the Welsh Government is now starting to take that difficult step forward by removing infected badgers as well as infected cattle. Of course, given the sensitivity of this issue, both for landowners and the Welsh Government, I understand, quite rightly, that no specific information will be released in the public domain. However, perhaps she could provide some more detail about how she intends to monitor these arrangements to ensure that this process happens as smoothly as possible. Perhaps the Cabinet Secretary will also tell us how she will be assessing the effectiveness of this policy so the targeted controls are being implemented appropriately.

Now, of course, a regionalised approach is now being implemented, and it’s absolutely essential that this approach does not indirectly result in more burden and red tape for farmers. It’s crucial that the regionalised approach doesn’t hinder any attempts to deliver the best possible trade deals for the Welsh red meat and dairy industries, and also ensures that domestic trade between Wales and England is not negatively impacted. Indeed, in responding to my questions on this before recess, the Cabinet Secretary said that her officials have certainly spoken to DEFRA and had discussions around that. Therefore, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could tell us how those discussions are progressing, and what action she has agreed with the UK Government.

The Cabinet Secretary will be aware of the concerns raised recently by farmers in my own area that the new controls could have a negative effect for pedigree breeders in high TB areas. Therefore, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary could tell us how the Welsh Government will specifically support the pedigree industry, who are anxious that the regionalised approach could result in them finding it more difficult to trade in the future.

Of course, one of the Welsh Government’s longer-term goals, according to the Wales TB eradication programme delivery plan, is the development of an informed purchasing scheme. In the Cabinet Secretary’s statement before recess, she confirmed that a mandatory scheme was the only way forward, and that she had asked officials to look at a mandatory scheme. Now, given that today’s statement doesn’t make any reference to an informed purchasing scheme, could the Cabinet Secretary confirm that this is still on the Welsh Government’s agenda and, therefore, can she tell us exactly what work her officials have undertaken to develop a compulsory scheme?

The TB eradication delivery plan confirmed that the compensation cap would be reduced to £5,000. This has now been introduced in the last few days, of course, and I appreciate this only affects a small number of farms. In response to my questions on this subject during her previous statement, the Cabinet Secretary said that she would encourage people who feel they’ve got cattle more valuable to look at insurance. However, the Welsh Government’s own TB eradication programme delivery plan states that there are concerns that insurance would not be a viable option due to the cost of the premiums. Therefore, whilst I appreciate that this only affects a very small number of farmers, there are, naturally, concerns for the farmers affected by high disease incidence who may be unable to obtain insurance for animals valued at more than £5,000. So, perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can tell us how she will be supporting those farmers so that the impact of this proposal is as minimal as possible.

Another aspect of the TB eradication programme is the development of a standardised, online biosecurity package. It’s crucial that this package is developed with the industry to ensure that it’s flexible enough to take account of individual circumstances and the different risks and disease drivers in each TB area. I’m pleased that today’s statement notes the importance of on-farm biosecurity to militate against the prevalence of the disease. However, could the Cabinet Secretary therefore tell us a bit more about how she will be ensuring that any on-farm biosecurity package will be responsive to individual needs? And can she tell us a bit more about how the agricultural and veterinary industries will be involved in the development of any online biosecurity packages?

Therefore, in closing, Llywydd, can I thank the Cabinet Secretary, once again, for her statement this afternoon? And can I, once again, put on record my broad support for the Welsh Government’s proposals? I can’t stress how important it is that the Welsh Government works with the agricultural industry to eradicate bovine TB in order to protect the sustainability and competitiveness of the industry for the future, particularly in light of Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union. Diolch.

I thank Paul Davies for the comments, for welcoming the statement, and for his questions. You’re absolutely right, we have to work very closely with the industry, with the farming unions, with the vets, with the individual farmers who aren’t members of farming unions, and also with all stakeholders. I do want to assure Members that that absolutely is the way that we’ve approached this. You’ll be aware that there were several summer agricultural shows—I always took the opportunity to talk to people about our enhanced eradication programme, and as I said in my opening remarks, my officials have certainly done intensive engagement with our stakeholders and with the sector over the summer ahead of the 1 October start date.

In relation to your specific questions, you asked about targets, and I said that I’m hoping to be in a position, certainly by the end of this year, to come forward with a target, and certainly as this is being developed by officials, we are looking at whether interim targets would be beneficial. You ask about what agreed action I’ve taken with the DEFRA. Well, as I said before, I haven’t had specific discussions with DEFRA about this. This is obviously a matter for us, so I haven’t actually agreed any specific actions with DEFRA, but I know my officials do have discussions around the programmes. For instance, I’m aware that England and Scotland are now consulting—one of the things is around a reduction in compensation and having a compensation cap such as we’ve brought in here in Wales. So, those discussions are ongoing, but I haven’t got any agreed actions because, as I say, this is a matter for us.

You mentioned about informed purchasing. Absolutely, that is still the intention—to introduce a mandatory informed purchasing scheme. It’s really important, I think, that farmers display TB information at the point of sale, and you’ll be aware that we have given funding to livestock markets, for instance, but I’m still not happy that that information is always there. So, I think it’s really important that all our livestock markets upgrade their facilities. As I say, we have provided funding for that to be done, and more information does need to be provided to sellers. It’s really about empowering farmers so that they can make those informed buying decisions going forward. So, yes, that is absolutely still our intention.

You also asked about pedigree farmers in your own constituency and around their reservations, being in a high TB area. I absolutely understand the reservations that a number of farmers have about being included in a high TB area, and certainly when I came to the Pembroke show that was something that I discussed. But I’m really confident this approach will allow us to speed up progress, and that’s the message that I’ve given to the sector. I really want to reduce the number of breakdowns and the severity of each breakdown, as you yourself have said also.

I think your final question was around biosecurity, and you’ll remember that this enhanced eradication programme came about after we’d been out to consultation. As part of that consultation, I did task officials with developing a standardised, online biosecurity package, which really built on previous work that had been undertaken in this area. So, there’s a number of biosecurity tools available to farmers at the current time. What I want to do is really standardise the advice, because I think we don’t want—. You mentioned bureaucracy, and we really want to make it as simple as possible, and take out that complexity. So, what I really want to see is a single, comprehensive biosecurity package to enable farmers to fully assess their disease risks and then mitigate accordingly.

May I say at the outset that I welcome the statement that confirms the actions currently being taken, and in light of the previous statement by the Minister, which has also been supported in general terms by Plaid Cymru? Of course, at their core, these issues relate to public health on the one hand and animal welfare on the other, and Plaid Cymru is of the view that we need to treat animal welfare—the cattle suffering from TB as much as the welfare of badgers. And in addition to dealing with infected animals, whatever species that animal will be, we welcome the steps being taken and outlined in this statement. I also hope that it will actually do something to lift the shadow currently cast over the industry. Although the Cabinet Secretary has said that the number of herds suffering from bovine TB is reducing, certainly the impact in many parts of Wales is being felt very deeply indeed.

I’m not going to reiterate Paul Davies’s questions—he asked most of the questions that I wanted to ask—but I will just say that I also welcome your responses to the questions on informed purchasing, as it’s known, the internal market, and what happens between pedigree herds too.

One question that I think Paul Davies did refer to, and I wanted to raise, but you didn’t have an opportunity to respond to, and perhaps you could respond to my question, is that although we recognise that we wouldn’t want information to emerge on where action is being taken in terms of wildlife, how can we be assured not only that it’s being monitored and being done in the most beneficial way possible, or the most humane way possible, but that we should also understand whether this is working and whether it has assisted in reducing instances of bovine TB in those areas and on those specific farms, as your statement states, where it’s been chronic for a long period of time?

I will just move on to two or three new questions. One of them emerges from the fact that you’ve said clearly that one of the reasons for introducing a cap is to make savings. You mentioned savings of around £200,000 per annum, which does raise the question: what happens once we have left the European Union? We now know of those dates and we’re not sure what kind of trading will take place, but in this context we will no longer be part of the European Union system. So, can you confirm today that you will keep Government expenditure on this disease at its current level, at least until the end of this Assembly, so that this gives the right message to the industry that you want to work with them and that the cap, if you like, is a price worth paying because funding will still be spent in order to reduce and eradicate this disease?

The second question arising, in welcoming the fact that you have expanded the testing of animals found dead, there is talk of the introduction of a new species to the Welsh wildlife system. The otter has been mentioned [Translation should read: 'beaver'], and I know that there are some specific proposals to introduce the beaver to parts of mid Wales. I am informed that the beaver can carry this disease, so what assurances can you give us in this context that no new species introduced to our rural areas could spread this disease?

I do hope that farmers and the Government will work together to ensure that the new-look programme will be successful. I very much hope that we will see a reduction in the number of herds infected but also in the way that this disease is spread in the hotspots, as they’re known, in Wales. I just wanted to ask: when would you be willing to review whether the three areas that you have in Wales are doing the job that you expect of them, and when will you review this to see if this plan is working or not?

Diolch, Simon Thomas, for welcoming the statement and for your questions. You’re quite right, it is a matter of public health as well as animal welfare. I think we all share that aim of Wales being TB free. That’s why, because of that plateau—we knew that was coming—it was really important that we refreshed the TB programme.

In relation to your specific question, you’re quite right, I did forget to answer Paul Davies’s questions around monitoring. So, you’ll be aware that, in relation to the trapping of badgers, that is only on those chronic herd breakdowns. I mentioned there are between 50 and 60, so those actions plans are being drawn up at the current time. I have asked for those action plans to be monitored. I mentioned the vet, and obviously the Animal and Plant Health Agency. I would like to report probably annually as to how this is progressing. So, it’s going to take a year before, really, I’m able to report in a substantive way that would be beneficial.

In relation to the informed purchasing scheme you also mentioned, as did Paul Davies, as I say, we absolutely intend to introduce a mandatory informed purchasing scheme. And the reason we’re doing that is because it has made a significant contribution to TB eradication in both Australia and New Zealand and I was very fortunate to talk to somebody from New Zealand about this. You’re quite right, we won’t be reporting which farms are having the bespoke action plans because, obviously, there is a security question, but as I say, I will be reporting, certainly—my intention is annually.

In relation to the compensation cap, I am committed to paying a reasonable compensation sum for cattle slaughter because of TB, but it is getting more imperative that we do look at what funding we can save, because you’re quite right, we do not know where that funding is. So, certainly, my intention would be to continue to fund at the level we are, but you will appreciate that budgets are done on an annual basis and we’ll have to look at that. But it isn’t about saving money, it is about eradicating TB, and I am concerned that overvaluation does increase the cost to the taxpayer, and I really want to avoid that. And when you compare our average compensation payments, they are 60 per cent higher when you compare them to England, which I don’t think is acceptable.

You mentioned about otters and beavers: I, too, heard over the summer recess that they were looking to introduce beavers in Wales, but the last time I checked there hadn’t been any applications for licences, but, obviously, this is something that we will have to look at if that, obviously, happens. And I mentioned that the dead badger survey will now include other species, and I would encourage all Members to make sure that that phone number—which I haven’t got to hand; it’s in here somewhere—is available to everyone, and that if they do find a dead badger, they report it.

I too hope that this will bring forward significant improvement, particularly in those chronic heard breakdowns, which, as I say, some of them—or one of them, has been in breakdown since 2001. It’s completely unacceptable at so many different levels, and I am very pleased with the way the sector has worked with us to develop the refresh of the eradication programme.

Well, I can be even briefer than Simon Thomas, considering that there are fewer unanswered questions left by the time you get to me. But I welcome the statement, and I would also like to put on record my opinion that the Cabinet Secretary has been very constructive in the way in which she has developed policy in this area and the farming community is very appreciative of the openness that she has shown and her willingness to listen and to engage them in practical discussions about dealing with this terrible disease. It is as important to the farming community and, indeed, the country as a whole that this be dealt with as it was when we had BSE. Certainly, as for the future, and for the marketing potential of agricultural products in Wales, dealing with TB and eradicating it, so far as we can, is going to be vital in the post-Brexit world. I know the Cabinet Secretary shares my view on that.

To that end, although I’m a strong believer, as she knows, in proportionate regulation, the change in the regulations in relation to pre-movement testing in low TB areas is something that needs to be kept under review, and I’d like to know whether that will be done. I’d like to add my voice to what has already been said in relation to compensation for farmers for animals that are worth more than £5000, and I know that the Cabinet Secretary has just said that the compensation on average is 60 per cent more in England—I heard Llyr Gruffydd say a moment ago that that’s because we have 60 per cent better cattle. I don’t know whether that is actually true, but nevertheless, obviously, we don’t want to pay over the odds for cattle, but nevertheless, we have to recognise that farm incomes are under extreme pressure and this does impose a real cost upon people in the real world. So, I do hope that, again, she will keep that under review.

One of the big problems, of course, is the infection of animals in the wild, off farms. I do acknowledge the significant step that she has taken, which, in proper Sir Humphrey language, must have been regarded as courageous, to decide to have a limited cull where infected badgers can be found and to dispatch them humanely. That is a very significant step forward in principle, and I think she deserves our congratulations for that.

As regards badger vaccination, I wonder whether she will agree with me that this doesn’t really, I think, constitute a practical step for the eradication of this disease. We all remember that when vaccines were available, the cost per badger for those that were vaccinated was extortionate: getting on towards, I think, from memory, something like £1,000. So, it’s very expensive and the badger population is difficult to monitor, so I think it’s a bit of a blind alley to think that if the vaccine ever becomes available again in significant quantities it’s going to be the answer to this disease.

My last point is in relation to the role of the Animal and Plant Health Agency and the requirement, therefore, to have two vets on the farm to inspect animals. I know that this is a step forward in many ways, but this does impose an extra cost upon the farmer. His own vet is likely to know his own farm and his animals better than an APHA vet, so I wonder, therefore, whether, in order to assist, the Government might be able to pay for the cost of the APHA vet as well.

One more point I would like some assurance on is that I know that the Cabinet Secretary can’t give us exact timings, and increased cattle controls have been introduced this autumn, but can she confirm that the trapping and testing of badgers will also take place simultaneously with that this autumn, in line with the additional controls being placed on Welsh farmers? The farming industry has said it couldn’t accept further cattle controls without action being taken concurrently, and I hope she can assure me today that that’s likely to be the case.

Thank you, Neil Hamilton, for those questions. I suppose the short answer to a couple of those questions is that we will keep the whole programme under review—constant review. As I say, I have committed to reporting to the Assembly on the progress that we are making. You asked about a couple of points and whether we would be keeping specific things under review. The answer is that we’re keeping the whole programme under review.

You mentioned the pre-movement testing in the low TB area. I think it’s a very important and effective tool in keeping disease out of TB-free herds. I think that if we can declare that north-west Wales is TB free, it would give everybody a really big boost. We are within touching distance of doing that, so I think it’s really important that we protect that area in this way. I think keepers really need to take ownership of the disease situation, so that we can really protect that area’s favourable status.

In relation to compensation, you will have heard my earlier answers. As I say, it’s very pleasing to see now that England and Scotland are out to consultation on that too. I do urge farmers, if they do think they’ve got cattle that are worth more than £5,000, to look for insurance. I know it’s quite a new area of insurance, but it is out there.

In relation to trapping badgers, it’s not a cull, it’s not a limited cull. I think it would be good for the badger population if we take out—. If a badger’s got TB, why would you want to keep it there? I mentioned in my opening statement how that would be done—that they would be tested and they would be microchipped, and blood would also be tested again. So, I think it’s good for the badger population as well as cattle, obviously.

The vaccine does play a part, I think. I don’t think any one measure that we have would eradicate TB—I think it is about a whole suite of measures. I do think, as I say, that the vaccine has a role to play. If it becomes available in the way I set out in my opening statement, I will certainly look at it as part of the eradication programme.

So, the action plans, I mentioned there are between 50 and 60 chronic herd breakdowns at any one time, not always the same, obviously. I understand that about 45 of these action plans have now been drawn up over the summer since I made my statement in June, ahead of the 1 October start date. Obviously, this will then be part of those action plans as we go forward.

In relation to the private vet and the APHA vet working alongside the farmer, I haven’t had any criticism around the cost of it, but I too don’t want to put any more burdens on farmers, so I will certainly have a look at how that is funded.

I thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement and I am optimistic that these new enhanced measures will continue the significant progress that has been made towards eradicating bovine TB in Wales, which has already seen a 40 per cent drop in cases since 2009. I share your resolve to clear up the long-standing TB breakdowns, the cost to the public purse and the personal misery that they perpetuate.

But, Members know my views on culling wildlife: I believe that we should do all that we can to avoid it. So, I would urge the Government to continue to seek new science-led, innovative and humane ways to take out the disease. There is a big difference between Wales and the heedless cull in England. I know, Cabinet Secretary, that you don’t support an all-out cull and I welcome that approach, but I do wonder how frequently cages will be examined and how sure you can be that once a badger is caught, it would escape unnecessary death and suffering. You mentioned roadside kills being reported. I wonder if any of those have been assessed as being already dead before arriving at the roadside, and how many of them are actually TB free. I have lots of anecdotal evidence that suggest that that is a way of disposing of badgers that have been killed illegally long before they arrive at the kerbside. So, the only way that we can determine that is by actually looking more closely at those carcasses.

The other thing that I want to ask about are the slurry leaks from the mega dairy farms and the potential spread of bTB as a consequence of those. I ask, because it’s not mentioned here at all in this statement, whether before we license any more mega dairy farms, we could look very seriously within that planning application about the containment of slurry within the farm, rather than finding it in the river within a few days and also quite frequently.

I would also be interested to hear your views, Cabinet Secretary, on a new testing technique currently being used on a farm in Devon that could help identify and isolate infected cows more accurately and quickly, eliminating TB from the herd without having to interfere with the surrounding wildlife. We know that although badgers can catch TB from cattle, they don’t keep it alive for nearly as long. The Devon test appears to show that even where badgers around the farm had tested positively for TB, because the disease had been completely eradicated from the herd, it then doesn’t return. The Save Me Trust is assisting in the study and hopes that, with better testing, killing badgers will become an irrelevance, and so do I.

The other thing that has disturbed me, and I’m sure it will have disturbed other people listening to this debate today, is now the inclusion, not only of badgers, but of otters and beavers. I find that completely distressing and I’d like to see any evidence that anyone can present in that regard.

Thank you. Well, as I say, the last time I asked there had been no licences applied for to bring beavers into Wales, but obviously that is something that we will have to continue to look at if that should happen. You’re quite right, I have ruled out an England-style cull, and I personally don’t think there’s anything to suggest that the disease picture in England is improving with what they are doing. So, absolutely, we’ve ruled out a cull, and you’ll be aware of what we are doing just in those chronic herd breakdowns in relation to badgers. It will be done as quickly as possible. The badgers will be trapped and tested very quickly, and I do want to assure you that they will be treated humanely at all times.

In relation to the ‘badger found dead’ survey, it might be helpful if I gave you some figures. I’m very pleased that we are continuing it—as I say, we’ve had a procurement exercise—because I do think it is a very valuable source of information in fighting TB in cattle. You ask the question: are they assessed as to how they got to the roadside or how they’ve been killed? And the answer is ‘yes’, and I certainly haven’t been given any indication that the badgers that are found at the roadside have been put there illegally. So, I do want to reassure you about that. The provisional results we had from the all-Wales ‘badger found dead’ survey completed in 2016 indicated that, of the 681 badger carcasses tested, 50, so that’s 7.3 per cent, were positive for bovis. From 1 January this year up until 31 August this year, we had 44 carcasses tested; eight were positive and we’ve got 12 results pending. So, you can see that it’s really vital that we have that information and also on where they are—that helps with the low, the intermediate and the high TB areas, having that information. So, I’ve now found the phone number. So, I would, as I say, urge everybody to make sure that this phone number is available: it’s 01970 612374. Further information can be found and instructions on dealing with those carcasses, but I would urge everyone to phone the Wales Veterinary Science Centre if they do find a dead badger.

In relation to slurry leaks, we have seen some significant agricultural pollution this year, which I’ve made very clear is completely unacceptable. So this, obviously, is something that we are keeping under review. You’ll be aware that we recently had the nitrate vulnerable zones consultation, and I will be making a statement in relation to that by the end of this year.

You mentioned about the new testing technique in Devon. I have asked officials to have a look at this, but I don’t have any information—I haven’t received advice on it yet. But, certainly, anything that can help us in this battle will be looked at.

In the delivery programme, you say that further analysis will be undertaken of alternative approaches to compensation in Wales, and I do ask you to review the removal of the cap. We did hear clear evidence from the farming unions that this will have a poor effect on investment and then the quality of cattle. And it’s quite a severe cut from £15,000 to £5,000. You’re right that it doesn’t affect that many cases each year, but it is a significant thing, especially at the pedigree end. I think it would be reasonable for you to check that there is the availability on the market of reasonably priced insurance products, because if there isn’t, then we’ve got real problems here. So, I think that ought to be the basis of your review.

Secondly, recommendation 11 of the committee report said that you should preserve the current spending on TB eradication. You seem to be going very quickly into, ‘Well, you know, the European programme pays for a lot of it at the moment’, and, indeed, one of the reasons you said you’d cut the cap is because you need to save money because of the possible withdrawal of—well, as a result of the withdrawal of European moneys, that they will not be made good. But, you know, our committee emphatically said you or the Welsh Government should preserve the current spend, and I would like to hear that commitment from you.

I thank David Melding for his questions, and I did say that certainly my intention is to preserve it. The European funding actually isn’t a huge percentage of the funding that we use, but, certainly, you’re quite right that we need to look at preserving that spending, and that’s certainly my intention, and I hope I made that clear to Simon Thomas before. There is insurance available. I did say it’s quite a new market, but there certainly is insurance available. I mentioned I’m keeping everything in relation to the refreshed programme under review. However, I also mentioned that England and Scotland are now consulting on reducing the compensation and having a cap at about £5,000. So, I don’t think we would be changing that in the near future, but the whole programme will be kept under review.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on the agenda is the motion to agree the financial resolution in respect of the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Bill, and I call on the Minister to move the motion—Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I move the motion on this financial resolution. In doing so, I want to first of all thank all of those Members who’ve taken part in the scrutiny process of this Bill. We will, if Members agree the financial resolution this afternoon, be beginning Stage 2 scrutiny tomorrow morning. For those Members on the committee, they will see that many of the amendments we’ll be discussing tomorrow derive from the scrutiny of this Bill in Stage 1 by both the Children, Young People and Education Committee and the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, as well as the Finance Committee. And I’m grateful for the comprehensive scrutiny of the policy and the legal and financial implications of the Bill. I’m firmly of the view that both the Bill and the system are better as a consequence of this scrutiny.

Before turning to the regulatory impact assessment and the financial implications, I want to reflect very briefly on why we’re doing this and why we’re taking this legislation forward. The Bill is a cornerstone of our additional learning needs transformation programme. It is a vital and long-overdue piece of reform with the potential to support tens of thousands of children and young people with additional learning needs to fully realise their potential.

Last week, the Cabinet Secretary for Education launched ‘Education in Wales: Our national mission’, the Government’s plans for continuing to raise standards, reducing the attainment gap and delivering an education system that is a source of national pride and public confidence. Our additional learning needs transformation programme is a key aspect of this mission, and I believe that there is broad support for the transformation programme, both within this place and outside amongst practitioners and amongst children and young people themselves.

The general principles of the Bill were agreed on 6 June. I decided not to move the financial resolution at that time to ensure that we were able to undertake a process to revise and review the RIA, and I wanted Members to have the opportunity to see and to question and scrutinise that revised version before being asked to vote on the motion.

Deputy Presiding Officer, since June, we’ve undertaken further thorough quality assurance processes and I’m confident that the RIA is accurate and sound. I said this when I attended the Finance Committee on 21 September and I repeat that assurance today. Allow me to outline the three parts of the process that we’ve undertaken since that time. We’ve undertaken extensive engagement with SNAP Cymru to fully understand the nature of their concerns with the original financial information and to ensure that they are comfortable with the revised RIA. We have received assurances that they’re now content with both the figures and the text. Representatives from SNAP Cymru have confirmed this to the Finance Committee. I’m grateful to them for the work they’ve undertaken with my officials to reach this point.

Secondly, a comprehensive internal review of the figures and calculations has been carried out, resulting in a clean bill of health. No inaccuracies in the calculations were found. A £20 discrepancy was identified and some changes have been made to the text to improve clarity and accessibility. These two elements by themselves are reassuring. But, Deputy Presiding Officer, I wanted to have the fullest confidence around the accuracy and robustness of the RIA, and, before bringing the motion to the Chamber, I wanted to ensure that we could, and I could, provide Members with the fullest assurance of accuracy, and therefore I commissioned an external review. This external review found the RIA to be comprehensive and detailed with reliable and cautious estimates that are based on the evidence available. We have taken on board all of the recommendations that are specific to this Bill’s RIA.

The review also looked more broadly at the way we produce RIAs, comparing this against another way and other ways of preparing a regulatory impact assessment. Deputy Presiding Officer, the way we prepare RIAs complies with the National Assembly’s Standing Orders and the guidance set out by Her Majesty’s Treasury. The external review has provided a set of wider recommendations for the National Assembly and Welsh Government to consider for the future. These have been shared with the Finance Committee and within Welsh Government for further consideration. Taken together, the three elements of the review process point towards a document that is accurate and robust, and a fair basis upon which to make decisions.

Turning to the financial implications outlined in this document, I want to say, upfront and in an entirely forthright way, the transformation programme is not and never has been about saving money. It is about shifting resource from the back office to the front line, ensuring children and young people with additional learning needs are supported to meet their potential and to enjoy their educational journey. We are operating in an extremely challenging economic climate as a consequence of the UK Government’s austerity agenda. We’ve already discussed the impact on services of this earlier this afternoon. I am acutely aware that public services are now having to make difficult financial decisions more and more frequently, but that should not prevent us from doing what is right and what this sector is waiting for.

The fact remains that the RIA is still projecting an overall saving once the new system is up and running. This is reassuring, and it is what we are experiencing on the ground. We want to see the money already in the system used more effectively, with less directed towards bureaucracy and more on front-line support for learners. We know there are gains to be made through efficiencies. Gwynedd, Ynys Môn, Carmarthenshire, Pembrokeshire and Gwent are all operating aspects of the new system, and we’re all seeing the person-centred practice, individual development plans and dispute avoidance and earlier resolution realising back-office efficiencies, which are then reinvested in front-line services. And this is a key thing for me and for, I think, all of us together on all sides of the Chamber. The new system will ensure resources are used where they can have greatest impact.

There will, of course, be an upfront cost in terms of transition from the current to the new systems. We have been clear all along that an investment in this transition will be required. The £20 million funding package I’ve already announced will cover this in its entirety. We will not be asking delivery partners to fund implementation; the Government will cover all these costs. Our £20 million transformation funding package will go beyond the cost of moving from one statutory system to another. It will invest in cultural and practice changes, and upskilling the workforce. To deliver true reform, we must improve the expertise and confidence of our professionals. This is a priority for all of us. We will need to continue to work closely with delivery partners on the operation of the reforms, but also on the financial implications. I am fully committed to doing this and to putting in place the appropriate structures to facilitate it. I am confident that we are in a good place on all of this. I hope that I have been able to provide the necessary assurance to members of the Finance Committee already, and I’m grateful to the committee for its report. I hope that all Members will have confidence in the process and the current position, following this debate.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I’m keen now that we’re able to move forward with the debate. As I said earlier, subject to Members approving the financial resolution today, we move straight into Stage 2 proceedings tomorrow. I am looking forward to continuing the debate on this Bill and to develop the Bill to ensure that our parliamentary processes here produce the best possible Bill, the best possible legislation that will underpin the best possible transformation programme for our young people. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I now call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Simon Thomas.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I’m very much aware that Members will want to vote on the financial resolution and also vote on the Bill on the basis of policy and the widespread support there is for the aims of the Bill, but I think it is appropriate that I talk to the report that the Finance Committee’s produced on the Bill, and for some Members who are not involved in this process to understand how we came by a situation where a Bill that could and should have been introduced before the summer recess is now being discussed at this stage, and we have a curious situation in that if the financial resolution was not to be approved tonight, then we couldn’t be discussing it in committee tomorrow. I suspect that won’t happen, but that’s the sort of philosophical position that we are in.

When the Bill was first introduced, and the Finance Committee, back on 7 February, I think it was, first looked at the RIA with the Bill, it was predicted to make savings of some £4.8 million, and in the context of the announcement of the Minister at that stage of a £20 million fund to fund the Bill and the implementation and programme coming out of that Bill, then that certainly looked like a very attractive financial situation. However, several amendments to the RIA, some of which have been referred to by the Minister in his opening remarks, have resulted in the current RIA before this Assembly talking not of savings of £4.8 million, but of costs of £7.9 million. That means that we have before us an RIA that has ongoing savings of some £3.7 million, but transition costs of £11.5 million. Now, clearly, these costs are still covered by the £20 million announcement that the Minister made, though I think it needs putting on the record that that £20 million, from the Finance Committee’s point of view, is actually £10 million commitment and £10 million indication of ongoing commitment in further financial and budget decisions.

Now, you would usually think that a situation where a Minister has introduced a Bill that initially had savings and then turned out to have significant costs is because the Minister didn’t take into account the actual costs of the Bill. In fact, something much more curious happened in this instance. The real issue here was that the initial savings envisaged in the RIA did not take into account that the savings could not, in fact, be cost allocated. They were arising from the savings that an organisation would make by not engaging its volunteers in working with families who were facing additional learning needs tribunals and disputes. In effect, the Welsh Government couldn’t allocate those savings as actual financial savings. This arose, as I think it was told to the Finance Committee last week, from a misunderstanding or a lack of understanding between the organisation concerned and the Welsh Government—SNAP Cymru, which the Minister has already mentioned. I can confirm that SNAP Cymru did confirm to the Finance Committee in our public session, where we also had the Minister in, that they now have that understanding and joint sharing of information with the Welsh Government. So, they are both talking about the same figures; that’s the important thing to say here. So, what you see in the RIA before you today are certainly figures that have been agreed between the Government and the main organisation that undertakes this work with families.

It’s very much for the Assembly and for the policy side now to understand whether this is a Bill that, on the basis of the announcement of the £20 million implementation fund and on the costs that are now set out in the Bill, is one that the Assembly wishes to go forward. There are, however, as the Minister also indicated, wider lessons for how we prepare RIAs. The Finance Committee is concluding its report on such RIAs, which I hope we’ll have an opportunity at a future date to debate. When we do that, we might want to reflect on the lessons learned from this process as well.

The final thing to say is that there was a reference, and there is a reference in our report, to the external evaluation commissioned by the Minister. I welcome the fact that he did commission an external evaluation of his RIA. At that stage, that evaluation, conducted by Aldaba Limited, said that the version of the RIA was not reliable for the purpose of making decisions on the Bill. That’s quite a damning conclusion for an external evaluator to come to. However, I want to assure the Plenary that that is not the version of the RIA that you are discussing here tonight. The Finance Committee’s report sets out, in a factual way, how we have arrived at this situation, and, of course, I’m sure Members will want to reflect on that when they weigh and judge the policy implementations of this Bill against the allocation of resources towards it.

I have to say that, after the first dog’s breakfast of an RIA, where we saw figures that were wholly inaccurate in parts of that paper, I am surprised that the Welsh Government has been able to get this thing into such decent shape. It does appear that there has been better discussion, shall we say, with stakeholders, and that we now have a set of accurate figures that are very robust and, certainly, those little 20 quid here and there have now been ironed out.

I do think it’s worth saying, however, that there are still some concerns that have been raised by some stakeholders about the potential costs of dispute resolution, notwithstanding the fact that we have a new RIA. But, of course, they base their concerns on the evidence that they’ve had made available to them by SNAP Cymru. I think it’s worth all of us reflecting on the fact that it doesn’t necessarily have to be SNAP Cymru providing dispute resolution services in the future. There may be new and innovative ways of doing that that actually cost less for the taxpayer in the future. So, we have to be aware of that—that there are other potential dispute resolution services that could be engaged and commissioned by local authorities and others. For example, there’s a fantastic organisation in my own constituency, called Createasmile, that provides advocacy services completely free of charge to people where they’re contesting issues related to autism with local authorities, and there’s no charge whatsoever to the public purse for that. So, it’s really important that we get this right. I think we now have a financial resolution that we can support on the basis that we’ve got some more robust figures, but it is disappointing it’s taken such a long time to get to this stage.

I also want to endorse the comments that have already been made, if truth be told, and to put on record my dissatisfaction with the way in which this regulatory impact assessment came into being. We accept now that it’s reached a point where we can support it, but these changes and the fact that we needed to go back to the figures and work on them again has had an impact on the scrutiny process of the committee in not being able to scrutinise the final RIA side by side with the Bill.

It’s also undermined the confidence of many people in the sector, and perhaps more broadly, in the ability of this place to develop the relevant documentation around legislation, as is necessary, and to do so in a robust manner and in an appropriate manner, and that is regrettable too. The significant differences in the original costs and the final costs do highlight, I think, the problems that have taken place.

Just to say, in conclusion, the fact that we are here just hours before we discuss amendments at Stage 2, at the very last moment, to all purposes, doesn’t reflect well on the Welsh Government or on this place. As the Chair of the Finance Committee said, I think there are lessons to be learnt and I very much hope that the Government will learn those lessons.

Four very quick points. First thing: this has proven the benefits of the Finance Committee reviewing the cost of legislation.

Second: cost is important, and the real key is distinguishing between cashable costs and nominal costs. I think that’s where the Bill went wrong. It didn’t have the wrong numbers, but you couldn’t actually make some of the savings within the Bill that were being shown because they weren’t cashable costs. Cost is incredibly important. Is this Bill worth £20 million? I think it definitely is. Is it worth £200 million? I think we’d have to start getting into a big debate. If it gets up to £2 billion, it’s neither worthwhile nor affordable. So, I think we’ve really got to make sure we get the costs right, because at some stage there’s a crossover with costs when the Bill becomes less worthwhile than the costs it’s bringing in.

Third: it would really help if Standing Orders allowed the Government to produce a range of possible costs and savings and the assumptions behind them, rather than having to try and find some midpoint amongst their calculations. It would actually give better understanding to the Finance Committee, looking at it, and it would actually understand that this is not an exact science. These numbers are not exact and I’m fairly certain that the result will not be, to the penny, what the Minister has brought forward. I’m sure the Minister doesn’t expect it to be, to the penny, what he brings forward. It will be around about that number. I think it’s important that we have some understanding of that.

The fourth point—and it’s always something we need to think about with legislation—is hidden demand. You bring in legislation, you shine a light on a topic—does that bring out any hidden demand in the system of people who didn’t know about it or weren’t involved, who now see it and then want to take up what becomes available?

Thank you very much, and the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I thank Members for their generally constructive comments and generous words during this debate. Can I say this? I sometimes worry when Mike gets to his feet on a debate that I’m answering, because I’m never quite sure how I’m going to answer some of his points, but he makes some very fair and very judicious remarks about cost. And the cost, of course, of failure will be borne not by Members here but by the people we fail out there, and the children and young people who fail to fulfil their educational potential because we, here, don’t deliver the system that will enable them to succeed. I accept the points that have been made by Llyr, but I would say to Llyr that the strength of parliamentary scrutiny is such as to shine a light into these things and to compel Ministers to come to this place and to make the case for their legislation, and to make the case for what they’re seeking to do, rather than to set the bar a lot lower. So, I think a higher bar is a better way of measuring these matters. I think what this has demonstrated over the last few months has been the strength of the parliamentary process in this place, and I’m sure that Members will recognise that I would always defer to the processes and to the committees we have here, and to the recommendations that the committees make in ensuring that we have not just a Bill but the best possible Bill that will deliver for the people we all seek to represent.

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 move on to item 7 on the agenda today, which is a debate on the White Paper on proposals for a Welsh language Bill, and I call on the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language to move the motion—Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and thank you for timetabling these discussions.

Members will recall that I published our strategy, ‘Cymraeg 2050: A million Welsh speakers’, and our ambition to reach a million Welsh speakers back in June. I was clear, and I hope I was clear to all Members at that time, that I was very eager to set our strategy and vision for the future before we discussed legislation, because the strategy and vision are more than a Bill, they are more than legislation, and they are more than the processes that we go through here.

The vision of transforming the position of the Welsh language in Wales is something that I hope will unite all parts of this Chamber. But I also want to ensure that we do have the kind of legislation that will ensure that we have a foundation that will allow us to reach a million Welsh speakers by 2050.

The Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011 was made at the end of the third Assembly, following delays by the Westminster Government in providing the necessary powers to the Assembly to legislate in the area of the Welsh language. Because of those delays, there wasn’t sufficient time at that point to consult on language policies, and the deficiencies there are to be seen within the Measure. The Measure’s heart is in the right place. It gives official status to the Welsh language. It gives people the freedom to use the Welsh language in conversing with each other and, through standards, it gives everyone a right to access services through the medium of Welsh.

But we must now consider how the Measure has been implemented. When councils such as Gwynedd and Blaenau Gwent agree that there is too much bureaucracy, then we have to listen to those comments. The title of the White Paper is ‘Striking the right balance: proposals for a Welsh Language Bill’; that is to say the balance between regulation and the promotion of the Welsh language. First of all, therefore, I propose in the White Paper that we should establish a Welsh language commission, and the purpose is to provide new leadership and energy in promoting the Welsh language.

There are a number of reasons for establishing a commission, rather than placing additional duties on the commissioner. First of all, the authoritative report of the House of Lords on the governance of regulators is very clear that a body that regulates shouldn’t be run by an individual or a single person. I agree with that. Secondly, the promotion of the Welsh language doesn’t mean balloons and biros. Promotion means particular expertise in areas such as language planning, workforce planning, economic development and behavioural change, and goes further in terms of media and marketing. The commission leading the new body must have a cross-section of these skills in order to be able to promote the Welsh language effectively. Thirdly, and separate from the other commissioners, I propose that the commission should have powers to penalise, and it will be a central part in introducing ‘Cymraeg 2050’. There is strength in having varying experiences and viewpoints to provide challenge.

One objection I’ve heard is that one body can’t regulate and promote simultaneously. I don’t accept that argument. There are many bodies that do the two things very successfully. The clear example, of course, is Natural Resources Wales, or the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

I’m not recommending going back to the days of the Welsh language board. The responsibilities of the commission will be broader, and standards are far more powerful than Welsh language schemes. The commission will work within the targets of ‘Cymraeg 2050’, and I have no doubt that the Welsh Government, the Assembly, and the public, will be asking some very difficult questions on the performance of the commission and its contribution to the million.

What of the standards, then? Well, first of all, we must retain standards. That is clear. There is no turning back on that. There are two main aims to the proposals in the White Paper: (1) to cut out as much bureaucracy as possible, and (2) to ensure a regime that puts the focus on putting things right where things go wrong, and making improvements. I also think that accountability for us in a democratic way must be in place, and I propose that the Welsh Government should impose and make standards, and, in so doing, it should have the support of this place, our national Parliament. The role of the commission will be to monitor and to enforce.

I am yet to be persuaded that we need a separate system when complaints are made about Welsh-language services. We can use the same regime as exists if an individual complains of a service to a local authority or a health service. I therefore intend that the commission should follow the same systems as the ombudsman when complaints are received, and, in this context, I have accepted some responses to the White Paper from the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. The ombudsman has copied his response to the commissioner and to Simon Thomas, as the Chair of the Finance Committee, responsible for introducing the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Bill.

The ombudsman is proposing that his office could deal with complaints and inquiries relating to standards as part of its core duties. This would be similar to the system in the Basque Country, where the public services ombudsman is responsible for the language. Deputy Presiding Officer, I think this proposal is an interesting one. It does show that there are other possibilities that can be considered beyond the proposals in the White Paper, and I will be considering the ombudsman’s response in addition to all of the other responses to the consultation. I encourage everyone to respond with their own ideas before the deadline for the consultation, which is the end of this month.

I ask, therefore, that Assembly Members support this motion, accepting amendments 1, 3, 5 and 7, and rejecting 2, 4, 6 and 8. I reject amendment 2 because there is a bigger picture in ‘Cymraeg 2050’. I reject amendment 4 because I do believe that it would be confusing for the public, and a waste of public resources, to have two bodies responsible for the Welsh language. I reject amendment 6. I intend to replace health standards before the end of the year, but, if there is support for the proposals in the White Paper, we will have to take that into account before making further regulations. And I reject amendment 8. I have set out in the White Paper and before the Assembly today my clear reasons for abolishing the role of the commissioner and establishing a commission.

I accept amendment 1. The evidence reflects a variety of opinions on some areas, and that is a positive thing. I accept amendment 3. The White Paper protects the rights of Welsh speakers. I accept amendment 5. Everyone wants to see reduced bureaucracy. And I accept amendment 7. The White Paper makes a definite proposal on extending the standards regime to the private sector.

May I say this in conclusion, Deputy Presiding Officer? I am very eager to hear the views of Members this afternoon, but I am also very eager to hear the views of people across the country. What I have endeavoured to do throughout this process is to ensure unity across the nation on the future of our national language. That means that we ensure our rights as Welsh speakers to speak and use the language and that we also promote in order to ensure that more of the people of Wales can use the language and learn the language. That means, on occasion, that we listen to views that we don’t want to hear and that we listen to views that are very different to our own. What I have done as a Minister with responsibility for the Welsh language is to have the kind of debate that will ensure that there is unity at the end of the debate. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I have selected the eight amendments to the motion. I call on Suzy Davies to move amendments 1 and 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I move the amendments in the name of Paul Davies. May I thank the Minister for opening the debate today and Plaid for their amendments? We support a number of them. Now, the first thing I’d want to say is that the Welsh Conservatives support the three core objectives of this legislation: value for money, reducing bureaucracy in the standards system, and improving the balance between regulation and promotion and empowerment. Now, linking empowerment and promotion is an interesting decision, and it separates the issue of promotion and regulation, and this, to me, gives an impression of the role of the commissioner that is very narrow and is steered by a particular time in the story of the commissioner and doesn’t reflect the duties of the commissioner as they are noted in the 2010 Measure. Those duties, before there was any talk of regulation and enforcement, include promotion and facilitating the use of the language, and it isn’t restricted to the context of standards. So, at the moment, I find it difficult to see where the difference lies between the objectives of your proposed commission and the original objectives of the commissioner as they were anticipated by the Welsh language Measure.

I agree with you that we should take the bureaucracy out of the processes that are contained in the current Measure. We do have some thinking to do here still in terms of how exactly the appeals process could develop, and I’m just thinking of shifting complaints to the organisation that has perhaps made the error in the first place, because I’m not quite sure whether the ombudsman would provide remedies for people in those circumstances. So, that deserves further consideration. I also agree in terms of changing the nature of standards that don’t protect meaningful rights, and that’s why I have difficulty in supporting amendment 4, because there is a risk of seeing any change, particularly in terms of process, as weakening those rights as a whole. I’m sure that’s not what you mean in Plaid, but, for that reason, I will be abstaining on that amendment. But, in future, perhaps we may return to the issue.

There’s also a separate question, namely: if there are some standards—keeping records for many years, for example—where no-one is interested in those rights, is that standard still proportionate? There is a question to be answered during this process there. We do need to get rid of those that aren’t effective in order to improve focus on rights that are important and to focus on promotion and facilitating the use of the language. In saying that, we are deferring our views on this until we see the detailed proposals by the Government, as I’ve said.

We are also deferring our view on amendment 4. Now, I don’t accept the suggestion made by officials during our committee meeting of last week, namely that there is no role for two separate bodies here. The existence of the Welsh for adults centres undermines that proposal already. My argument is that there is mixed evidence in the responses to the Welsh Government’s consultation, and there’s no clear, definitive support for the options favoured by the Minister and by Plaid. Now, the purpose of my amendment is to try and prevent the Minister from jumping in a particular direction when there are credible options available that need to be worked through. And, for the same reason, I will be supporting amendment 8.

The main consideration for us, as the White Paper proceeds, is the level of independence given to whoever regulates and promotes the language. Despite the Measure underlining the independence of the commissioner in terms of her activities, Leighton Andrews ignored that statutory defence, took the promotion role of the commissioner and brought it back within Government. This left the commissioner with the work on standards and facilitation, and, according to responses to the consultation, there is a warm welcome to her in doing that. Helping bodies conform to standards is better than the heavy-handed enforcement that is required by current legislation—and the commissioner does more of that now, and has done recently. So, we don’t know what the commissioner could do in terms of promotion and facilitation on a wider level, because of Government intervention.

In supporting amendment 8, we agree that the Government hasn’t won the argument that a commission is an improvement on a reformed role for the commissioner, and I think that there’s been a false start, which has actually pushed the Government to push for a new structure and relationship with Government that is far from being clear. That’s why we have included our second amendment. This legislation could create a new role for the commissioner that is more arm’s-length and accountable to this Assembly rather than to Government, as we have argued for a long time.

I call on Sian Gwenllian to move amendments 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you for holding this debate on the White Paper on the proposals for the Welsh language Bill. This consultation goes on until the end of the month and this debate is a good way of reminding people of the need to record their comments throughout the consultation before the closing date.

We have set our viewpoint as a party very clearly through the medium of amendments that explain our vision—a vision that is different to the one of the Government. We don’t want to see any weakening or limitation on the legal rights of Welsh speakers. We believe that we need to keep regulation and promotion separate, and that they should be undertaken by two separate bodies, and we’re calling for moving forward with the Welsh language standards on health and housing associations urgently, and we’re calling for a timetable for introducing standards to the energy sector, water companies, telecommunications and train and bus companies. We’re calling on the Government to extend the standards to the private sector. So, we’re setting our stall clearly at the start of the process.

Any weakening or restriction on the legislation would be a significant backward step for the Welsh language. Friends, the Welsh language is losing ground. Only in 7 per cent of communities in Wales is Welsh the language of 70 per cent of the population—a living language on the street and in the pub. That is the subject of great pain for me, and I can’t support any back-turning on any rights that have already been established. To the contrary: we need to strengthen these rights if we seriously want to see the Welsh language continuing.

Can we be clear from the outset? The proposals of the Labour Government are going to weaken our rights. Abolishing the role of the commissioner is going to weaken our rights. Going back to one body and expecting that to carry out two entirely different functions is weakening our rights. Putting the power in the hands of the Government instead of the Assembly in terms of determining who should fall under that language duties and when—that weakens our rights. Abolishing the current list that ensures that the Assembly has the right to impose language duties on some private companies does weaken our rights as Welsh speakers. Abolishing the right of the public to complain to the Welsh Language Commissioner does weaken our rights as Welsh speakers. Saying that only serious complaints will be investigated—there’s no definition of what a serious complaint actually constitutes—that, again, restricts our rights as Welsh speakers. Plaid Cymru is against any weakening, any restriction, on our rights.

In terms of promotion, Plaid Cymru believes that we need an independent body to do this important work, leaving the commissioner to focus on the work of setting standards and regulation. Establishing a commission that would be trying to do all the work that was necessary would be a backwards step, and that’s why we’ve argued consistently for having an arm’s-length agency to promote and to facilitate and to plan strategically for the Welsh language on the basis of robust linguistic principles.

We need to strengthen our rights, and that brings us to the private sector. There are several examples of why we need to extend these standards to the private sector, and they’ve been highlighted over the last few months: the Sports Direct saga, when Welsh speakers’ rights were restricted in the workplace; and Santander and Lloyds Bank refusing to accept papers in the Welsh language and so forth. I’d like to thank the Minister for his swift response to those cases. But I do note that the White Paper says this:

‘We are not proposing that the Welsh Government will imminently be imposingStandards on bodies which do not currently come within the Standards system.’

Namely the majority of the private sector. Unfortunately, history shows that depending on persuasion of bodies to protect Welsh language rights doesn’t work. We need to legislate and we need to extend the legislation to the private sector. But that’s not in White Paper, although I do note that you this afternoon have said that you’re in favour of our amendment 7, and I do welcome that greatly.

We need you to act—that’s the main issue. You need to act. We need to move forward with imposing these standards on the health bodies, and I do welcome the fact that you say at last, after nearly two years—over two years, to tell you the truth—that the Government will move on this. Patients have the right to discuss their problems through the medium of Welsh. And the report on standards for the housing associations has been on your desk for two years, and the water companies for nearly two years. Buses and trains and railways—nearly two years. There’s a lot of work to be done and we’re just starting. Now is the time to act, and maybe now is not the time to be discussing this kind of White Paper. What about moving forward with the work? What about starting to act?

In the background, of course, is your 1 million speakers strategy. Shouldn’t the Government be focusing on the work that’s needed to launch that million Welsh speakers strategy, rather than having an unnecessary debate about a piece of legislation that’s going to take time to bed in and standards that need to be imposed and implemented?

We have to deal with the Government’s White Paper on the basis of one important principle—that everything now in the area of the Welsh language is subject to the principle of securing a million Welsh speakers by 2050. The challenge posed by the new strategy is transformational for all of us. If we are serious that we want to see the ambition of the strategy made reality, then we have to recognise that the linguistic landscape has to change entirely. In a period of austerity, we will need to ensure that every penny spent by any body on the growth of the Welsh language has a direct impact on the ground.

The focus for the most part has been on rights—rights through standards—and it is clear that there is room to reform the process of creating and imposing standards. We saw evidence from all areas that it was a burdensome process for everyone, and the aim here is to ensure that the standards work and that effort and resources are focused on driving up standards of provision, rather than negotiating and administration.

May I say that I personally support the concept of a general right? We have a number of regimes that do provide rights, as well as a process of balancing rights when they come into conflict. And with some imagination, I think that could work with a general right to use the Welsh language. But I’m willing to accept the point made in the White Paper that there are some complexities and limitations arising from that. I am convinced that we should extend standards to include supermarkets and banks and so on, and I welcome the commitment of the Minister to do that under the proposed system. I would like to hear from him, therefore, what his proposals are in that area.

The truth of the matter is that we can’t reach that aim of a million Welsh speakers with the current balance between rights and promotion. Maintaining and enhancing the current standards system is not enough. The power of rights to generate change depends on the willingness to insist on using those rights. The White Papers is clear that there are far more Welsh speakers than there are people taking advantage of the right to use the Welsh language. So, only through promotion can we create that confidence for more and more Welsh speakers to insist on those rights. We need to promote in wider society. The strategy and the White Paper go into some detail on that. But we need promotion within the organisations that are subject to standards too—a culture change, not just regulation. Changing ways of working to create a bilingual ethos can develop access in various ways and it can generate creativity, and we need to create a space for an inclusive conversation on the benefits of the Welsh language within those organisations.

I welcome, therefore, the proposals to redefine standards and to create a new focus on language planning duty—a duty that will mean more than a tick-box exercise and a system that will mean compliance with a duty to carry out inquiries, to plan and to provide. This is the opportunity now to truly transform the landscape.

Just a few words on structure, namely the new commission. This isn’t the most important element of the White Paper in my view, but we shouldn’t be conservative in our views to reforming structures, if that is required to meet new demands. The scale of the challenge in the strategy does create new demands. The proposal is that the enforcement and compliance powers of the commissioner should remain. It has been recognised for a decade or more that it is through a board, rather than through an individual, that that is most appropriately achieved for many reasons. So, it is appropriate that we evolve the regulatory body.

Fifty-five years ago, in February 1962, in a radio interview, Jim Griffiths, Member of Parliament for Llanelli, stated that the future of the Welsh language was the greatest challenge facing Wales. It was an unusual statement for a Labour MP to make at that time. In the same month, Saunders Lewis gave his ‘Tynged yr Iaith’ lecture, which transformed our awareness as a nation of the threat to Welsh culture. He predicted that the Welsh language would have died by the beginning of this century. Well, as Welsh speakers, we are still here, but it’s only through working together and taking action—

Before you close, could you, and I’ve been listening intently—? On this central question, which arises in other contexts, of course, is it a system that centralises power with the Government or a system of a commissioner or a commission, which is independent of a Government in order to give the credibility and the confidence to our Welsh speakers that their rights are being recognised—what’s the Member’s opinion on that?

Well, I think that the commission can be sufficiently independent to provide that service to the people of Wales.

We are now, I hope, at the beginning of a period of development for the Welsh language and we must ensure that the powers and resources are available to us, through the Welsh language Bill, to achieve that.

My party broadly supports the approach that the Government takes to the promotion of the Welsh language and we strongly support the Cymraeg 2050 proposals. I believe that the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh language’s approach is the right one—it’s a consensual approach, and that is the only way in which we will, I think, be able to succeed in the objective that everybody in this Chamber approves of.

I think that the proposals in the White Paper, by and large, are very sensible. Suzy Davies started by saying that value for money, cutting bureaucracy and improving the balance between promotion and empowerment are very laudable objectives. I certainly support what the Minister said in his speech about introducing real democratic control into the development and imposition of standards. I think it is right that it’s from the Government that those should be initiated rather than from an independent body. I think he hit the nail exactly on the head when he said that what he wanted to achieve was unity across the nation for a consensus to take this forward. This is vitally necessary because we’ve got a long way to go and there are a lot of people who need to be convinced that this is the right thing to be doing. I have no doubt myself that it is. I do want to see ultimately a bilingual nation. It probably won’t be in my lifetime, but nevertheless, I think that this strategy is definitely going to help us to achieve that.

Having said that, we can support the Plaid Cymru amendments, apart from amendment 7, as well as the Conservative amendments, but I don’t think that the wording on the order paper is actually in conflict with what the Minister was arguing for earlier on. I do think that the arguments that have been put forward on this side of the Chamber will flesh those words out, but they won’t actually be on the record in the same way as an amended motion. So, I do think that that is worth while.

The only caveat that I want to introduce into this debate is about the extension of standards to the private sector. This is something that should happen but it’s the time frame that is the key issue here. It is right that big companies like BT, or big utility companies, should be treated, in effect, as the public sector—they can afford it—but we’ve heard debates about the impact of austerity today, and I’m not going to rehearse those, but the business climate is not easy and we must be careful not to impose too early what might be significant costs upon businesses that can’t afford them.

I was rather alarmed, in a way, to hear Sian Gwenllian say that persuasion doesn’t work therefore we must have compulsion. This, I don’t think, is the right attitude. [Interruption.] Yes—

Thank you for taking the intervention, as I didn’t get a chance to speak in my submission here. On the point of private companies, obviously, we’re a small and medium enterprise country. Do you think that the requirement for any standards to be reasonable and proportionate is enough to ensure that those small and medium enterprises are protected against the possibilities that you were alluding to?

Well, it might be. It’s not something as yet I’ve been convinced on. I would like to consider that in greater detail. I do think that there should be some sort of de minimis test, whether that’s by reason of the size of the company, whether that’s measured in terms of number of employees or turnover or whatever. I don’t personally believe that the Government has any intention of embarking upon two draconian set of obligations at all. But I would hate to think that we would create antagonism where it needn’t exist by adding fuel to people’s fears that are unnecessary.

We had a most unfortunate situation in Llangennech last year in the school, and what I saw there worried me a great deal, because I do want to see more bilingual education and I do want to see more Welsh language-medium education, but the parents of that school were not convinced that this was the right thing to do, and the policy of the county council was creating a real antagonism there, which I think actually would set the language back rather than take it forward. So, I’m in favour of an evolutionary approach to this. I do believe the Government has to lead and I do think it should nudge heavily in the right direction, but I do think that we need to be very clear, before we pass motions, exactly what obligations we’re imposing. Broad, general-terms formulations that might be misinterpreted in a way that is disadvantageous to the achievement of the objective that we all share I think would be a retrograde step.

There is major work to be done to reach the objectives of the language strategy. There are gaps, certainly. And the promotion agency is one of them. Our party called for the creation of that kind of agency and it certainly was a strategic error to get rid of that element. But in trying to fill that vacuum, the risk is that we then weaken severely the part of the system relating to regulation, which it starting to deliver, to tell you the truth.

I was looking at figures for the progress that has been in terms of the annual report of the Welsh Language Commissioner. They’re amazing, to tell you the truth, given that the new system under the Measure has only been in existence for just over a year in full. That is, a Welsh language or bilingual greeting to 90 per cent of phone calls—a 31 per cent increase since the previous year. Fifty four receptions showing clearly that you’re welcome to use Welsh—an increase of 28 per cent over the previous year. And now 25 per cent of job advertisements saying that the Welsh language is essential—an increase of 9 per cent from the previous year.

We’re at risk of destroying the regulatory system as it starts to deliver. Well, it’s not me saying that, Alun. You said that you wanted a consensus. Well, the language consensus is being destroyed. Dyfodol yr Iaith and Cymdeithas yr Iaith both oppose, and even Huw Onllwyn, the former head of the Government’s language unit, is criticising some of the core suggestions that you have. Creating one body for promotion and regulation is an error, and they are different objectives and different activities that call for a different approach and different governance skills.

This question is central, in giving the power to the Government to impose the standards. That is a huge error, and Huw Onllwyn himself says, ‘I’m afraid that we’re on the verge of losing the service of an independent language champion’, and the Government will be managing everything. And in the context of rights, that is a great concern, because what happens if politics changes? The Minister talked of the fact that the position of the commissioner put the power all in the hands of one person. Well, in fact, there is a deputy commissioner and so forth, and there is a governance system, and of course there are staff and so forth. But, of course, what you’re suggesting, in giving the right to the Government to impose standards, is—. Well, at present, Alun, at present the standards come back to this Assembly. That is appropriate in a democratic system. What we’re talking about here is giving too much direct control to the Government, and the Government, of course, then facing conflicts of interest. They fund the bodies that are being regulated, and Ministers coming to them and saying, ‘Well, can we weaken the standards in that context?’

Having a system of independence through a commission or a collective body means that Welsh speakers have confidence that the rights are going to be protected. Sian Gwenllian said this is central: the right of the individual to complain directly to a commissioner, and to the office of the commissioner, which then conducts an investigation. Instead of that, complaining to the bodies that transgress, and that didn’t work very well for Welsh speakers, did it? That’s why we had to have the Welsh language Measure: in order to give assurance to the Welsh language speakers that we were going to have equal rights in Wales.

Alun, you and I were part of that campaign for rights for Welsh speakers, and we are now turning our backs on that, and it’s being withdrawn, there is a loss of momentum, and we’re diluting this. This is what your White Paper does represent. We need to start again. I agree with Jeremy Miles: why not have basic rights in legislation? That’s what’s delivered to other people in other contexts of disadvantage. Why doesn’t the Welsh Government show that kind of ambition and radicalism instead of this pitiful White Paper, which takes us a step back?

I call on the Minister for the Welsh language to reply to the debate.

I am grateful, Llywydd, for the opportunity to have this debate on the White Paper and how we make progress with language policy. I’m very grateful to everyone—everyone—who’s participated in this debate. I was very pleased to hear the comments made by Suzy Davies, Neil Hamilton, even Adam Price, and I’m also pleased that we can still have this kind of debate on the future of the Welsh language.

I was particularly pleased to hear Jeremy Miles quoting Jim Griffiths, one of the leading figures of Welsh Labour, and one who reflects the kind of Welsh identity that Wales wants to see, not just from Government but from us all. May I just make a few points in response to the debate? I hear these allegations that we are weakening our rights as Welsh speakers. We are not weakening any rights that currently exist. In fact, what we are doing is going further to extend the kinds of rights that we have, to extend the rights that we can implement, and what we’re going to ensure is that we can implement these rights. I have no patience at all with rights that exist only on paper. What I want to see is rights that can be delivered for Welsh speakers every day, wherever they are in this nation, and that doesn’t happen at the moment. It doesn’t happen at the moment, and that is why we must see change.

No, I’m not going to take an intervention at this point, but what I am going to do is to ensure that we can operate those rights wherever we are in Wales. That is why I think that we must consider how we strengthen our rights. It is not good enough—it’s never good enough—simply to come to this Chamber and say that we’re not content to change, we have the status quo; it’s not adequate, but we’re not willing to consider how we change that system.

I know, Adam, that you’re sitting next to UKIP now, but I would ask you not to be quite so conservative as you have been.

Does the Minister at least consider that it’s clear evidence that there are deficiencies in this White Paper that everybody that represents Welsh campaigners, Welsh speakers, say that they’re concerned that this White Paper is going to weaken the rights of Welsh speakers? You would listen to Stonewall if it was a matter of the rights of gay people. Why aren’t you listening to the Welsh language bodies?

I am listening. I am listening. I was in Llandudno discussing these issues yesterday. I was in Swansea a fortnight ago listening to people. I will continue to travel around Wales listening to people and discussing these issues with people. What I’m telling you now, quite clearly, Adam, is that people don’t particularly agree with what you’ve said this afternoon. The people I’ve spoken to across this nation don’t agree with what you and Sian have said this afternoon, and you have to consider that and think about it. We must, as the Parliament of Wales, reflect our collective vision for the future of the Welsh language. I am quite convinced in my own mind that we need to strengthen the rights we have as Welsh speakers to use the Welsh language wherever we are and to ensure that we can access Welsh services. This is something that we must do.

We must also do that within a democratic system. What I hear on occasion is that people don’t trust our democracy. People aren’t content to trust the democracy that we have. Now, I do think that we need a regulator that is wholly independent of Government, and that’s why I’m considering the ombudsman option, which is entirely independent of Government, and also the establishment of a commission with powers, with a budget and with the necessary powers to ensure that the Government is accountable for its actions. I also want to collaborate better in terms of how we enforce standards on various bodies. What I see is regulation as a positive means of ensuring that, where there have been failures, people have their rights implemented, but also that we regulate by collaborating with people, by collaborating with the large companies, and even with the banks, in order to ensure that we have a language policy that reflects our vision.

And what I want to say in concluding this debate is that there is a debate to be had, and I will bring the conclusions of this debate back to the Assembly during the next year, and we will then move towards legislating. But we will legislate to ensure a legislative framework that will reflect our ability to achieve our vision, and a vision that I think each and every one of us shares. We are not going to spend time discussing different structures. We are going to discuss the future of the Welsh language, and we are going to ensure a vision that will be shared in all parts of this country, from Holyhead to Monmouth—[Interruption.]

Allow the Minister to finish.

[Continues.]—and we will be leading on that.

The proposal is to agree amendment 1. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting, therefore, until voting time.

This brings us to voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will move immediately to the vote on the White Paper on proposals for the Welsh language. Amendment 1: I call for a vote on amendment one, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 44, no abstentions, 11 against, and therefore amendment 1 is agreed.

Amendment 2: a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, four abstentions, 40 against, and therefore amendment 2 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 43, 10 abstentions, two against, and therefore amendment 3 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 4, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, 11 abstentions, 30 against, and therefore amendment 4 is not agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 5, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 54, no abstentions, one against, and therefore amendment 5 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 6, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 30 against, and therefore amendment 6 is not agreed.

Amendment 7: I call for a vote on amendment 7, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, no abstentions, 16 against, and therefore amendment 7 is agreed.

I call for a vote on amendment 8, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 30 against, and therefore amendment 8 is not agreed.

I therefore call for a vote on the motion as amended, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 40, four abstentions, 11 against, and therefore the motion as amended is agreed.

That brings today’s proceedings to a close.